Browns QB Read Option - Page 2 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > 32 NFL Teams > Cleveland Browns

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12.02.2015, 10:46 PM
kevin.macca34 kevin.macca34 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 04.12.2014
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leebladedawg View Post
I have just took part in a 3 round mock draft on one of the other threads, I went OLB with first pick and DT with second pick, we need to badly get pressure to the QB in order to play the man coverage in secondary that Pett wants to and therefore allow the D to win games which is probably our best chance next year of winning games
Orapko is a free agent.
This draft looks so weak to me
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 13.02.2015, 10:58 AM
leebladedawg's Avatar
leebladedawg leebladedawg is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 25.11.2005
Posts: 17,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin.macca34 View Post
Orapko is a free agent.
This draft looks so weak to me
Yeh it does look like a weak draft class this year
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 13.02.2015, 02:16 PM
go_browns!'s Avatar
go_browns! go_browns! is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 05.01.2010
Posts: 3,827
Default

For what it's worth I think we'll go for some D-line help early in the draft. As far as the QB situation goes, I think Manziel will get his chance as the starter and we'll draft someone in the mid-rounds to back him up. Hoyer isn't starter material, at least not in the long run.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 13.02.2015, 09:12 PM
kevin.macca34 kevin.macca34 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 04.12.2014
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by go_browns! View Post
For what it's worth I think we'll go for some D-line help early in the draft. As far as the QB situation goes, I think Manziel will get his chance as the starter and we'll draft someone in the mid-rounds to back him up. Hoyer isn't starter material, at least not in the long run.
I will be absolutely amazed manziel is our starter.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 13.02.2015, 10:17 PM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

I thought Manziel starting would depend very much on how long he needs to sort himself out initially as himself and then, as part of the offense.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 13.02.2015, 10:40 PM
leebladedawg's Avatar
leebladedawg leebladedawg is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 25.11.2005
Posts: 17,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce70 View Post
I thought Manziel starting would depend very much on how long he needs to sort himself out initially as himself and then, as part of the offense.
He was always going to be slightly behind but then so will be Connor Shaw simply because it's a new offence again, the one advantage he has and I'm hoping someone at the Browns has worked out as well is new QB coach Kev, he worked him out last year so he should be able to sit down with Flip and work out the best way to work him back in as quick as poss
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 13.02.2015, 11:30 PM
kevin.macca34 kevin.macca34 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 04.12.2014
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leebladedawg View Post
He was always going to be slightly behind but then so will be Connor Shaw simply because it's a new offence again, the one advantage he has and I'm hoping someone at the Browns has worked out as well is new QB coach Kev, he worked him out last year so he should be able to sit down with Flip and work out the best way to work him back in as quick as poss
I would be amazed if manziel is the starter even with new QB coach. Obviously depending on the nature of his problem he could conceivably still be accessing support by September. Also can you really build your team around someone with perhaps a substance problem. He could face punishment if he fails a substance test that could result in him missing games. Same with Gordon. We need to move on and get some stability.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 15.02.2015, 09:48 AM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

On CBD they were talking about the prospect of trading down in the draft to let the Eagles get Marriota, with us getting Faulds as part of the deal. While the logistics and likelihood of this being able to happen seem remote, I wondered why Chip Kelly has a) gone off Faulds and b) would be so tempted to trade up for a QB that will have been passed over by franchises whose need at that position appear greater?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 15.02.2015, 09:03 PM
leebladedawg's Avatar
leebladedawg leebladedawg is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 25.11.2005
Posts: 17,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin.macca34 View Post
I would be amazed if manziel is the starter even with new QB coach. Obviously depending on the nature of his problem he could conceivably still be accessing support by September. Also can you really build your team around someone with perhaps a substance problem. He could face punishment if he fails a substance test that could result in him missing games. Same with Gordon. We need to move on and get some stability.
I think the reality of the upcoming season and frankly the bleakness of QB options for me really dictates no other option and for me this is the only reason we brought O'Connell in as QB coach, i mean the odds already are that Pettine and his staff will be gone by the end of the year and the whole thing will be blown up again which is they have gone this route

I think the reality is he will always be accessing support for his condition which is one reason i believe the time isnt such a big deal, yeh he could be impotently banned just like he could potentially wreck his knee and be out for the year etc, im thinking thats how they are looking at it
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 15.02.2015, 09:12 PM
leebladedawg's Avatar
leebladedawg leebladedawg is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 25.11.2005
Posts: 17,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce70 View Post
On CBD they were talking about the prospect of trading down in the draft to let the Eagles get Marriota, with us getting Faulds as part of the deal. While the logistics and likelihood of this being able to happen seem remote, I wondered why Chip Kelly has a) gone off Faulds and b) would be so tempted to trade up for a QB that will have been passed over by franchises whose need at that position appear greater?
Im assuming Fauld's is Scottish slang for Foles mate

I think Kelly has, like every HC, his vision of how his offence will be and Foles wasnt his guy, remember Kelly has just won a power struggle in Philly so im second guessing that Foles wasnt his preferred choice

I think Marriota is more suited to how Kelly wants to spread his offence and if he can get him to work in the pocket then the sky could be high, he maybe will drop so low simply because he is realistically a two year project and most GM/HC who need a QB now wont have the guts to take such a risk even if its common sense
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 10:05 PM.