NFL Discussion Thread - Hall of Fame Game: August 3rd

Status
Not open for further replies.
The one minor detail with the Browns that makes me question whether or not their tanking is the decision to start Hoyer. Why? Campbell was the backup in Cleveland and probably gives them the best chance to win. So, why now do they go with Hoyer unless they want to better their chances of losing?

They are in full-tank mode. No point in starting a QB who will make them reasonably competitive. IF the colts finish w/ 6 wins, that would be 2 first round picks (maybe the #1 overall) in the top 10.

I can never get on board with tanking.

would you rather have them completely suck for 1-2 years, or be stuck in mediocrity for 5-6 years?

i watched the texans hand out bad contract after bad contract just to remain at 8-8 7-9 9-7. then they started drafting better and we're a playoff team now.

You can still draft well even though you may not have a high pick. By tanking, you send the message to players that ownership has no faith in them and their commitment to winning only comes from if the roster looks good on paper.

And it's not like we're talking about Andrew Luck here...Is Teddy really as safe a pick as people say? For the most part, an organization that tanks, shows their ineptitude to build a consistent winner and need to get lucky with a top pick in order to win.
 
 
I'm still confused on the Browns drafting Weeden lol
i dont get that whole draft for them.. why did they trade picks to the vikings to move up 1 spot.. didnt think richardson should have gone that high

then was the weeden pick
 
^Different front office.
i understand.. if you were responding to my response.. hence where the player was picked shouldnt matter to the new guys

but what i posted above are the feelings i had during the draft.. the vikings played their cards well and ended up with the guy they truly wanted (kalil) and got extra picks
 
^Different front office.


i understand.. if you were responding to my response.. hence where the player was picked shouldnt matter to the new guys



but what i posted above are the feelings i had during the draft.. the vikings played their cards well and ended up with the guy they truly wanted (kalil) and got extra picks

Oh, gotchya. That's my bad.

I was never too concerned about Weeden, but I also thought he'd be a lot more advanced and successful than he's shown.
 
"You can still draft well even though you may not have a high pick. By tanking, you send the message to players that ownership has no faith in them and their commitment to winning only comes from if the roster looks good on paper."

What if it's true?
 
"You can still draft well even though you may not have a high pick. By tanking, you send the message to players that ownership has no faith in them and their commitment to winning only comes from if the roster looks good on paper."

What if it's true?

Then in my opinion a culture is already being formed and it's not a winning one. The hope then becomes that they hit a HR in this ONE draft next year, because if they fail, they've already demonstrated their approach. I just don't think front offices can be that risky, stubborn and close-minded. Not a winning one, at least.
 
Last edited:
 
Anyone got coverage maps for this weekend? Looks like I might be stuck at work without my Sunday Ticket...
Gotta be the worst.
Yeah Manager on duty from 3-11 Sunday night...
sick.gif
Trying to get it switched for monday night instead but don't think I'll get any takers.
 
Isn't there a way to watch online for Sunday Ticket customers or is watching online a no-go at work?
 
Last edited:
Trading three picks to move up one spot to draft Richardson :lol:

Hopefully this new Cleveland regime takes the draft seriously and yes realizes this franchise is going absolutely nowhere until they finally find their franchise quarterback. I like the move for them.
 
The one minor detail with the Browns that makes me question whether or not their tanking is the decision to start Hoyer. Why? Campbell was the backup in Cleveland and probably gives them the best chance to win. So, why now do they go with Hoyer unless they want to better their chances of losing?

They are in full-tank mode. No point in starting a QB who will make them reasonably competitive. IF the colts finish w/ 6 wins, that would be 2 first round picks (maybe the #1 overall) in the top 10.

I can never get on board with tanking.

would you rather have them completely suck for 1-2 years, or be stuck in mediocrity for 5-6 years?

i watched the texans hand out bad contract after bad contract just to remain at 8-8 7-9 9-7. then they started drafting better and we're a playoff team now.

You can still draft well even though you may not have a high pick. By tanking, you send the message to players that ownership has no faith in them and their commitment to winning only comes from if the roster looks good on paper.

And it's not like we're talking about Andrew Luck here...Is Teddy really as safe a pick as people say? For the most part, an organization that tanks, shows their ineptitude to build a consistent winner and need to get lucky with a top pick in order to win.

To me it looks like they're sending that message loud and clear with that trade and by starting Hoyer, they're just not saying it cuz we all know it wouldn't sound good. This is tanking 101. I can't really blame 'em. It's a new staff, they want to bring in their own guys. It's gonna be ugly if this doesn't work though.
 
^ But that's a stubborn approach and unless they let the entire roster go, there will definitely be some carryover of players onto the team they are building and if there's doubt...The ship could sink.

I'm beating a dead horse, I suppose. It's just not a philosphy I agree with or would implement if I was ever a GM or something.
 
Last edited:
It's not like Jason Campbell is going to turn them into the 99 Rams, I've seen enough of him to know he's pointless anyways, so why not try Hoyer out, only now they have the added benefit of accepting losses.

Besides, they can get a RB in any round and get similar production, just have to find the right fit.
 
^ But that's a stubborn approach and unless they let the entire roster go, there will definitely be some carryover of players onto the team they are building and if there's doubt...The ship could sink.

I'm beating a dead horse, I suppose. It's just not a philosphy I agree with or would implement if I was ever a GM or something.

I can't say I agree with it either but they're in a tough position right now. Only time will tell what the right move was.
 
Browns are doing the right thing by trying to clean up the mistakes of the previous regime...however there is a crazy amount of pressure on the FO to make sure that these next 2 1st round picks can be franchise stalwarts for 8+ seasons.

I really wonder what the reception is going to be at the next home game.

It doesn't really matter what the FO does around here, the oblivious browns fans around seem to just support the trash moves year and year again. The stadium is always full, the fans are always there cheering...for what though? I have no idea. It's more of a like a mini-holiday every sunday in Cleveland. They're here every sunday regardless (check attendance records dating back to 1999).

Although I do support this trade because it gives us so much more flexibility going forward into next year's draft, I hate to see Trent go man. He loved Cleveland, the fans, the city, the Dawgpoud, the Brown and Orange colors and the new FO. He was a fan favorite here in Cleveland. But I'm sick and tired of rebuilding year after year, I'm hoping this is the last of the rebuilding phase.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom