Hey Tony

I come here not to bury Tony Grossi.  Unlike a lot of fans who read the post from him to follow, I don't believe he has an anti-Browns agenda.  I've found his columns fairly objective.  They tend toward the negative, but this is not the result of an agenda or bitterness.

And he's pretty good, actually.

The following is what he posted on a forum a little while ago, together with my analysis of same:

Despite an uncommonly poor draft that reeked of “wait ‘til next year,” I maintained a positive vibe on the Browns through the offseason OTAs, minicamps and summer training camp.

Well, Tony, I know that you don't believe that Mingo will be all that, but this is an opinion with which many smart people disagree.  Nor was it the new regime's fault that they can't claim credit for a second round pick.  I'm sorry you've got Jenkins, McFadden, Slaughter, Gilkey and Bryant scratching at the inside of their coffins already.  

But really, you have to be fair and include Gordon, rather than bashing the new regime for a gaping hole in their draft.
The final roster cutdown was a cold towel slap in the face, followed by a second day of random waiver pickups. It’s still not over, but as I write this, the Browns have nine undrafted rookies – plus four picks from their inglorious draft -- and another eight undrafted players entering their second season. That’s 21 of 53 without much experience or pedigree.

The pickups were not random, and several of the players they replaced were themselves undrafted free agents.  Not one but two running backs had to be replaced, and rookie running backs can play immediately.

And you ignore the fact that many of the players without "much experience" are entering their second seasons, where players tend to make the biggest strides.  These include starting ILB Craig Robertson, Gordon, Winn, Hughes, and Gipson.  This is positive, not negative.

And the hell with pedigree, Tony!  Talent is talent.  James Micheal Johnson is a good player.  An undrafted free agent is better.

The Browns say they are building for sustainable success. It looks more like sustainable mediocrity.

The sustainable part is the core which includes two first and a second round starter on the offensive line, Gordon, Little, Benjamin, Richardson, Cameron, Taylor, Bryant, Jackson, Haden, Ward--all except Jackson young and improving players.

The sustainable part is the guys like Gipson and Robertson without "pedigree" that come out of nowhere; digging their way out of the graves you put them in based on their undrafted status, and others like McFadden and Slaughter who were hurt and are still healing.
Still, everything rides on Brandon Weeden. If he pulls out a season like that of Derek Anderson, 2007, the points and wins will follow. But the palpable vibe is that not everybody in the building believes in him. There is negative energy there. It may be a self-fulfilling prophecy. I hope not.

I see the Browns going 6-10. If that happens, Weeden will be replaced and the Browns will pat themselves on the back for forsaking this year’s draft for next year’s. And everyone will be starting over again.

They'll look to draft a quarterback regardless of how well Weeden does due to his age.  Nor would he neccessarily be released since he doesn't make a lot of money and could be a back up.

It's possible your prediction is right, but the reasons you cite aren't quite rational:

The offensive line has an issue at guard for now, but even as-is it's one of the better units in the league, with a veteran core.  While you were sleeping, Greg Little became a seasoned veteran, they added veteran reciever Devone Bess, Gordon and Benjamin got a year of experience, Cameron has been developing for two seasons, and this list goes on and on throughout the whole team. 

The starters are all at least second year players, and probably average around 3.5 years experience.  Only the top two draft picks should be counted on for heavy contributions as rookies, unless the third rounder is a running back or offensive lineman or something.  It's massively presumptuous to dismiss two injured players from those rounds in their first seasons (and you know that, T-man).

You may be right about the divided opinions on Weeden, but since you're talking about "vibes" that's iffy.  I've known you to take "He has things he needs to work on" as condemnation.

Assuming you're correct, what has this to do with his de facto performance, and who says those who believe in him aren't right?  Digging down a little deeper, isn't Lombardi the dissenter?  Huh?  When did you start listening to him again?

You got one thing right:  As Weeden goes, so goes the team.  That's why if he falls on his face you could get lucky with your 6-10.  But it will be Weeden, not the team as a whole.

We'll see, Tony.