What Brandon Weeden Said

I'm tempted to write "Weeden Fires Back at Bernie Kosar", like a lot of bloggers do, but it would be dishonest.  You won't read Soap Opera/fake reality show stuff here.  Unlike what Kosar said about the Lions backup quarterback, Bernie's critcisms of Brandon are constructive.

In a synopsis of an interview on NFL/com, Weeden defended himself and his recievers in the week of a bad preseason outing in Indianapolis.

I was unable to see or even hear that game, and relied on other media to figure out what went on.  (After reading more, written by smart people, and getting comments by the coaches and players, I've upgraded my own assessment from "putrid" to merely "bad".  Plus, I always knew that 17-3 early in the third quarter wouldn't spell doom).

"I don't think there's any reason to push the panic button like a lot of people want to," says Weeden.  I like that!  The way he expressed it!  "Like a lot of people want to".  The man's got a bead on all you Chicken Littles!  He knows you've been waiting for the first bad game (or interception) to come out of your caves, hopping up and down saying "SEE?  I told you!  I was right and Turner, Chud, Banner, Kosar, Jaworski, are wrong!  We're DOOMED hahaha!"

"I've watched the tape four times, and all four times their coverage was really, really good," Weeden said.  Wow!  You mean the opposing defense actually has something to do with what happens on the field?  

Brandon, don't you know you're not supposed to acknowlege that opposing players have anything to do with it?  Why, that's making "excuses"!  "Winners" transcend mere physical obstacles!

But seriously, I like to hear him get smart-alecky.  He watched the film four times and couldn't see where he overlooked an open guy.  He can't control that, and is a rational person.  Good.

In another more in-depth synopsis of the same interview, Weeds said that the "locking on" thing was overstated.  He physically imitated a "no-look" pass.  That was facetious, since he knows that looking off a safety means pretending you're looking somewhere else, just so that the safety will hesitate or even take one step the wrong way, then going to your real target.

But what I really like is what he said after that:  "I'm not that good yet."

Ah, there it is.  I was right.  Unlike Joe Montana, who had great peripheral vision, Weeden is afraid that if he looks away, he'll have trouble finding his real target when he looks back.

I now think that it's just possible that last season he was trying to look off safeties, and wound up holding the ball because he couldn't "find" his real target in time when he looked back.

It's just possible that behind the scenes, Norv Turner saw that the look-offs screwed Weeden up and told him to quit trying it (for now) until he's more accustomed to the individual recievers and their routes.

As Pete Smith says, Weeden's arm and yes, accuracy let him get away with this sometimes, because he can lower trajectories and get the ball to the reciever before the safety or zone corner can jump the route.

It's certainly a flaw, since more passes will get broken up, recievers will get hammered, etc., but it beats the hell out of Weeden standing back there five seconds after the snap trying to figure out where his primary went.

His recievers took turns dropping balls, and fumbling in one case.  It was important that Weeden re-affirmed his confidence in them.  This is a hiccup, not a pattern.  They had a bad day, and up until this game were all very reliable.

There are no Braylon Edwards' on this team.

Richardson was pulled early, the best outside linebackers were MIA, the Colts attacked a right guard spot in turmoil, and are an 11-5 team with a record-setting second-year quarterback who's very athletic.

I'm also now reading that the Browns' offense and defense were both pretty vanilla...

I can't fathom how some writers can't fathom this.  Sure, it's the all-important third preseason game, but it still doesn't count, ok?  The object is to test the players, ok?  

The best way to test the players is to make it as hard on them as you can, so you keep it simple and predictable.  Players prove themselves, and for that matter learn more, when their opponent sees them coming, and they have to physically beat them.

Sure enough, the more experienced 11-5 first units beat the new Browns' first units.

In this game, Weeden took more snaps from under center.  Thanks to Terry Pluto of the Plain Dealer, I now know that this wasn't why he sucked, as he actually had better stats from under center than from the shotgun.

The shift in philosphy for this game might have had to do with the vulnerablity of the right guard.  It's easier for a center to block after snapping a ball than after throwing it.  It's easier for a DT to get by a guard when he knows where the QB is and where he has to stay until he gets the ball.

It certainly had to do with the fact that they wanted to run more, and it's harder to run out of a shotgun.

By the way, Peyton Manning (the statue) is running a lot of pistol stuff in Denver.  See?  It told you that the pistol doesn't neccessarily require an athletic quarterback.  Look for that here.

Anyway, I'm now more encouraged about this season.  17-3 vs an 11-5 team running vanilla with key parts missing is actually pretty good for a team this early in it's growth curve.  In a real game, the starters ten points down with most of the second half remaining wouldn't have been insurmountable, either.

There will be more stumbles and setbacks.  This is why even I can't bring myself to predict that they'll pass up either the Bengals or the Ravens yet.

But I know they'll be fun to watch, are being massively underrated, and will win several games that they're supposed to lose.