jordo212000;1350651 wrote:Eric Mangini? Romeo Crennel?

When are people going to realize that the majority of New England's success is due to Tom Brady and The Hoodie?

You're a douche bag, but this is true. You can add Weis to the list as well.

Mulva;1350674 wrote:I saw the current order on espn. How is buffalo ahead of us when they beat us head to head?

Also, for all the talk about the tough schedule, browns played 4 teams that would currently be drafting top 6.

I don't think they factor in H2H when it comes to the draft. It's all a flip of the coin with teams with tied records.

Also the Browns have the third toughest schedule. You can be a pessimistic crybaby all you want, but that is a fact: http://www.theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

Depending on how the game goes this weekend, the Browns played 10-11 teams with a .500 record or above.

like_that;1350679 wrote:I don't think they factor in H2H when it comes to the draft. It's all a flip of the coin with teams with tied records.

Also the Browns have the third toughest schedule. You can be a pessimistic crybaby all you want, but that is a fact: http://www.theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

Depending on how the game goes this weekend, the Browns played 10-11 teams with a .500 record or above.

http://predictionmachine.com/Strength-of-Schedule-Rankings

http://www.playoffstatus.com/nfl/afcsosag.html

When you look at head to head instead of teams played and teams those teams played and teams that those teams played, they played one of the hardest schedules this year. I mean, after all you are playing head to head, not the teams of the teams played of the teams played.

royal_k;1350742 wrote:When you look at head to head instead of teams played and teams those teams played and teams that those teams played, they played one of the hardest schedules this year. I mean, after all you are playing head to head, not the teams of the teams played of the teams played.

His link was wrong. I would almost guarantee those numbers are based on 2011 records, not 2012 results. The opponent records add up to 256 games. That's 16 games x 16 teams. How does that work when only 15 games have been played? Probably something he should have checked before claiming something as fact.

Browns opponents are 94-101 this year. 120-120 if you include the division teams twice. It was hardly murderer's row. The 2nd link I posted is actual SOS. Browns are 21st, not 3rd.

like_that;1350679 wrote:I don't think they factor in H2H when it comes to the draft. It's all a flip of the coin with teams with tied records.

Also the Browns have the third toughest schedule. You can be a pessimistic crybaby all you want, but that is a fact: http://www.theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

Depending on how the game goes this weekend, the Browns played 10-11 teams with a .500 record or above.

FlopFail..... Steelers twice. KC, Oakland, Philly, SD, Oakland and KC. All teams with losing records. Get your shit straight.

Browns will have played 7 games against teams with losing records and 9 against teams with winning records.

Who gives a shit about SOS...the Browns were fucking terrible this year, no matter how shitty or good our schedule was.

Lets recap:

We didn't make it to .500...which, after 4 seasons of the same front office, shouldn't be very difficult to do.

Weeden was terrible. Weeden fans can argue it all they want. I saw it with my own two eyes. He was not good, and did not put is in a chance to win games. He couldn't make throws that will take you to the next level as a QB. He could hit a ton of crossing routes. Hell, if we wanted that we should have grabbed a guard or OLB with that pick and stuck with McCoy. Results would have still been the same.

Richardson showed promise. Whoever the next coach/regime is next year, they better focus this offense around him. Take a look at John Harbraugh (sp? right brother?) in Baltimore and how he focuses his offense around Ray Rice. I understand, Mulva, that Richardson didn't have 1700 yards and 22 TDs. But he did break Cleveland records left and right, and showed promise. Something that I actually care about, not comparison of stats.

Shurmur was as bad as we all thought he'd be...and then some. No chance of winning with this guy at the helm. What a bum he is. I hope he doesn't get another coaching opportunity any higher than middle school football.

Our WRs are...STILL....awful. I just don't understand how we can still have the league's worst (or at least one of them) WR corps. Is it really too much to ask that the Browns' FO actually listen to me and grab a franchise, #1, dominating WR? Get someone in here, whether from the draft or free agency, that can open the damn field. I believe Gordon and perhaps Little could be pretty solid if we had a #1 field spreading WR.

The defense wasn't bad. I realize their stats probably won't put them anywhere near the top, and don't get me wrong they need a LOT of improvement; but there is talent there. just need to fill some positions in the draft and free agency (mainly a DB opposite of Haden and another safety) and the young guys to keep improving. That D-Line is going to be filthy.

Overall...such a shitty season. But predictable. Unless your name is BR or Iggy and you were literally wrong about everything from the start of training camp.

like_that;1350679 wrote:I don't think they factor in H2H when it comes to the draft. It's all a flip of the coin with teams with tied records.

Also the Browns have the third toughest schedule. You can be a pessimistic crybaby all you want, but that is a fact: http://www.theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

Depending on how the game goes this weekend, the Browns played 10-11 teams with a .500 record or above.

They use tie breakers for the draft order just like the playoffs, just a different and shorter list, which is why a coin flip is used at times.

First they use strength of schedule, the team with the easier SOS gets a higher draft pick a team they have the same record as.

After SOS, divisional and conference records (if from the same division/conference) are used next.

Then a coin flip.

I think Gordon is going to be a #1 guy. If we could add a solid vet to go with him and little I'd be happy with our receivers. There probably isn't a good fa available without breaking the bank though. We could use a te upgrade too.

The defense needs playmakers at every level. Not good against the pass or run this year. Gotta improve the secondary and pass rush.

Then something needs to be done about the run blocking on offense, and of course the qb.

Other than needing to upgrade about half of the roster i think that I think we're in pretty good shape though.

Apparently we signed QB Josh Johnson. Awesome!!!!!

like_that;1350678 wrote: this is true. You can add Weis to the list as well.

Good call. Forgot about him

Rotinaj;1350915 wrote:Apparently we signed QB Josh Johnson. Awesome!!!!!

Disregard my previous posts regarding our QB situation...we have our guy.

SportsAndLady;1350922 wrote:Disregard my previous posts regarding our QB situation...we have our guy.

I wouldn't be surprised if he panned out better than weeden.

LOL

Gordon is a legit #1. He's shown a ton of promise and had some productive games for a rookie. Keep in mind how hard it is to look good when you have Weeden throwing the ball to you.

lhslep134;1351150 wrote:Gordon is a legit #1. He's shown a ton of promise and had some productive games for a rookie. Keep in mind how hard it is to look good when you have Weeden throwing the ball to you.

Come on..he's not a legit #1, yet. He's shown the potential to be a legit #1, but he's not one yet.

Lots of players have good rookie seasons then fall off the face of the earth. Still a long ways to go before we call him a legit #1.

SportsAndLady;1351151 wrote:Come on..he's not a legit #1, yet. He's shown the potential to be a legit #1, but he's not one yet.
.

Let's check the math:

He's our #1.

He's legit.

He's a legit #1.

lhslep134;1351299 wrote:Let's check the math:

He's our #1.

He's legit.

He's a legit #1.

Haha okay if you want to set the standards that low

lhslep134;1351299 wrote:Let's check the math:

He's our #1.

He's legit.

He's a legit #1.

He has potential. NO WAY he's a legit #1 as of now.

Sry I have a hard time calling a guy a legit #1 if he is 3rd on the team in receptions, behind our RB and Greg Little. As others have said, potential is definitely there, however.

Pick6;1351347 wrote:Sry I have a hard time calling a guy a legit #1 if he is 3rd on the team in receptions, behind our RB and Greg Little. As others have said, potential is definitely there, however.

He has more receptions than Little.

He wasn't the starter until game 7.
He wasn't playing significantly until game 5.

Look at his averages since he started playing significantly (game 5), and then stretch them to 16 weeks and that is 56 rec, 980 yards, and 7 TDs.

That is a VERY good rookie season.

Remember, most WRs don't take off until their 2nd or 3rd season. AJ Green was an anomaly last year.

jmog;1351353 wrote:He has more receptions than Little.

He wasn't the starter until game 7.
He wasn't playing significantly until game 5.

Look at his averages since he started playing significantly (game 5), and then stretch them to 16 weeks and that is 56 rec, 980 yards, and 7 TDs.

That is a VERY good rookie season.

Remember, most WRs don't take off until their 2nd or 3rd season. AJ Green was an anomaly last year.

I think we all agree w/ everything you said. Not trying to take anything away from Gordon..dude had a great rookie season and will most likely be our #1. He's just not what you would call a "legit #1" quite yet.

Not sure if a "legit #1" wouldn't waste away when 85% of pass plays are 5 yard crossing patterns, 10% are screen passes and 5% are longer passes.

like_that;1350678 wrote:You're a douche bag, but this is true. You can add Weis to the list as well.

I think he still has a shot but Josh McDaniels failed pretty hard as well...

An abysmal track record for New England assistants.