Heckert's quote when asked if the Browns would have taken Weeden if Wright was available seems pretty telling.  "We didn't have to make that decision."  If Weeden was the plan all along, wouldn't you just say that? 

 

I get what HTS is saying, but it sure sounds like the thought was Wright at 22--maybe with a plan to get Weeden later. 

^ I love that response.  Why play right into what the media wants?  They'll constantly speculate with a bunch of what-if, coulda shoulda.  He's completely right, what does it matter in the end?  They didn't need to make the decision, so they went with Weeden.  I think it was telling that the pick was in immediately from the Browns, they knew what the were doing.

 

H&H would have to be the most unprepared FO in the league if the drafting of Wright sent their board into complete disarray, like Shefter would have you think.

If people are sick and tired of the Browns, maybe they need to start talking with their pocketbooks.  The Browns are by far the least successful Cleveland sports franchise in the past 15 years, yet they never fail to sell out a game and its the only team anyone around here can talk about even when the Cavs (a few years ago) or Indians (right now) are in first place.  It gets kind of annoying.

If people are sick and tired of the Browns, maybe they need to start talking with their pocketbooks.  The Browns are by far the least successful Cleveland sports franchise in the past 15 years, yet they never fail to sell out a game and its the only team anyone around here can talk about even when the Cavs (a few years ago) or Indians (right now) are in first place.  It gets kind of annoying.

 

Agreed. And what incentive do they have to put a good product on the field in order to compete for Clevelanders' spectator-sport dollars? What do you think would have happened to the Cavs or Tribe if they had offered three winning seasons since the 1980s and only one playoff win (a wildcard)? Yes, 3-16 in offering fans a winning season.......

 

Losing seasons:

 

1990

1991

1992

1993

1995

1999

2000

2001

2003

2004

2005

2006

2008

2009

2010

2011

 

This is why I have not been to a Browns game since 2001.

^ That's longer than the list of Quarterbacks!

 

I also just noticed that the Browns have had one winning season every five years that the Browns have put a team on the field. So that means that 2012 is our year!! Woohoo! :P

Don't know if those of you following the draft saw this, but I thought this was pretty funny.  It's been making the rounds at various sports sites.  (Note:  It has negative reaction to the Weeden pick, but that is not why I am posting it.) 

 

http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52641

 

I don't think the Browns know what they are doing. Why do I think such a draconian thought?

 

Their record.

 

Until their record improves over several seasons, I cannot change my thinking.

 

Who is "they"?  If you mean H&H, I'll be happy to talk about their 'records' in the NFL and the Draft  Pretty sure they 'know what they are doing' more than you know about how they are doing.  If you mean Lerner, I agree..... but that is why he hired the Big Show, who fills the role customarily occupied by NFL owners.

 

Again, people are getting too influenced by the media.  The more 24/7 draft coverage is becoming (they already have 2013 mocks out), the more the media is being used as pawns by people making much more money than them.  I suppose the media being used by millionaires is nothing new. 

When Browns employees arrive at work at Berea, those employees become "they." They is a team, just like any other business. Some have talent. Some have chemistry. Some even succeed. When they provide a successful, competitive product, they win. When they don't, they lose. It's nice that this business called the Cleveland Browns has employees who have produced a successful product previously and elsewhere. The Browns have hired many other talented people since the 1980s who have previously succeeded elsewhere but not here. So just because they have some people with past track records does not translate to success here. And no I don't believe in Cleveland curses or jinxes. But I do believe in keeping my money in my pocket when asked to support a product that is not competitive, nor will I spend it on the Browns until it becomes competitive. Only a winning record over more than one season will give me the trust in them to buy their product again.

Since their return, the Browns have always hired people who succeeded "under" some other leadership.  Policy and Clark did not build those championship teams in SF.... that was all Bill Walsh.  Davis rode JJ to success.  Romeo did the same with Belichek.  Savage obviously was not the brains behind the Ozzie Newsome operation in Baltimore like he was sold to us fans when he was hired.  At least now they have people who can stand on their own past successes.

 

But feel free to show your disapproval for the "product."  Personally, I don't view my team as a "product"...... to each his own.  I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

I don't go to the games but I watch and follow the team fanatically. If I had a lot of money, I would probably go occasionally if I could get nice seats.

 

I look at it this way. Yes, the Browns have been consistently awful since their 'rebirth'. There are a lot of reasons for that, and a lot of blame to go around, including to the Lerners, the NFL, Art Modell, Michael White, and so on and so forth - most of that is irrelevant at this point. The real killer has been constant turnover in the coaching and management, for which the Lerners are first and foremost to blame, and the coaches/managers themselves as well, and also a number of players who never came close to meeting expectations (but again, that mostly goes to the coaches/managers).

 

All that awfulness taken as a given, this most recent draft is Tom Heckert's worst draft in his three years in Cleveland. And it's not that bad. Tom Heckert has my nearly-complete confidence as a GM. Why? Because he was able to pick out the talented parts of the team he was given, retain nearly all of them to significant long-term contracts, and add new talent through the draft. That's his entire job, and he's done an excellent job.

 

Retained: Joe Thomas, D'Qwell Jackson, Josh Cribbs, Phil Dawson (by force, albeit)

Added: In 2010: Joe Haden, TJ Ward, Colt McCoy (he was good value at 85), not a great draft but decent, especially Haden/Ward; In 2011, he blows the field away, getting starters in Phil Taylor, Jabaal Sheard, Greg Little, and even Jason Pinkston, who while not great, manages to be a serviceable fill-in starter despite being a 5th round project pick. Eric Hagg, a 7th-rounder, becomes a valuable special teams player, and Heckert acquires extra picks for the following year. This is the best draft for the Browns in 20 years.

 

And this year, well, I like Richardson and I don't mind trading up - there was a lot of talk of Tampa moving up, and the fact they moved down after we moved up strongly supports that, if you choose not to believe Heckert. Weeden at 22 - not great value, but a potentially great player. Schwartz is an underrated choice for RT IMO, and I disagree that the WR on the board at 37 were all that interesting. We have Greg Little - a lot of those guys are similar to him. Big, physical, need to work on hands. Why get another project? Travis Benjamin, again, nice, but too high. Jonathan Hughes - I have no clue what the deal is. His teammate also went really high in 2, despite being graded only marginally higher - apparently they were both shooting up boards in the final days.

 

If it was my draft:

 

3: Richardson (same trade)

22: David DeCastro G (deny him to the Steelers, who were thrilled to get him...)

37: Jonathan Martin OT (I'm willing to buy the argument that Schwartz is underrated, and is a Cal Bear like Alex Mack, but I would have gone with Martin anyway)

87: T Y Hilton WR (trading down with Denver made sense, IMO)

100: Alameda Ta'amu DT

120: James-Michael Johnson LB (the actual pick)

Onward - Same as actual picks, almost all were A+ value.

 

That's my 'perfect' draft. Would have cried tears of joy for that draft. Still fairly happy with what we got, but I don't agree with Weeden merely because the risk, for a team that has so many needs, is just too high. If he struggles, how long before he gets replaced? How much patience will they have? What if they really, really bomb? Then they're all fired, and does a new regime want Old Man Weeden behind center? Another wasted first rounder - ESPECIALLY with David DeCastro on the board. Man. But I hope he throws long bombs and proves me wrong - he's surely better than McCoy, but how much?

 

So Tom Heckert is not the problem. Mike Holmgren is not really the problem - he's far too expensive for what he does, but it's Randy's money and his decision not to be an involved owner, so who cares? If Holmgren is a problem in any way, it's that his anointed coach, Pat Shurmur, hasn't done anything to impress anyone. But - he was a new coach in an abbreviated offseason with, frankly, a pretty raw team with only about 2.5 years of quality players on board. So he gets at least this year to prove himself. And frankly, if he doesn't really mail it in, I'd say next year as well. Turnover is the worst thing for this team, unless the coach just totally loses it. Or never has it. I erred on the side of keeping Eric Mangini's staff as long as he would be allowed nowhere near a draft room ever again, merely because I was tired of hiring and firing. And you have to ask yourself at each junction - is there a better coach waiting in the wings? With our current coordinators, it's a maybe, but I'd definitely reject firing the whole staff after this season unless we're 0-16.

Davis had a ton of success at Miami--took a program people said should be given the death penalty and built it into a National Championship team (though he left before they won).  Of course, college does not necessarily translate to the pros. 

I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

There's a lot of UO's who will jump on when the time comes.

Is the season over yet?

I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

There's a lot of UO's who will jump on when the time comes.

 

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

There's a lot of UO's who will jump on when the time comes.

 

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

We're disappointed not delusional!

 

 

Stay in your lane!

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

a) Be original.  Don't be the Utah "Jazz".  Even with the Ohio Valley drawl, you couldn't pull it off.

 

b) What wagon?  I have 2 of the last 7 posts in your thread and one of those was from months ago.  We are on our 3rd post-draft page.

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

a) Be original.  Don't be the Utah "Jazz".  Even with the Ohio Valley drawl, you couldn't pull it off.

 

b) What wagon?  I have 2 of the last 7 posts in your thread and one of those was from months ago.  We are on our 3rd post-draft page.

Now you know you can't tell those double wide living hillbilly's a damn thing!  SMDH!

Ah, the New Orleans Jazz! On the spur of the moment, a friend at UC in 1975 wanted to see his first NBA game.  We jumped in the car and drove to the Richfield Coliseum.  Paid $12 to sit in row AA which I thought was 1/2 way up. 

 

We sat on the floor on cushioned folding chairs!  Saw Pistol Pete, Austin, Bingo, all of them, right in front of us!

But feel free to show your disapproval for the "product."  Personally, I don't view my team as a "product"...... to each his own.  I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

Sorry, I'm not going bite on the insult and return it. If I'm posting here, I obviously still care about the team. Some part of me always will. Perhaps its the memory of being a boy. But my passions were stomped on by the team leaving, it winning a championship five years later in a different city and under another name, and enduring 22 years of futility here. If I lived with a woman who treated me that way, all my friends would be urging me to dump her. As a boy, I once cared very deeply for the Browns, maybe more than you'll believe I could. But I'm now 45 and time has taught me they are just a machine-like business, and one that isn't very good at what it does. I can't predict the future, but I find it difficult I will ever feel about the Browns like I did, including getting on a bandwagon like the ones I once rode. For one, I haven't been a boy in a very long time. And two, I can't get emotionally invested in something that isn't emotionally invested in me. Winning doesn't last. Players don't last. And even teams don't last. I have learned that, to put my emotions into something so shallow and fleeting as a pro sports team is to invite only disappointment, not joy. It would be nice to be a boy again and fall in love with in a pro sports team, but l just can't see me giving my heart to that bitch again.

Its more than just the Browns, its also the result of getting old. Through the lousy 80's, I'd sit in my car in Cincinnati whenever I could to listen to the Indians. I cried when they traded The Rock, and actually had tears in my eyes when they won the pennant in '95.  Now, if I catch a game, I'll listen or watch, but its not the same, with all the players leaving for the money. 

 

Baseball will never be what it once was, and football is getting to be the same, but I am now, and always will be, a fan!

^ My 7yo is at the point where he's really starting to follow sports, and he's torn about whether or not to root for the Browns (or any Cleveland team right now, to be honest). What I always tell him is that you root for whatever team you have the most fun rooting for. Because at the end of the day, you have a bunch of guys playing a kids game, and what happens really doesn't matter, so there is absolutely no reason to get too emotionally invested.

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

a) Be original.  Don't be the Utah "Jazz".  Even with the Ohio Valley drawl, you couldn't pull it off.

 

b) What wagon?  I have 2 of the last 7 posts in your thread and one of those was from months ago.  We are on our 3rd post-draft page.

Now you know you can't tell those double wide living hillbilly's a damn thing!  SMDH!

 

We are the urbane sophisticates of the forum. We don't concern ourselves with chatter of such brutish topics of commoners. Except when we commingle with the likes of you -- that's just polite diplomacy.

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

a) Be original.  Don't be the Utah "Jazz".  Even with the Ohio Valley drawl, you couldn't pull it off.

 

b) What wagon?  I have 2 of the last 7 posts in your thread and one of those was from months ago.  We are on our 3rd post-draft page.

Now you know you can't tell those double wide living hillbilly's a damn thing!  SMDH!

 

We are the urbane sophisticates of the forum. We don't concern ourselves with chatter of such brutish topics of commoners. Except when we commingle with the likes of you -- that's just polite diplomacy.

 

MTS sees dead people.

MTS sees dead people.

But feel free to show your disapproval for the "product."  Personally, I don't view my team as a "product"...... to each his own.  I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

Sorry, I'm not going bite on the insult and return it. If I'm posting here, I obviously still care about the team. Some part of me always will. Perhaps its the memory of being a boy. But my passions were stomped on by the team leaving, it winning a championship five years later in a different city and under another name, and enduring 22 years of futility here. If I lived with a woman who treated me that way, all my friends would be urging me to dump her. As a boy, I once cared very deeply for the Browns, maybe more than you'll believe I could. But I'm now 45 and time has taught me they are just a machine-like business, and one that isn't very good at what it does. I can't predict the future, but I find it difficult I will ever feel about the Browns like I did, including getting on a bandwagon like the ones I once rode. For one, I haven't been a boy in a very long time. And two, I can't get emotionally invested in something that isn't emotionally invested in me. Winning doesn't last. Players don't last. And even teams don't last. I have learned that, to put my emotions into something so shallow and fleeting as a pro sports team is to invite only disappointment, not joy. It would be nice to be a boy again and fall in love with in a pro sports team, but l just can't see me giving my heart to that bitch again.

 

Didn't mean for you to take my friendly ribbing as an insult.  I suppose I can somewhat sympathize because I have taken the same approach to the Indians.  However, my reasons for doing that is more my general loss of interest in baseball and the completely f'd up state of the MLB (when will Masterson be signing with the yankees?) than anything to do with the organization.

I'm sure there will be room on the bandwagon for the fair-weather fans when they do return to glory.

 

I have and always will support the Cavs, Indians, and Browns no matter their record.  What annoys me are the multitudes of people who are fairweather Cavs and Indians fans but will always be Browns fans.  It also annoys me that the Browns get more coverage in the off season when they suck than other in season teams who are playing well.

Might as well jump on the Jungle Wagon! Who Dey!

 

a) Be original.  Don't be the Utah "Jazz".  Even with the Ohio Valley drawl, you couldn't pull it off.

 

b) What wagon?  I have 2 of the last 7 posts in your thread and one of those was from months ago.  We are on our 3rd post-draft page.

 

Yeah, because an urban development forum is clearly the best place to discuss sports.  I find it hilarious that most media outlets think the Browns had a pretty lousy draft and the Bengals had a great one, and yet you seem to be the only one who seems to think the reverse is true.  Don't trust the media! The Browns are going to the Superbowl this year!! Looking forward to seeing the Bengals sweep the Brownies again this year...

When did I say the Browns had a "great" draft?  When did I say the Bengals had a lousy draft?  "Most" media outlets have given the Browns fairly average marks (B's and C's).  Personally, I'd probably give them a solid B.

 

My only really negative point about the Bengals draft (which I posted in the Bengals thread) was that they passed on DeCastro.  I'm kind of mad we passed on him too.  But we obviously weren't targeting a guard.  The Bengals took one a few picks later.  I don't think the Steelers hesitated for one second when he somehow was still on the board when they picked.  If Zeitler and the DT you got with the extra 3rd rounder you picked up in the trade down turn out to be > than DeCastro, I'd be surprised.  That said, I expect Zeitler to be a solid starter.  But I expect DeCastro to be a perennial all-pro. 

^Pass protection wasn't as big of a need for the Bengals as run blocking.  I think Zeitler will help the run game, and Still will add depth to the d-line, which is always nice to have.  I'm just glad the Bengals have finally gotten to a point where we are drafting for depth rather than needing to fill gaps at every postion, as we have had to do for years. 

 

For the record, I don't think the Browns had a lousy draft, but I do think you guys should have picked a WR with a higher round pick.  I don't have a huge problem with Weeden, except I think that not giving him any weapons to work with will only set him up to fail like Colt.  Imagine Dalton without AJ Green to throw to.  I don't think he would have had half the season he had without the viable down field threat in Green.

For the record, I don't think the Browns had a lousy draft, but I do think you guys should have picked a WR with a higher round pick.  I don't have a huge problem with Weeden, except I think that not giving him any weapons to work with will only set him up to fail like Colt.  Imagine Dalton without AJ Green to throw to.  I don't think he would have had half the season he had without the viable down field threat in Green.

 

x2

We'll have to wait and see if we have a 'viable downfield threat'.  Hard to tell when your QB can't throw it much farther than 25 yards with any velocity.  If hit in stride, I think both Cribbs and MoMass can take it to the house.  And, speaking of adding a downfield threat, we did select the fastest WR in the draft (Travis Benjamin).

 

If AJ was in this year's draft, I think H&H would have thought long and hard about staying at 4 and drafting him as opposed to moving up to take Richardson.  He was their pick last year if still on the board.  They obviously did not feel the same way about Blackmon and outside of him I don't know if there was a #1 WR in this draft.

I don't feel like I follow the Browns closely enough to offer a critique of the organization as a whole, but I think that there are three viable critiques to be made of Heckert's (or whoever was the trigger man) draft, particularly the first round:

 

1) Picking Weeden.  This is either going to be a love it or hate it thing.  I don't know that there's a right answer, but anytime you take a guy who's going to be 29 before he ever plays a down in the league, you run the risk of criticism.  If he works out, great--you get six to eight years of quarterback play.  If not, you have Chris Weinke, but spent a higher draft pick.  Given the percentage of first round QBs that flame out, it's probably not that much more of a crapshoot than picking anyone else.

 

2) Picking Richardson in the top 5.  To me this is a viable critique.  Running back has been devalued more than any other position.  I think there are many teams--maybe even a majority now--that think it's foolish to spend a top pick on a position that (1) often has a very short shelf life, and (2) where guys picked up in later rounds (or not at all) can contribute just as greatly as high picks.  Not sure how I come down on this one--if you are drafting a back and he has the chance to be the next Adrian Peterson, well, who wouldn't want AD carrying the ball?  But I can see why some people just look at this as something you don't do in the NFL these days.  Not saying it's right, but I get the premise.

 

3) Trading up from 4 to 3.  This, to me, is the most valid critique of what the Browns did.  I understand not wanting to miss out on Richardson if he is the guy you want, but it seemed like a lot to give up to move up one spot.  I have not read anything out there--and if it's there, please point me to it--indicating that the Bucs or anyone else was seriously considering trading up to the 3rd spot, and the Browns had to move.  It sounds like Spielman from Minn. convinced Heckert that there was someone doing this when there wasn't, in which case it stings to lose those picks.  I assume that it must be, in some sense, a reaction to losing out on the trade up to number 2 for RGIII.  That said, in the long run it probably doesn't add up to much more than giving up picks that the Browns fleeced from the Falcons in the Julio Jones trade anyway. 

We'll have to wait and see if we have a 'viable downfield threat'.  Hard to tell when your QB can't throw it much farther than 25 yards with any velocity.  If hit in stride, I think both Cribbs and MoMass can take it to the house.  And, speaking of adding a downfield threat, we did select the fastest WR in the draft (Travis Benjamin).

 

 

I think that's a valid issue, and Colt's lack of downfield velocity is a big reason why defenses crowd the line of scrimmage against us. They don't fear our downfield game. Weeden may change that. But I want to see how well he can read defenses, identify the same reads as what the receivers are reading to hit underneath routes, or option out of pass plays into handing off to Richardson.

 

1) Picking Weeden.  This is either going to be a love it or hate it thing.

 

100% agreed. I don't think there's many people who personally dislike Colt McCoy. He's not a divisive guy like other recent quarterbacks like Couch or Garcia or Anderson. So if he loses his job, some who really like Colt may take it out on Weeden -- unfortunately.

 

 

2) Picking Richardson in the top 5.  To me this is a viable critique.  Running back has been devalued more than any other position.  I think there are many teams--maybe even a majority now--that think it's foolish to spend a top pick on a position that (1) often has a very short shelf life, and (2) where guys picked up in later rounds (or not at all) can contribute just as greatly as high picks.

 

While the rest of the NFL advances into 21st-century laser-tag passing games, I think the AFC North and the NFC North still depend on old-school basics of tough defenses and tackle-to-tackle running games. Sure, the winning teams have top-notch downfield passing games, but that's not all they do on offense.

 

Trading up from 4 to 3.  This, to me, is the most valid critique of what the Browns did.

 

Doesn't bother me. The picks they gave up were mostly mid- to late-round picks.

 

That said, in the long run it probably doesn't add up to much more than giving up picks that the Browns fleeced from the Falcons in the Julio Jones trade anyway. 

 

That's right. They basically took out a loan whose currency is draft picks against Julio Jones and bought Trent Richardson. I'm not sure they needed to (in either case), but they felt insecure in their position. I think they could have had Julio Jones and Trent Richardson on the same team. But that's hindsight now.

 

Consider this possibility -- that Weeden and Richardson retire from the NFL at about the same time. Richardson retires because running backs get beat up and Weeden retires because he is already "old."

 

Speaking of Richardson:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/58056/is-richardson-browns-a-bad-marriage

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/58056/is-richardson-browns-a-bad-marriage

We'll have to wait and see if we have a 'viable downfield threat'.  Hard to tell when your QB can't throw it much farther than 25 yards with any velocity.  If hit in stride, I think both Cribbs and MoMass can take it to the house.  And, speaking of adding a downfield threat, we did select the fastest WR in the draft (Travis Benjamin).

 

If AJ was in this year's draft, I think H&H would have thought long and hard about staying at 4 and drafting him as opposed to moving up to take Richardson.  He was their pick last year if still on the board.  They obviously did not feel the same way about Blackmon and outside of him I don't know if there was a #1 WR in this draft.

 

I think Massaquoi is just about done in Cleveland. He's a 3 or 4 WR on a decent team. Great guy, but just doesn't have the stuff a 1/2WR needs. Greg Little, on the other hand, is basically a beefier Braylon Edwards. Same drop problems, same athleticism, better blocking and maybe better potential on the reverse play. I think Little is at least a 2WR; if he breaks out this year, he could become our 1WR. Cribbs is average in the slot and has breakaway speed and good agility, he should be the 3WR. Travis Benjamin probably comes in right away and ends up fourth on the depth chart as an speedy option. Norwood probably hangs on as the last guy on the roster. I would guess we've seen the end of Carlton Mitchell unless he shows some immediate improvement.

 

It's not an awful group of WR, it just needs a guy who demands double coverage every down like Edwards did when he was playing well.

It's not an awful group of WR, it just needs a guy who demands double coverage every down like Edwards did when he was playing well.

 

Yep, it's pretty bad. Not one guy in there says "reliable" or "threat" to me.

Sounds like Weeden impresses in rookie camp:

 

Cleveland Browns rookie quarterback Brandon Weeden ready to start competition for starting job

Published: Sunday, May 13, 2012, 8:43 PM    Updated: Sunday, May 13, 2012, 8:57 PM

Mary Kay Cabot, The Plain Dealer

 

 

BEREA, Ohio -- Browns rookie quarterback Brandon Weeden wrapped up rookie minicamp Sunday and will leap right into his much-hyped battle for the starting job with Colt McCoy and Seneca Wallace Monday in the off-season program.

 

"Absolutely, I think we're just going to compete," said Weeden at the close of rookie camp. "Nothing will change. I know Colt [is] a good guy. I know Seneca is a good guy. I met Seneca, so I'm looking forward to just being part of the other quarterbacks."

 

Weeden's innate throwing ability has impressed the Browns. He threw a tight, fast spiral, launched an effortless deep ball and displayed nice touch on shorter passes.

 

"I think he's a very smooth thrower," Shurmur said. "He throws the ball easy, and I think a guy that can throw the ball with a smooth motion, the ball presents itself to the receivers well. I think that helps them be more efficient catching it. I like what I've seen from him just in terms of throwing the football, for sure."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/05/cleveland_browns_rookie_quarte_2.html

This competition isn't going to take any longer than the time it takes him to complete a pass to an open receiver.

 

Ok...you've got the job.

^considering our receivers though, that might take till mid-season.

^considering our receivers though, that might take till mid-season.

 

ha! thats great!

Damn.... And I thought I was Mr Negative on these Browns!! :-D

I've heard some really good things about the way Little is developing this offseason.  He's lost some weight and is looking really good out there in OTAs.  Keep in mind that because he was drafted last year (during the lockout), he had only a short time to prepare for his rookie season and he still had 60 catches for 700 yards.  Also not bad considering he missed his last season of college due to off-the-field stuff.  Let's not go crazy yet, he still has a lot to prove, but I really think that he can turn into a solid contributor to the offense.

I expect a major step forward from Little, based on the additions of Weeden and Childress.  And Richardson and Schwartz.  I also expect one more receiver to break out but I have no idea who.

I expect a major step forward from Little, based on the additions of Weeden and Childress.  And Richardson and Schwartz.  I also expect one more receiver to break out but I have no idea who.

 

Carlton Mitchell.  He's been a project all along and started to show something at the end of the season.

The WR I see benefiting most from Weeden's arm is Josh Cribbs.

Wha???

 

Cleveland Browns may be for sale, according to WIP in Philadelphia

Published: Thursday, June 07, 2012, 5:39 PM    Updated: Thursday, June 07, 2012, 5:54 PM

Mary Kay Cabot, The Plain Dealer By Mary Kay Cabot, The Plain Dealer

 

 

CLEVELAND --The Browns may be for sale, according to radio reporter Howard Eskin of WIP in Philadelphia.

 

Eskin reported on his twitter account today that Former Eagles President Joe Banner is interested in putting together a group to buy the Buffalo Bills, and the Browns and St. Louis Rams may also be for sale.

 

A Browns source said he hadn't heard anything about the Browns possibly being for sale.

 

 

"It's my understanding that the Bills are (Banner's)first priority,'' said Eskin. "I was also told by an NFL source that Cleveland and St. Louis may be for sale, but Joe's first order of business from what I was told was Buffalo, if in fact he can get that money together and do all of those things.

 

"Cleveland and St. Louis were secondary in the information that I got...I was told my somebody I truly, truly respect with information, but outside of that, I know nothing further.''

 

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/06/cleveland_browns_may_be_for_sa.html

Probably not true, but I do think it might be time for Lerner to sell it to someone who's more interested in owning a football franchise.

Probably not true, but I do think it might be time for Lerner to sell it to someone who's more interested in owning a football franchise.

in Cleveland. Not LA.

 

Al Lerner got to cash in as "minority owner" when Modell moved the team to Baltimore.

Randy Lerner will get to cash in after the city built him a new stadium. 

Good old American capitalism