I kept faith with Weeden until now. Unlike others, I know the difference between a dropped pass and a bad throw, and where to place the blame for a loss.
Still, here comes Hoyer and lights it up--there you go. Well, not really. Weeden didn't have that dee-lux deep threat, Josh Gordon, to loosen things up, as well as to make actual big plays for him.
So I said let's see what he does with Gordon.
He failed. Not all of it was his fault, but now I've seen enough to pretty much give up on Weeden.
I believe part of it is his age. When you're 22-23, it's easier for you to learn and adapt. At 29-30, you're much more hard-wired. Weeden was wired for focus and tunnel vision as a pitcher. It didn't hurt him much as a college QB, but now he's 29, and it seems too late for him.
It's still classless and embarrassing to hear the guy get bood before he's thrown his first pass. Boobirds in general irk me, because every player is trying; nobody is screwing up on purpose. It's sadistic to take a guy who's already humiliated and hurting, and kick him when he's down.
Except Braylon Edwards, or somebody like that--ok he's not trying so boo him.
Anyway, now it's Jason Campbell. Much is made of the fact that they skipped over him and put Hoyer in when Weeden got hurt. Then, of the fact that Weeden returned when Hoyer went down.
Well yeah, they thought Hoyer was a better fit for this offense, because he's more accurate on deep passes. And then, they knew about Campbell, but needed to give Hoyer his chance so that they could find out what he had to offer.
It was a calculated risk. If Hoyer had stunk up the joint, it would have been Campbell time.
But as usual, the conclusion-leapers overshot. It meant they really hate Campbell and he sucks and stuff. Not at all.
Cherry-pickers want to focus solely on his brief, putrid performance with the Bears the season before he was signed here, and ignore what he was doing with the Raiders before he was injured.
He was winning games with a crappy team. I'm not sure what happened in Chicago, and you can't just ignore it. But with Campbell or anyone else, you need to look at his overall history--except perhaps his rookie season.
Jim Zorn was his coach in Washington. Armani Tumor points out that Zorn's offense was all about short, quick passes, and didn't allow Campbell to use his big arm.
In fact, Armani picked the Browns to upset KC today! When I regained consciousness, I recalled that he cited this fact, and stated his personal opinion that this former first round pick was always a good QB, and got blamed for bad teams.
Boy, that sounds familiar.
I'm not kidding myself. Campbell is no long-term answer, even if he does well. Contrary to current mythology, he's shown that he's above average and a competant starter, which is positive. Not negative.
Hoyer, I believe, is better. He's also younger, with more upside. And regardless of how much Norv and Chud like Hoyer, they'll still draft a quarterback to compete with/learn from him next season.
But for now, Campbell is a decent QB who will give the Browns a chance to win every game. He is NOT a bad quarterback.
As for the draft crop, I've heard a lot of irrational theories about this or that guy "falling" to them. That won't happen unless they draft at least in the top 5.
Bridgewater is probably off the table to begin with, and several other teams will try to trade ahead of the Browns for the others. Because teams in need of a quarterback tend to draft in the top third, the teams ahead of them might well need a QB, and those a few slots behind them will have the ammo to make moves.
Before the rookie salary cap, this happened. With the cap, it will happen in every draft, as teams will take more chances on players who won't cost them 25% of their salary cap.
HOWEVER, the idea of trading Josh Gordon is still rediculous. Gordon and Cameron are THE two guys who could help Hoyer or a rookie quarterback succeed. You take Gordon out of it, and they're all over Cameron and playing downhill to hammer to the quarterback and stuff the run.
Gordons don't grow on trees! Why can't some people not GET this? You just watch what happens to the Bengals if Green gets hurt! Check out the Steelers without Wallace (and Wallace can't carry Gordon's jock)!
As for the KC game, Armani's prediction and my higher opinion of Campbell have given me some hope. While I was also bothered by the defense looking bad the last two weeks, the matchups here are interesting.
Alex Smith is relying almost exclusively on short passes. I don't know if he's gone deep even once this whole season. With the emergence of Skrine, the Browns have the secondary to mix zone with man and jump those routes.
This includes both Roberts and Jackson.
The Chiefs unsung heros are the defenders. They've been very stingy, and this is where the Browns could have a bigger problem.
I'm afraid this feels like a loss to me...but maybe I don't mind that much, since I'd really like to get a stud quarterback (not that Hoyer can't be that, ok?)
One point on that: Level of competition doesn't mean as much for a quarterback, ok? This is common sense. His recievers, protectors, and ball carriers are all presumably at the same level as the opponent, and he still has to be smart and accurate, period.
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Oh! I forgot the referees! They'll probably make sure...
No comments:
Post a Comment