What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Brandon Weeden (1 Viewer)

Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
I don't understand this reasoning - if he's not ready, he's not ready. You know what they say about insanity, right?
 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
I don't understand this reasoning - if he's not ready, he's not ready. You know what they say about insanity, right?
The reasoning is that McCoy will never be "ready." McCoy just doesn't have the physical tools to be a starting QB in the NFL. Weeden perhaps does. Ready or not, he can make throws that McCoy can't even dream of. He should be able to open up the Clev attack more. Should being the critical word.
 
Fair or not, he's got a year to prove his worth IMO.Thought he was a terrible reach in Round 1
One of the worst reaches in recent draft history.Brutal Brutal Brutal. They wasted a Julio Jones trade pick on this. A developmental 29 year old rookie QB. Good luck selling that to a fan baseSo next year, "Let's hope this 30 year old QB can make some strides". They panicked after missing out on RG3 trade.Sadly Weeden's got a year to show something. Really should expect more from a 1st round pick. Today was a horrific horrific start. Jimmy Claussen was probably cringing at that start.
You're missing the long-term plan which was to get Barkley.
Nonsense.You don't spend a 1st pick to replace him the next year. (Not to mention they gave up arguably one of the best 5 WR's in football, right now, to gain this pick)Wasn't the plan, but they'll be finding a new QB next year. Weeden was just a horrific reach on many levels.He turns 29 in about a month. Have fun Cleveland.-----------And don't count me in the crowd that Barkley's destined for great NFL success.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He's an instant asset on your FF team as a secondary QB and an ideal guy to have if you have a Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc, type as a one-week filler. You may see a lot of people in forums like this putting it down but that's just because of his age. In REAL life (where it matters), they know the deal.Its commonly been stated that you don't take a team with the needs that the Browns had, and draft a QB in the first round and then not play him. So he's gonna be the guy from Week 1. And the Browns don't have to look any farther than their own division to see its merits. The Bengals drafted a player in the 2nd last year and put him out there and it worked out fine so the first rounder is going to get his chance. Yes, the Bengals have AJ Green and Gresham, but the Browns have a better o-line, a better RB, a better Defense and ST, and Little and the TEs might be better than people think. Its like the Indy situation: Guys like Reggie wayne and Dallas clark go from all-pros to ??? when you have a garbage QB throwing to them. McCoy out. Weeden in and give him his shot.
This is pretty much how I see it. Weeden is a guy who could very quietly put up a QB14 - QB18 seasons in fantasy without hardly any press or attention behind it.
Qb 14-18? Name a Browns player that will have more than 4 receiving tds.
I don't expect anyone to have 10 TDs but Little could get 7-8 and Cribbs, Norwood, Benjamin, Watson, Moore, Cameron and Richardson all have the ability to score 4 or 5.
Yikes.Zero receptions on four targets for Little.Jordan Cameron and Ben Watson: 2 catches on 3 targets, 9 yards. The TE is a rookie QB's best friend, man.Hey that RG3 to Julio combo would have been awesome. Too bad.
 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
I don't understand this reasoning - if he's not ready, he's not ready. You know what they say about insanity, right?
The reasoning is that McCoy will never be "ready." McCoy just doesn't have the physical tools to be a starting QB in the NFL. Weeden perhaps does. Ready or not, he can make throws that McCoy can't even dream of. He should be able to open up the Clev attack more. Should being the critical word.
That's exactly what people, including myself, thought about Brees before 2004. Arm strength can be developed.
 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
I don't understand this reasoning - if he's not ready, he's not ready. You know what they say about insanity, right?
Yes, but it's only been one game. There's no way Weeden's leash is that short. They obviously thought he was ready before yesterday - otherwise, he wouldn't have started. I know today is Overreaction Monday, and yes, he had a putrid game yesterday, but sheesh. The Weeden hate is getting to be over the top.
 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
I don't understand this reasoning - if he's not ready, he's not ready. You know what they say about insanity, right?
Yes, but it's only been one game. There's no way Weeden's leash is that short. They obviously thought he was ready before yesterday - otherwise, he wouldn't have started. I know today is Overreaction Monday, and yes, he had a putrid game yesterday, but sheesh. The Weeden hate is getting to be over the top.
It's not hate. It's that the guy was a horrific horrific horrific Round 1 reach. 29 year old rookie QB's won't get a long leash. Plain and simple. The guy reeks more of a stopgap QB than an actual franchise one.Perhaps a Cleveland fan can help out, but didn't they (or in progress of) overhauling the front office? Weeden will have no ties left and I'm sure a new regime doesn't want to think "Sure hope our 30 year old shows something and develops in Year 2"And I think Weeden gets the year (not simply this one game) to show something. If he gets pulled before that, his starting NFL career goes down the drain with it.The Rich Gannon later career renaissance types are the exceptions....not the norm.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate how Weeden looked, but I told you sos after one friggin game? Do you guys think Alfred Morris is an MVP candidate too?

Do you guys realize that if Greg Little had caught that slant that Weeden hit him in the numbers with we're probably looking at a more reasonable line of 140 yards, 1 TD, and 2 INTs?

Little catches that ball and scores instead of tipping it up for a gift pick and Cleveland probably wins that game and that last Weeden INT is gone as they're running the ball with no need to throw down the field.

 
I hate how Weeden looked, but I told you sos after one friggin game? Do you guys think Alfred Morris is an MVP candidate too?

Do you guys realize that if Greg Little had caught that slant that Weeden hit him in the numbers with we're probably looking at a more reasonable line of 140 yards, 1 TD, and 2 INTs?

Little catches that ball and scores instead of tipping it up for a gift pick and Cleveland probably wins that game and that last Weeden INT is gone as they're running the ball with no need to throw down the field.
"Well see that's yer problem right there mister...."As a connoisseur of bad football I can tell you this is a common lament.

 
Looks like I really missed on this guy. Given how bad he played in the preseason and how well McCoy did he shouldn't have been the starter. Give McCoy a chance and see if he's improved.
Won't happen, these guys went all-in on Weeden, if he doesn't pan out they know they're cooked so the job is his until he corrects in time to save their jobs or when they're shown the door. I'd rather Colt not play anyway, if he plays well it'd just be a reason to consider passing on QB at the top of the 2013 draft, which would just be another mistake on a franchise full of them.
If Weeden doesn't improve they will bench him for McCoy. To do it after one game would be silly though.
Maybe they should, but they won't. Their long term hold on their jobs is directly tied to the success of Weeden. Unfortunately, they care more about their jobs than they do the long term success of the Browns.
 
i didn't see the whole game but it looked to me that Weeden was making quick decisions and getting the ball to the receivers on time for the most part.

seemed like a lot of drops, especially early on.

couple of bad INTs which he should be able to correct relatively quickly.

i'm not saying the kid necessarily has the goods, but i saw a lot more potential out of that game than i ever did out of Colt.

 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?

 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.

He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly.

If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.

I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?

P.S. He looked awful yesterday.

 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly. If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?P.S. He looked awful yesterday.
If he was Kurt Warned 2.0 it wouldn't matter. I thought he'd be much more NFL ready that this but he looked worse than a typical rookie.
 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly. If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?P.S. He looked awful yesterday.
If he was Kurt Warned 2.0 it wouldn't matter. I thought he'd be much more NFL ready that this but he looked worse than a typical rookie.
but kurt warner had played professional football before the nfl.
 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.

He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly.

If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.

I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?

P.S. He looked awful yesterday.
If he was Kurt Warned 2.0 it wouldn't matter. I thought he'd be much more NFL ready that this but he looked worse than a typical rookie.
but kurt warner had played professional football before the nfl.
OK, but could Warner do this?
 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.

He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly.

If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.

I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?

P.S. He looked awful yesterday.
If he was Kurt Warned 2.0 it wouldn't matter. I thought he'd be much more NFL ready that this but he looked worse than a typical rookie.
but kurt warner had played professional football before the nfl.
OK, but could Warner do this?
That sports science clip is the most impressive thing I've seen from Weeden.I've just always thought Klinger/Ware/countless other college QBs with gaudy stats from a spread offense when I see him.

It's one game, he still has time to proven doubters like myself wrong but I've just never been sold on him. Not sure I can point to one thing I don't like about him but just doesnt seem to have "it" to be a starting QB in the NFL IMO.

 
I really don't understand the logic of taking Brandon Weeden by any NFL team.He's 28 and will be 29 next month if I remember the horrible announcers from yesterday correctly. If I'm going to have a rookie QB, don't I want one who is 22, 23 years old? We're cutting 5 years minimum off this guy's career by having a 28-year-old. And if you are going to have a 28-year-old QB, couldn't they have gotten a guy with NFL experience? I mean, I just don't get the 28-year-old rookie aspect of it. If he takes 3 years to develop into a solid NFL starter, he'll be 31. I just don't think you are getting a long NFL career from this guy.I agree with whoever above said this is probably just a stopgap, but why spend a first-rounder on a stopgap?P.S. He looked awful yesterday.
If he was Kurt Warned 2.0 it wouldn't matter. I thought he'd be much more NFL ready that this but he looked worse than a typical rookie.
but kurt warner had played professional football before the nfl.
Not only did Warner play 3 years in Arena football, but he also played a season in NFL Europe and had been the Rams' backup quarterback for the previous 1 1/2 years. He was no rookie.
 
Instead of the "preseason hype thread", can we name this the "regular season poop thread"? Because Brandon Weeden pooped himself in that game. And this is coming from a Browns homer and Weeden fan... sigh.

 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play.

Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.

All that said, I think he's destined for mediocrity, not stardom.

 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
Weeden has the TOOLS...McCoy does not. McCoy has always had the look of a career backup. Weeden has the cahnce to be at least a decent starter.FWIW...I believe EVERY starter shold get 2 years provided they have the tools to start with.
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
Colt McCoy can not throw outside the hash marks more than 10 yards downfield. He is never going to be a starter because you have to tear a third of the playbook out before he takes the field. I LIKE McCoy, and I'm jealous of how much money he will make holding a clipboard for the next 6 years. But I'd take weeden 100 times out of a 100 if I were the browns and choosing between the two.
 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
Eli's first game week 1 wasn't that bad:3/9 for 66 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT

However, his first 5 appearance were horrible:

44/110 (41.8%) for 416 yards, 1 TD, 6 INT

 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
Eli's first game week 1 wasn't that bad:3/9 for 66 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT

However, his first 5 appearance were horrible:

44/110 (41.8%) for 416 yards, 1 TD, 6 INT
I didn't say it happened in his first start; it happened in his 5th start:4/18, 27 yards, 2 INTs, QB rating 0.0

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
Eli's first game week 1 wasn't that bad:3/9 for 66 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT

However, his first 5 appearance were horrible:

44/110 (41.8%) for 416 yards, 1 TD, 6 INT
people bring this up all the time when a QB starts slowly. They did it two years ago with Tebow. "Eli can do it so Weeden can do the same" is the implication. Faulty logic. Just like when Spud Webb and Muggsy Bogues did well in the NBA, then any guy that was shorter than 5-8 and was really good in college had a legitimate shot. Weeden was a mid round pick if you listen to a lot of scouts. The fact that Cleveland reached up in the late first to get him doesn't make him a first round QB. It just makes him another failed QB pick (Couch, Quinn, McCoy) by the Browns.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
Weeden has the TOOLS...McCoy does not. McCoy has always had the look of a career backup. Weeden has the cahnce to be at least a decent starter.FWIW...I believe EVERY starter shold get 2 years provided they have the tools to start with.
You say Weeden has the tools, just like a large number of people said that McCoy had the tools, and Quinn had the tools, and Couch had the tools, etc.Then when these guys fail, the same people say "Oh, he never had any tools." :rolleyes:We're only about 12 games away from all the experts proclaiming that Weeden never had any tools, that he always looked like a career backup, etc.
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
Weeden has the TOOLS...McCoy does not. McCoy has always had the look of a career backup. Weeden has the cahnce to be at least a decent starter.FWIW...I believe EVERY starter shold get 2 years provided they have the tools to start with.
You say Weeden has the tools, just like a large number of people said that McCoy had the tools, and Quinn had the tools, and Couch had the tools, etc.Then when these guys fail, the same people say "Oh, he never had any tools." :rolleyes:We're only about 12 games away from all the experts proclaiming that Weeden never had any tools, that he always looked like a career backup, etc.
I think you are wrong about McCoy, but you are right about Quinn and Couch. One misfire after another for the Browns.
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play.

Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.

All that said, I think he's destined for mediocrity, not stardom.
When I look at him I don't even think about his age. I think of a guy who was the product of a system and playing with a really good WR in college.
 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
Eli's first game week 1 wasn't that bad:3/9 for 66 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT

However, his first 5 appearance were horrible:

44/110 (41.8%) for 416 yards, 1 TD, 6 INT
people bring this up all the time when a QB starts slowly. They did it two years ago with Tebow. "Eli can do it so Weeden can do the same" is the implication. Faulty logic. Just like when Spud Webb and Muggsy Bogues did well in the NBA, then any guy that was shorter than 5-8 and was really good in college had a legitimate shot. Weeden was a mid round pick if you listen to a lot of scouts. The fact that Cleveland reached up in the late first to get him doesn't make him a first round QB. It just makes him another failed QB pick (Couch, Quinn, McCoy) by the Browns.
I don't think anyone has tried implicating that Weeden's career arc will go similar to Eli's. We're simply pointing out that it's not unprecedented for a 1st round QB to struggle mightily out of the gate and still go on to have a fine career. Calling Weeden a failed pick this early into his career is faulty logic. And as far as the idea that some scouts thought Weeden was a mid round pick, obviously others thought he was a 1st-2nd round pick, I don't think the Browns were the only ones.

 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.All that said, I think he's destined for mediocrity, not stardom.
He reminds me of that guy that played for Carolina when I read what's written about him.Cleveland changes QBs too often; winning teams don't. I like McCoy. I see his downside and all but that guy will die trying and took blame that wasn't necessarily his. He deserved plenty but it reached a point where they were piling it on.If Weeden is the guy, then go with him.If he plays this Sunday like he did last Sunday, we will be talking about a new QB in 2013 for them already. I can't tell if Massaquoi (under-appreciated here) or Little are truly any good. They tease with some nice plays but then they're quite unimpressive. Cribbs was exciting and sooo worth a shot at being some sort of special player that made us FF folks drool when we thought of his stat potential. He never became all that.I'm not sure the Browns get better every year.
 
For some perspective:

Weeden 12/35 (34%) for 118 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT.

Leaf - 16/31 (51%) for 192 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT.

Has there been a worse performance by a rookie QB in his first game? Has anyone who played that bad when on to a productive career?
Yes, given Weeden's 5.1 QB rating in that game. Lots of Hall of Fame QBs have had games where that had a 0.0 QB rating, including Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, and Warren Moon. More recently, Eli Manning had a 0.0 QB rating in a game in his rookie season.
Eli's first game week 1 wasn't that bad:3/9 for 66 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT

However, his first 5 appearance were horrible:

44/110 (41.8%) for 416 yards, 1 TD, 6 INT
people bring this up all the time when a QB starts slowly. They did it two years ago with Tebow. "Eli can do it so Weeden can do the same" is the implication. Faulty logic. Just like when Spud Webb and Muggsy Bogues did well in the NBA, then any guy that was shorter than 5-8 and was really good in college had a legitimate shot. Weeden was a mid round pick if you listen to a lot of scouts. The fact that Cleveland reached up in the late first to get him doesn't make him a first round QB. It just makes him another failed QB pick (Couch, Quinn, McCoy) by the Browns.
I don't think anyone has tried implicating that Weeden's career arc will go similar to Eli's. We're simply pointing out that it's not unprecedented for a 1st round QB to struggle mightily out of the gate and still go on to have a fine career. Calling Weeden a failed pick this early into his career is faulty logic. And as far as the idea that some scouts thought Weeden was a mid round pick, obviously others thought he was a 1st-2nd round pick, I don't think the Browns were the only ones.
I don't disagree but his age was supposed to be helpful
 
People are making too much of Weeden's age IMO. If it take him 2 full seasons to "get it"...he'd still have at least 4 or 5 more to play. Many young QB's who "get it" get hurt after a few seasons and disapear by 30 anyway. If Weeden can get it in 2 years...he's a fine pick.
Funny that you're already giving Weeden a 2 year extension to "get it", when Colt McCoy -- who BY THE WAY had a better debut than Weeden did -- was not given that luxury.
Colt McCoy can not throw outside the hash marks more than 10 yards downfield. He is never going to be a starter because you have to tear a third of the playbook out before he takes the field. I LIKE McCoy, and I'm jealous of how much money he will make holding a clipboard for the next 6 years. But I'd take weeden 100 times out of a 100 if I were the browns and choosing between the two.
:goodposting: Finally someone who knows what he's talking about... just get the McCoy talk out of here please.
 
people bring this up all the time when a QB starts slowly. They did it two years ago with Tebow. "Eli can do it so Weeden can do the same" is the implication. Faulty logic. Just like when Spud Webb and Muggsy Bogues did well in the NBA, then any guy that was shorter than 5-8 and was really good in college had a legitimate shot. Weeden was a mid round pick if you listen to a lot of scouts. The fact that Cleveland reached up in the late first to get him doesn't make him a first round QB. It just makes him another failed QB pick (Couch, Quinn, McCoy) by the Browns.
:confused: The logic here doesn't show Weeden will succeed...it shows you can't give up after one game, or even one season.A good many people thought Weeden was a reach, but nobody expected him to last beyond the middle of the second round....and age was the biggest reason draftniks thought he'd slip that far. He wasn't a big reach at all. This from a guy who isn't sold on Weeden either....it's TOO SOON.
 
I hate how Weeden looked, but I told you sos after one friggin game? Do you guys think Alfred Morris is an MVP candidate too?Do you guys realize that if Greg Little had caught that slant that Weeden hit him in the numbers with we're probably looking at a more reasonable line of 140 yards, 1 TD, and 2 INTs?Little catches that ball and scores instead of tipping it up for a gift pick and Cleveland probably wins that game and that last Weeden INT is gone as they're running the ball with no need to throw down the field.
That statline is still horrible.
 
26 for 37, 322 yards, 2 TDs, no INTs, 114.9 rating. On the road.

What a ####### nightmare.

You overreacting boobs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah, we gotta talk Weeden.

In his first NFL game Brandon Weeden posted the third lowest QB passer rating since 1960 of any rookie starter.

Yesterday his QB passer rating was nearly 100 points higher than his first game. He broke the ALL-TIME Cleveland Browns rookie single game passing yard record and in only his second game he passed the 300 yard passing mark.

It took Colt McCoy twelve games to surpass 300 passing yards and Colt wasn't able to break the 300 yard berrier until his second season in a game where he threw over 61 passes and Colt has never had another 300 yard passing game.

Brady Quinn didn't hit 300 yards till his third season, so he like Colt couldn't accomplish that fete his rookie season let alone his second start, and like McCoy he also has never had another 300 yard passing game.

Tim Couch didn't cross the 300 yard berrier till his second season and only surpassed 300 yards two other times in his five years with the Browns.

The turn around by Weeden from one of the ALL-TIME worst debutes in NFL history to breaking the ALL-TIME Cleveland Brow rookie passing record and surpassing the 300 yard mark in only his SECOND GAME is enormously big news and people seem to be sluffing this off and not really understanding how huge what he did was.

The fact the guy did what he did without a true-legit #1 WR is remarkable. The Browns don't have anything remotely close to a #1 WR but Andy Dalton has AJ Green. Andy Dalton was facing a Cleveland secondary without Joe Haden or Sheldon Brown. BOTH of Cleveland's starting CBs were OUT yet Weeden threw for more yards than Dalton did and he didn't throw an interception whereas Dalton did.

Since Weeden had the third lowest QB passer rating his first game, 5.1, and then in his game his QB passer rating was 104.8 I don't have to look it up, I know he had the biggest turn around in NFL history with his QB passer rating of any rookie ever and I don't think that record will ever be broken.

Colt McCoy and Brady Quinn have never been able to surpass 300 yards again in their NFL careers but I'm positive Weeden will beause he can sling it.

Also the amazing-incredible-remarkable (put in any adjective you can think of) turn around from game-one to game-two is not just a run-of-the-mill wishy-washy improvement, it was record shattering stuff.

I do not know how good Weeden will be but I can state he is not a bust and the Browns have a legit NFL QB going forward.

Oh they also have a legit NFL RB too and they have some raw talent at WR.

Hopefully someone will emerge from the wideouts and then Weeden will really have the tools in place to show what he's capable of but Brandon Weeden is legit folks. He proved it yesterday by turning around one of the worst debutes in NFL history with a rookie club record breaking passing performance and the improvement from game-one to game-two isn't just an ALL-TIME NFL record.

He SHATTERED the record for improvement from game-one to game-two for any NFL rookie QB.

Brandon Weeden is a legitimate NFL quarterback. I don't know how good he will be but he is no bust, he's for real.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top