NFL Forum :: - Brandon Weeden

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

Brandon Weeden
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Panthers11

Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 22904
Location: Florida

Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 9:16 pm Post subject:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.
_________________

Yes we Cam. Giancarlo <3. The Bobcats will have their time.

footy_29

Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 11161
Location: The Frozen Tundra that is Canada

Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 10:51 pm Post subject:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

That's my issue as well in part. However, if Weeden adjusts during his second year, it may give the Browns up to three more years to find a true franchise QB and give him an established roster to work with.

I remember seeing Weeden try to throw to the opposite side of the field a couple of times during the Senior Bowl and it raised some suspicion as to whether his previous arm injuries will be an issue. That to me is the risk just as much as the use of the spread offense or age. Still, if he is average and they get the running game going, it might be enough to have some interim success until a better prospect can be acquired.
_________________

Blknite01's masterpiece

onejayhawk

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 5048
Location: Waco, Tx

Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 11:31 pm Post subject:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

If he was a young rookie, they would have had to use the first pick. This way they covered two positions. He'll be solid for the whole contract, which is what the FO cares about.

J
_________________

ninjapirate

Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 28400
Location: Vegas

Posted: Sun May 27, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject:

onejayhawk wrote:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

If he was a young rookie, they would have had to use the first pick. This way they covered two positions. He'll be solid for the whole contract, which is what the FO cares about.

J

I don't know about that, if weeden was 22 I still think Tannehill goes before him.
_________________

UKEaglesFan wrote:

Searching for Brooklyn Decker Camel on a work laptop - not the smartest thing I've ever done!

DawgSoldier

Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Posts: 5947
Location: Medina OH

Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:26 am Post subject:

Reality_Check wrote:

pnies20 wrote:

FWIW Weeden has smoked McCoy so far in OTAs. I know it's just OTAs but if he is much better than McCoy I'll be happy.

According to Schudel: Weeden tests downfield much more than McCoy, has picked up the offense faster, and has been deadly accurate.

He should look good in OTAs, if he doesn't the situation is worse than everyone thinks. The main knock on Weeden's actual game is that he looks like an octopus falling out of a tree anytime the pocket gets the least bit dirty.

Wait til he faces a pass rush before we get a real read on him.

That said, Air Raid QBs (which includes Weeden, and RG3 interestingly enough) have had the worst time transitioning to the NFL. Time will tell, but I can honestly say, when consulted, I listed Weeden as off my board.

They maybe bringing some Air raid to the NFL.

Brandon Weeden - QB - Browns

According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Browns will adapt their offense to Brandon Weeden's strengths.
The Browns had a run-heavy, West Coast offense under Colt McCoy, but plan to the take more shots down field with Weeden, and incorporate ''spread and no-huddle concepts.'' The vast majority of Weeden's college snaps came in shotgun.

Earlier this week, Browns GM Tom Heckert said learning Pat Shurmur's offense has been "nothing" for Weeden, and that he views him as their starting quarterback.

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer
May 27 - 7:34 AM
_________________
The Dawgpounds new three headed monster!

Adopt a Brown: QB Brandon Weeden
247/433 57% 2820yds 6.5avg 13 TD 15 Int

texans_uk

Joined: 26 Feb 2009
Posts: 24949
Location: Kempes on the sig

Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 5:08 am Post subject:

onejayhawk wrote:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

If he was a young rookie, they would have had to use the first pick. This way they covered two positions. He'll be solid for the whole contract, which is what the FO cares about.

J

Why?

People seem to be thinking his age somehow will help him translate quicker than other rookies.
_________________

DallasInHeart wrote:

Buddy if you lived in Europe or ever gone to visit Europe you would know that over there Football is totally on a different level

ThorntonMelon

Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 690

Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 8:47 am Post subject:

onejayhawk wrote:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

If he was a young rookie, they would have had to use the first pick. This way they covered two positions. He'll be solid for the whole contract, which is what the FO cares about.

J

I doubt it. I really don't like Weeden's college tape. Not that he wasn't a very good college player, he was. But what he did in college in no way will translate to NFL quarterbacking.

I think if he was 22, the Browns would still be the only team interested in him in the first round.

titwio

Joined: 09 Jan 2011
Posts: 6256
Location: Bronx NY *Sio Moore mofo's

Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:54 pm Post subject:

Just wanted to say...

what a great, awesome and entertaining thread... Laughing

_________________
44 and 21 Once a Giant, always a Giant
bRONX bRIXX 2013 Welcome's you to the "David Wilson Show".

onejayhawk

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 5048
Location: Waco, Tx

Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 6:00 pm Post subject:

ThorntonMelon wrote:

onejayhawk wrote:

Panthers11 wrote:

At least he is a young rookie that has time to develop.
Oh wait.

If he was a young rookie, they would have had to use the first pick. This way they covered two positions. He'll be solid for the whole contract, which is what the FO cares about.

J

We know that is not true. They were not the only team interested in him at age 28. Denver planned to take him if he was on the board. Make him 22 years old, then KC and Seattle, at minimum, take a close look. Cleveland could possibly trade down and still get him, but probably not out of the top 10.

As was brought many times in the Tannehill discussion, a QB's Big Board value has only passing importance for QB's who could become long term starters. Comparing Weeden to Tannehill is difficult, because they are so different. However, based on a full season in the same league, it is going to be close, if you have no age difference to factor in.

J
_________________

mitchconnor

Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 1006

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 11:11 am Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

pnies20 wrote:

Let the guy play before you hate.

EDIT: Not Saying you necessarily but everyone hating On Weeden.. Which does in fact include you.

The word "hating" is flung around too often. There's a difference between "hating" and just not thinking a guy is good. People, including me, "hate" on Tom Brady. On the flip side, I just don't think AJ Feeley(as an example) is a good player.

Thank you! If every negative evaluation constitutes "hating", how are we ever supposed to debate a player's merits?

ThorntonMelon

Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 690

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 1:28 pm Post subject:

onejayhawk wrote:

Can you provide a citation for this statement? I'm not saying you are wrong, I would just like to know where you are getting that from.

ThorntonMelon

Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 690

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 2:49 pm Post subject:

DawgSoldier wrote:

1 That is because they have a vested interest in looking at the guy and being very informed on him. It's not rocket science.

2 T-rich Plus a revamped nasty OL is going to make wish you hadn't said that.

I think that Richardson will be a good RB, but I don't think his chances of being a difference making, elite RB, are as great as most people seem to think.

Let's look at the last 10 years of top-10 drafted RBs. In that period of time there have been 7 RBs picked in the top-10. They are:

CJ Spiller
Darren McFadden
Adrian Peterson
Reggie Bush
Ronnie Brown
Cedric Benson
Cadilac Williams

Only 1 out of 7 (Peterson) is a true difference maker.

Its easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight and think that Richardson is a much better prospect that Reggie Bush or Cedric Benson, or Cadilac Williams etc., but at the time most of these guys were considered can't miss players and future all-pros, just like Trent Richardson is today.

Go back and look at the highlight reels of these guys and you will see college players that are every bit as impressive as Richardson. Reggie Bush's highlights are more impressive than Richardson's. Benson is a very similar prospect to Richardson.

So will Richardson be Adrian Peterson or will he be just another good NFL RB like the rest of these guys? Odds are he won't be a difference maker.

iknowcool

Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 11389

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 2:59 pm Post subject:

To be fair, McFadden, Brown, and Caddy were/are all difference makers. Unfortunately for them, none of them could/can stay healthy.
_________________

ThorntonMelon

Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 690

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 3:12 pm Post subject:

iknowcool wrote:

To be fair, McFadden, Brown, and Caddy were/are all difference makers. Unfortunately for them, none of them could/can stay healthy.

Which is another reason to not draft a RB that high.

Not to quibble, but Caddy was never a difference maker. He is a career 3.8 y/c back and has never exceeded 4.1 y/c in any season.

I would agree with you on McFadden if it werent for the fact that he fumbles about 1 in 50 carries. His fumbling negates his value as an above average runner and makes him a net liability.

A healthy Ronnie Brown was a good RB, but not anyone that teams feared. He was never elite.

JAD

Joined: 06 Sep 2009
Posts: 1759
Location: hookin' for cheeseburgers

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 5:42 pm Post subject:

ThorntonMelon wrote:

onejayhawk wrote:

Can you provide a citation for this statement? I'm not saying you are wrong, I would just like to know where you are getting that from.

It really doesnt make any sense. Denver wanted a young QB to potentially be groomed behind Manning for 2-5 years. By the time Manning's contract is up, Weeden will be 34..

And all the "if he was 22" talk is garbage. Thats the exact reason people are saying its a bad pick. He ISN'T 22. He is 28, and will be 29 this season. It's like me, as a Rams fan, saying that if Janoris Jenkins was 6'2" he would have been a top 5 pick. Or if Brian Quick ran a 4.2 forty he would be a top 10 pick. That doesn't validate a draft selection, its just a cutesy "what-if" scenario and a way to deflect Weeden's obviously MASSIVE question marks. If Weeden was 22 years old it would change his entire landscape as a prospect. His fresh physical tools are there, his wear from baseball wouldn't be, and he would have time to develop from coming from an air raid system.

I'm not hating Weeden or saying that he can't become successful. I hope the Browns do become a good team. Being a fan of an awful football team, I don't wish failure on any teams.
_________________

Bjoern Werner Tunes Up for Senior Season

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Page 5 of 8

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum