Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
wadegarrett

**** CLEVELAND BROWNS THREAD ****

Recommended Posts

Quick though. The Bess deal was a great deal. It just didn't work out.

Was anyone, and I mean ANYONE, upset we had Davon Bess on our team? The guy was one of the better slot WRs in the NFL prior to whatever the hell happened to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GhostGuy,

The coaches made the decisions to:

- Start QB Brandon Weeden over QB Brian Hoyer and QB Jason Cambell

- Sit RB Bobby Rainey and start RB Willis McGahee

- Sit RB Edwin Baker and start RB Willis McGahee

- Start WR Greg Little over WR Josh Cooper

- Start WR Davone Bess over WR Josh Cooper

Those were coaching decisions.

The front office was responsible for initiating the trade of RB Trent Richardson for a first round draft pick, a deal that looks sensational but at the time it was made they knew that they would take heat from Browns fans boy did they ever.

Chud gets props for coaching three consecutive wins after the trade but we won after QB Brandon Weeden got injured and QB Brian Hoyer was plugged into the starting lineup.

The front office reportedly wanted Hoyer to start over Weeden.

Having noted the above, my biggest problem with Chudzinski was the game against Cincinnati when the team imploaded in the second quarter. We never won a game after that diaster. I have to put that loss and the fallout from that loss on Chud.

From what I heard, one of the reporters said that Chud must have went to the carpet on one of those failed personnel/coaching moves where he said he felt so strongly about having it his way that he would put his job on the line. I don't know which one.

Oh and Davone Bess deal was great when it was made but he lead the NFL in dropped passes so that was a huge problem but then he left the team for 'personal issues' but then a picture surfaced of him smoking what looked like a joint in front of a picture of Bob Marley so his body and apparently his head wasn't in the game. I heard the front office was sick of the drops and wanted Chud to either cut Little or Bess so that WR Josh Cooper could get a shot but Chud refused.

Cooper got his shot in the last game and he caught everything thrown his way which could have pushed Haslam over the edge because it came after Bobby Rainey and Edwin Baker showed more than Willis McGahee, two other coaching/personnel mistakes made by Chud. Ofcourse the biggest coaching/personnel mistake he made was having Weeden start over Hoyer/Cambell when the front office wanted Hoyer from the begining.

Oh and Haslam left both the last two, NY Jets game and the Pittsburgh games early fuming.

Haslam is the one who met with Chud for nearly two hours.

You don't meet a guy for two hours if you simply plan to fire him. You meet a guy for two hours with an ultimatum.

My guess is he probably told Chud to give up some control to the front office or he'd have to let him go.

We heard zero reports of any possible Chudzinski firing until the day he was fired so I think it was Jimmy Haslam who was responsible for the firing but from what has come out, well their were reasons so if anyone can defend the coaching mistakes then go ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A team with a choice of weeden, hoyer, and Campbell at qb, and five total no names at rb ended up making coaching mistakes??? The HELL you say.

By the way, starting weeden week 1 was the right move. You gotta see if he improved. You KNOW you can't go anywhere with Campbell.

And stop talking about hoyer like he was great or something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A team with a choice of weeden, hoyer, and Campbell at qb, and five total no names at rb ended up making coaching mistakes??? The HELL you say.

By the way, starting weeden week 1 was the right move. You gotta see if he improved. You KNOW you can't go anywhere with Campbell.

And stop talking about hoyer like he was great or something.

Hoyer looked pretty good for the short amount of time he was in there for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have a hundred backup qbs that come in for two games then teams have tspe on the guy and it all changes.

He is currently our best qb, I will give ya that. But he was never in consideration to start week one by anyone in the organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A team with a choice of weeden, hoyer, and Campbell at qb, and five total no names at rb ended up making coaching mistakes??? The HELL you say.

By the way, starting weeden week 1 was the right move. You gotta see if he improved. You KNOW you can't go anywhere with Campbell.

And stop talking about hoyer like he was great or something.

Let me ask you how many games did you need to see once Brian Hoyer took over as the starter to realize that he was better than Weeden? Before you answer note that Chud and Norv started Weeden until he got injured where they had to put in Hoyer.

Hoyer won all of the games he started. Weeden lost every game he started.

The coaches not only started Brandon but they gave him the bulk of the starting reps in training camp and in practice. The coaches got to see the quarterbacks every day and up-close.

Giving Weeden a chance is fine and all but honestly how many games did it take you to realize that Hoyer and Cambell were better quarterbacks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not that this matters much, but weeden came in against buffalo when they were down like 10-0, but hoyer gets credit for that win.

Hoyer played two games.

Yes weeden sucks, we all know weeden sucks, and we all knew it quickly. Probelm is, it was his 2nd year, was a first round pick, and did decent in preseason. However the way he was playing, I don't think it would have been much longer before he was benched. Just so happen he got hurt to expedite the process.

As I said, at no point was hoyer a starting consideration week one by anyone in the front office.

Frankly, our front office looks like a bunch of arrogant idiots. Bad combo

Edited by ghostguy123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it does matter that the coaches were in charge and got to see all three quarterbacks. They had the power and actually made the decision to start Brandon Weeden.

Ok, he was a first round pick and they needed or wanted to get a chance to see him in real NFL action before making any decision but it took an injury to Weeden before Hoyer got his shot and he obviously looked better but here is the real killer GhostGuy.

AFTER Hoyer got injured who did the coaches start?

They then had yet another coaching decision that was all on them and they chose to start Brandon Weeden over Jason Cambell.

Its really hard to defend those decisions that were all on the coaching staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starting Weeden again over Campbell was an easy decision. We have seen MORE than enough of Campbell for almost a decade now to know we arent going anywhere with him. And what was he like 1-7 or something this year?

I bet anything Chud knew Weeden sucked and would end up sucking, but that doesnt mean his chances of success were less than Campbell.

Call me crazy, but it is easier to give a crappy QB like a Weeden a longer leash when his backup is an equally crappy Campbell.

And stop saying "it took an injury". It was after week 2 actually. Do you see a lot of week 1 QBs pulled after one game?

And while Hoyer had what some consider to be a good game at Minnesota, he did throw 3 INTs, and they also converted fake punts and a TD on a fake FG. Wasn't exaclty some Hoyer led victory, though he did lead a nice go ahead drive at the end.

He had a decent game against Cincy, I liked what I saw that. I am bummed he got hurt, cause I think he was showing some good things, but I can't come close to saying he is out answr at QB at this time, or even at that time.

Edited by ghostguy123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their were a few other personnel blunders that were on Chud as well that I can't recall just now.

little and Bess.

The front office traded for bess on April 26th.

how they were utilized in season, front office wanted to see more of the kids and less of the #### veterans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just say this. Prior to this past season, our franchise was looked at as a laughing stock, a running joke, and a caricature of a real NFL team.

Right now, we look even worse. Our owner should probably be in prison, and he might end up there. He bought the damn team with stolen money for crying out loud, and the FBI is up his #### like a procologist.

We lose out on all the coaching candidates we went for last year and end up with Chud (though out coordinators were amazing hires). We trade away two picks in the draft for future picks (keep in mind I think both trades were good), and then deal our only RB to the Colts (again, even at the time, I did think this was a good move).

So we not only roll into the season with terrible QBs, after week 2 we had maybe the worst assorment of RBs in NFL history. Our front office wasn't exactly trying to win in 2013, that was fairly clear. So when we couldnt muster a good season with ####### Weeden and Campbell, and the stable of Mcgahee, Rainey, OBGYN, and some other guys I cant even remember, what happens.............fire the coach that you just signed to a 4 year deal less than a year ago?? And now we don't even have anyone as good or better than Chud to hire, and he is sitting home collecting 10 million more dollars.

We went from laughing stock of the league to such a joke that my friends and coworkers who are Steelers fans do not even make fun of me anymore because it is like making fun of someone's ######ed child. It is THAT bad.

All that said, if we manage to get a legit QB, this can pretty easily be a playoff team. However, I can certainly understand why the perception of our team is so horrfiically bad.

Edited by ghostguy123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No question that the quarterback play was the single biggest personnel issue that the Browns faced this last season.

Weeden began the season and struggled as the team only scored 1 touchdwon in the first two games. People made excuses for him saying that he didn't have Josh Gordon and OG Shaun Lavaua was injured. Weeden got injured and Hoyer leap frogged ahead of Cambell and was named the starter but the club traded away RB Trent Richardson and people lost their minds saying the team was tanking the season and lambasted the front office.

At that point three things happened to spark a three-game winning streak:

1. WR Josh Gordon came back from suuspension and exploded onto the scene

2. The team got angy at how people on the outside were saying they would tank the season

3. QB Brian Hoyer provided a spark that was missing with Weeden

Hoyer got injured and Weeden was re-named the starter so now the Weeden apologists could see what Brandon could do with WR Josh Gordon and TE Jordan Cameron and with Lavaua back and with an energized defense so we could compare the two QBs.

It was obvious not only that Weeden wasn't good but he sucked the life out of the team and that Hoyer not only played better but he sparked the team.

When Cambell replaced Weeden he played better but he didn't provide the spark of Hoyer.

We've seen what this team is capable of if it not only gets 'good' or 'solid' QB play but if the quarterback steps up as a team leader to provide a damn spark to the team. The team can lay down like dogs and die if they have a rudderless non-leader like Weeden or Cambell or it can find its backbone with a leader like Hoyer and he only has to play 'good' or 'solidly' and for this team to play with any team in the league.

See the Patriots game for evidence that this team is only one guy from competing.

Having said that I don't see any sure-fire "elite" QBs in the draft so I hope we don't mortage the farm to move-up for a non-elite QB prospect.

The team is much closer to winning than at any time since the return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just say this. Prior to this past season, our franchise was looked at as a laughing stock, a running joke, and a caricature of a real NFL team.

Right now, we look even worse. Our owner should probably be in prison, and he might end up there. He bought the damn team with stolen money for crying out loud, and the FBI is up his #### like a procologist.

We lose out on all the coaching candidates we went for last year and end up with Chud (though out coordinators were amazing hires). We trade away two picks in the draft for future picks (keep in mind I think both trades were good), and then deal our only RB to the Colts (again, even at the time, I did think this was a good move).

So we not only roll into the season with terrible QBs, after week 2 we had maybe the worst assorment of RBs in NFL history. Our front office wasn't exactly trying to win in 2013, that was fairly clear. So when we couldnt muster a good season with ####### Weeden and Campbell, and the stable of Mcgahee, Rainey, OBGYN, and some other guys I cant even remember, what happens.............fire the coach that you just signed to a 4 year deal less than a year ago?? And now we don't even have anyone as good or better than Chud to hire, and he is sitting home collecting 10 million more dollars.

We went from laughing stock of the league to such a joke that my friends and coworkers who are Steelers fans do not even make fun of me anymore because it is like making fun of someone's ######ed child. It is THAT bad.

All that said, if we manage to get a legit QB, this can pretty easily be a playoff team. However, I can certainly understand why the perception of our team is so horrfiically bad.

Yeah, I think ownership sank something good going on.

Chud, Horton and Turner, at least that is a very capable, even excellent, group.

I don't know what Browns fans felt but I rather liked the attempts in season to do something, anything. It was not status quo from the outside looking in.

And when Chud got canned I thought well heck they're going to take the same approach with the coaching. Problem is, you can sign or start any player, but you can't necessarily get a quality head coach and staff to come in if they don't like the situation.

Not sure what you do now.

One other thing - the Browns have been searching since they came back for a real star skill position player, they keep screwing up the RB, WR and QB picks but somehow they got Gordon. So here is a guy who is a real star, potentially the best WR in the game, to build around, and the greatest risk to that is his weakness for alcohol and who knwos what else and other personal demons he may have, and you take away the coaching staff that has nursed him to stability. Gordon is loose now, no one to hold him accountable. I'm pulling for him, but that is not a good situation.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Wisenhunt lost out to Mike Tomlin to coach the Steelers and he also lost a Super Bowl to Pittsburgh. Those two blows had to sting and I'm sure he would love nothing more than to coach in the AFCN and prove his coaching chops.

Whisenhunt was named as one of the finalists for the Steelers head coaching job after Cowher resigned but accepted Arizona's offer before the Steelers had made a decision so technically he took himself out of the running.

That left the the Steelers to choose between Tomlin and Russ Grimm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Wisenhunt lost out to Mike Tomlin to coach the Steelers and he also lost a Super Bowl to Pittsburgh. Those two blows had to sting and I'm sure he would love nothing more than to coach in the AFCN and prove his coaching chops.

Whisenhunt was named as one of the finalists for the Steelers head coaching job after Cowher resigned but accepted Arizona's offer before the Steelers had made a decision so technically he took himself out of the running.

That left the the Steelers to choose between Tomlin and Russ Grimm.

probably doesn't mean much to you, but my source said the same thing. Whiz knew he was going to get passed over so he took the Arizona job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this at Rotoworld today:

Colleagues 'warning' Gase about Browns HC job

A source tells the Cleveland Plain Dealer that "several colleagues" are warning Broncos OC Adam Gase against taking the Browns' head-coaching job after Rob Chudzinski went one-and-done in Cleveland.

There are indications CEO Joe Banner, GM Mike Lombardi, and owner Jimmy Haslam are not "on the same page," per NFL Network's Ian Rapoport. CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora has reported that Gase is the Browns' new primary head-coaching target, after Patriots OC Josh McDaniels turned them down. Gase is not expected to interview for top-job vacancies until after Denver's playoff run.

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

Jan 13 - 1:52 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst part about the coaching staff, aside from us just looking real stupid, is losing Norv and Horton.

And yeah, I didn't even think about the ramifications of what could happen with Gordon.

And now people are being warned about coming here. This is so bad that it keeps bouning back and forth from hilarious to frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon stuff is overblown. Dude is gonna smoke pot this offseason or not, regardless of Chud and the gang. Guys like Irvin have just as big a role in talking with him outside of Berea than the coaching staff, probably bigger. Think Gordon relates to Norv, lol.

Edited by Bobcat10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just played connect the dots on the Big Show.

Banner + Vitt (Philly) ---> Vitt's daughter + Gase (marriage)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this at Rotoworld today:

Colleagues 'warning' Gase about Browns HC job

A source tells the Cleveland Plain Dealer that "several colleagues" are warning Broncos OC Adam Gase against taking the Browns' head-coaching job after Rob Chudzinski went one-and-done in Cleveland.

There are indications CEO Joe Banner, GM Mike Lombardi, and owner Jimmy Haslam are not "on the same page," per NFL Network's Ian Rapoport. CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora has reported that Gase is the Browns' new primary head-coaching target, after Patriots OC Josh McDaniels turned them down. Gase is not expected to interview for top-job vacancies until after Denver's playoff run.

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

Jan 13 - 1:52 PM

Tony Grossi, long time beat writer from ESPN, does a weekly 'Hey Tony' collumn where he answers fan questions. He made a really reasonable speculation on what he thought went wrong with the Chud firing where he places blame on how the front office communicates or failed to communicate with the coaches.

The classic line from Cool Hand Luke applies. "What we got heeere is.... Failure to communicate."

Here is the link: http://espncleveland.com/common/more.php?m=49&action=blog&r=18&post_id=27511

Hey Tony: You have mentioned a couple times that Chud should have been advised in his weekly meetings with Banner/Lombardi that his job was in jeopardy if he didn't start winning. Could it be that they were surprised as well? I am suggesting that Haslam was the one who instigated this whole thing as he demanded accountability for the embarrassing losses and that it was a bit of a surprise to the current regime, who thought they were on a longer-term program. If Haslam doesn't learn that accountability for a sports team requires a bit different time line than a commercial enterprise does, we may have the makings of another Dan Snyder. And, if so, then Banner/Lombardi may find themselves on a much shorter leash than they thought.

-- Paul, Rochester, NY

Hey Paul: I think Haslam, Banner and Lombardi were in total concert on firing Chudzinski. I now think the coaches were blindsided. A functional organization would have had regular dialogue in which the front office conveyed concerns from week to week and then conducted a year-end review of things that went right and wrong. Obviously, this did not occur. There was an unhealthy disconnect between management and the coaches; otherwise, cooler heads would have prevailed and management concerns would have been addressed.

But if anyone is stupid enough to say that the Cleveland coaching job is radioactive or toxic or icky squicky oowie goowie or whatever moronic adjective they can scrape off their sheets then they are out of their frick'n minds.

Chud skates away with $10 million dollars after ONE YEAR!

Sign me the F' up for some of that 'radioactive' coaching, sheeshusHcrimeny.

Also the job is probably the most secure of any in the league right now because the owner and the front office know their itchy trigger fingers will get busted into a million pieces if they dare to even think of firing the next head coach after two or three years.

-------------------

Also Mary Cay Kabot says that Broncos OC Gase plans to interview with the Browns once Denver's season is over so that is good news since other coaching positions are getting filled up which means we might be the only coaching position left open if Denver goes all the way to the Super Bowl..

AM Repost: #broncos OC Adam gase plans to interview w/ #browns per @mikekliswww.cleveland.com
Beat Writer / Columnist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there were two...

It's pretty crystal clear now...after the last few hirings around the league, the McDaniels mumbo jumbo, and our other interviews...that Gase has been the #1 guy all along. The only question is if they've had the wink wink conversations or not. I really hope our brass has a strong indication that Gase is seriously interested, if not already knowing it's basically a done deal. If we get left at the alter again (Kelly) after the Gase interview this thing is really going to explode. Maybe we should be rooting for the Broncos to win the SB.

edit: and if they have not had those conversations, it has to be pretty flattering to somebody like Gase that a team is willing to wait this long for the first interview, essentially letting the field of top available coaches dry up.

Edited by Bobcat10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other tibit from Grossi' column that should quell any talk of the Browns trading-up for a QB.

http://espncleveland.com/common/more.php?m=49&action=blog&r=18&post_id=27511

Hey Tony: Friends and I are in agreement the Browns will not improve until they acquire and stabilize the QB position. We often debate who and how to acquire one. A current debate is whether trading up from #4 in this year’s draft is worthwhile. I’m for sitting at 4 and hoping a QB drops and my argument against trading up is, when has it worked? The only examples I can think of are Eli Manning and John Elway (even though they were technically traded after being drafted). In both of those cases the player demanded to be traded by the team that originally drafted him, thus lowering the bounty the team trading for the QB had to give up. Are there any other cases that I’m not thinking of? Can it be argued that if a QB is worth trading up for you won’t find a partner to trade with you? (i.e. Andrew Luck) And if a team would trade with you, the price they demand would be too damaging to your team going forward?

-- Nathan, Cleveland, OH

Hey Nathan: Here are some recent examples of quarterbacks taken in the first round by teams trading up for them: 2012, Robert Griffin 3, No. 2 overall, Washington; 2009, Mark Sanchez, No. 5, Jets; 2008, Joe Flacco, No. 18, Baltimore; 2006, Jay Cutler, No. 11, Denver. Draw your own conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?

I've had this thought over the years. Not sure we go this route though because of Hoyer.

I'm a little unsure about all this trade up talk from #4. I think some are underestimating the cost of doing this. I want Johnny Rocket probably, but not at the cost of 3 1sts because I think that's what it's going to take. StL is going to be fielding alot of calls.

Edited by Bobcat10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?

How'd that work out for Washington? They were 3-13 this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?

I've had this thought over the years. Not sure we go this route though because of Hoyer.

I'm a little unsure about all this trade up talk from #4. I think some are underestimating the cost of doing this. I want Johnny Rocket probably, but not at the cost of 3 1sts because I think that's what it's going to take. StL is going to be fielding alot of calls.

JM isn't RGIII. Something like face value could work. The advantage CLE has relative to ATL or MIN is the 1.4 instead of the 1.6 or 1.8.

The two 2014 firsts OR the 1.4 AND either the 2014 second and third OR a 2015 first and 2014 fourth are all in the ballpark chart value-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?
I've had this thought over the years. Not sure we go this route though because of Hoyer.

I'm a little unsure about all this trade up talk from #4. I think some are underestimating the cost of doing this. I want Johnny Rocket probably, but not at the cost of 3 1sts because I think that's what it's going to take. StL is going to be fielding alot of calls.

JM isn't RGIII. Something like face value could work. The advantage CLE has relative to ATL or MIN is the 1.4 instead of the 1.6 or 1.8.

The two 2014 firsts OR the 1.4 AND either the 2014 second and third OR a 2015 first and 2014 fourth are all in the ballpark chart value-wise.

He absolutely is not RGIII. I just think the price is going to be up there. It's just beginning though, so we'll see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleveland should not trade up.

Get BPA, and QBs are dicey. If any specific position I'd say go with a sure fire WR to pair with Gordon & Cam, even if that means trading down (if feasible) and go with Hoyer next year with a 2 year development QB draft pick behind him. Keep Campbell around as insurance.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade Weeden for a pick before the draft, move on.

lol. he's one if the absolute worst QBs in the league. they'll have to cut him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then they should, but give it a shot even Whitehurst & Charlie Frye were traded, teams trade for backups all the time, even bad ones. Browns got a 7th for Frye I believe. Ring up the Jets or Raiders.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then they should, but give it a shot even Whitehurst & Charlie Frye were traded, teams trade for backups all the time, even bad ones. Browns got a 7th for Frye I believe. Ring up the Jets or Raiders.

I'm sure they'll try or else they are not doing their job. But he definitely will not be back with the Browns next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter King and Tony Grossi stopped by the Big Show yesterday and went over a ton of things.

One of the things mentioned that I thought was very interesting is that Norv Turner has an idea of the type of quarterback/system that he favors and might not have been open to the new sort of mobile QBs, like a Manziel and the read-option offense or off-shoots of that offense. They speculated that the coaches were bound to a system and certain type of QB but the front office is more open to new offensive systems and different types of quarterbacks which would help with their QB search. I think they were hinting that one of the reasons why Chud/Norv were let go is because they didn't mesh on being open to diffent offensive systems/new mobile QBs (Johnny Manziel).

Oh and Peter King said that the Browns head coaching position is probably the most secure in the league for any new hire because he said the Browns CAN'T FIRE the new guy for at least three years and I agree wholeheartedly with that.

Long podcast so if you have the time, check it out.

Tony Grossi@TonyGrossi13h

Link to the @SI_PeterKing segment on850 WKNR today. Talking #Browns, Adam Gase and Peyton Manning. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=70&c=476&f=2307633

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter King and Tony Grossi stopped by the Big Show yesterday and went over a ton of things.

One of the things mentioned that I thought was very interesting is that Norv Turner has an idea of the type of quarterback/system that he favors and might not have been open to the new sort of mobile QBs, like a Manziel and the read-option offense or off-shoots of that offense. They speculated that the coaches were bound to a system and certain type of QB but the front office is more open to new offensive systems and different types of quarterbacks which would help with their QB search. I think they were hinting that one of the reasons why Chud/Norv were let go is because they didn't mesh on being open to diffent offensive systems/new mobile QBs (Johnny Manziel).

Oh and Peter King said that the Browns head coaching position is probably the most secure in the league for any new hire because he said the Browns CAN'T FIRE the new guy for at least three years and I agree wholeheartedly with that.

Long podcast so if you have the time, check it out.

Tony Grossi@TonyGrossi13h

Link to the @SI_PeterKing segment on850 WKNR today. Talking #Browns, Adam Gase and Peyton Manning. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=70&c=476&f=2307633

Chud was the OC in Carolina who had Cam Newton, untrue

Norv on the other hand, well yeah hes a stiff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then they should, but give it a shot even Whitehurst & Charlie Frye were traded, teams trade for backups all the time, even bad ones. Browns got a 7th for Frye I believe. Ring up the Jets or Raiders.

true, don't lose anything by trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and Peter King said that the Browns head coaching position is probably the most secure in the league for any new hire because he said the Browns CAN'T FIRE the new guy for at least three years and I agree wholeheartedly

if they suck the next two years Jimmy's going to flush everyone and start over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about drafting a quarterback in the 1st and another in the 3rd? If they both impress early on, they can at some point get at least a 1st or 2 2nd's for the 3rd rounder (McCarron?). Odds are better to get at least one good one. Got plenty of picks to get whatever else they want and need.

kinda like rg3 cousins?

How'd that work out for Washington? They were 3-13 this year.

A little simplistic of a p.o.v. They didn't go 3-13 because they selected two QB's in the same draft. I think bobcat is right that we won't take two because of Hoyer. If we take a second QB it'll be a late round flier as a potential developmental QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter King and Tony Grossi stopped by the Big Show yesterday and went over a ton of things.

One of the things mentioned that I thought was very interesting is that Norv Turner has an idea of the type of quarterback/system that he favors and might not have been open to the new sort of mobile QBs, like a Manziel and the read-option offense or off-shoots of that offense. They speculated that the coaches were bound to a system and certain type of QB but the front office is more open to new offensive systems and different types of quarterbacks which would help with their QB search. I think they were hinting that one of the reasons why Chud/Norv were let go is because they didn't mesh on being open to diffent offensive systems/new mobile QBs (Johnny Manziel).

Oh and Peter King said that the Browns head coaching position is probably the most secure in the league for any new hire because he said the Browns CAN'T FIRE the new guy for at least three years and I agree wholeheartedly with that.

Long podcast so if you have the time, check it out.

Tony Grossi‏@TonyGrossi13h

Link to the @SI_PeterKing segment on850 WKNR today. Talking #Browns, Adam Gase and Peyton Manning. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=70&c=476&f=2307633 …

i woulda said the browns could not fire Chud after one season too, I think King would have agreed

i would have been wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i woulda said the browns could not fire Chud after one season too, I think King would have agreed

i would have been wrong

Situation has changed.

Its not just because they fired Chud, the club will address the QB position giving a new head coach a built-in one-year mulligan added to the Chud firing meaning any head coach hired by the Cleveland Browns has two to three years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i woulda said the browns could not fire Chud after one season too, I think King would have agreed

i would have been wrong

Situation has changed.

Its not just because they fired Chud, the club will address the QB position giving a new head coach a built-in one-year mulligan added to the Chud firing meaning any head coach hired by the Cleveland Browns has two to three years.

what if they go 4-12? 2-14? 0-16?

coaches are paid to get results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Browns fire ANOTHER head coach after a single season, they'll need to stick it out for at least 4-5 years with somebody's QB coach (aka a Zorn-type candidate who is their only option) for a legit candidate to ever interview there again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i woulda said the browns could not fire Chud after one season too, I think King would have agreed

i would have been wrong

Situation has changed.

Its not just because they fired Chud, the club will address the QB position giving a new head coach a built-in one-year mulligan added to the Chud firing meaning any head coach hired by the Cleveland Browns has two to three years.

So this first year was like the Holmgren-Mangini one.

I swear to God if Haslam or Banner pull the 'second first year' card I'll fight them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Browns fire ANOTHER head coach after a single season, they'll need to stick it out for at least 4-5 years with somebody's QB coach (aka a Zorn-type candidate who is their only option) for a legit candidate to ever interview there again.

Why? I would think every candidate would love to get a four year contract then either sit in their butts for three years making millions, or double dip on another job.

Funny. Every other team has a coach. At least we can be picky now, lol. Biggest problem will be the coach getting a staff together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Browns fire ANOTHER head coach after a single season, they'll need to stick it out for at least 4-5 years with somebody's QB coach (aka a Zorn-type candidate who is their only option) for a legit candidate to ever interview there again.

Why? I would think every candidate would love to get a four year contract then either sit in their butts for three years making millions, or double dip on another job.

Funny. Every other team has a coach. At least we can be picky now, lol. Biggest problem will be the coach getting a staff together.

Haha good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the "they have to keep the next guy 3 years" rationale. They'll do whatever the hell they want and think it was a brilliant move.

Me either. If a guy goes all SHURMUR on them, he is gone after the season. Hell, maybe before the season is even over.

No idea why they would care about looking stupid when they can't look any stupider. It's like when you have -200 in spades. You can't get any worse, so go double nill baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.