***Official 2014-2015 Cleveland Browns Thread*** (sponsored by we got Football)

[benefactor]

Hoyer has been named the Browns starting QB per Schefter.

[djohn2oo8]

Hoyer has been named the Browns starting QB per Schefter.

Manziel throws up middle finger to this

[Raven]

obviously, he failed in proving wrong any of the commonly mentioned flaws he had. Not even one.

[FkLA]

He's an absolute scrub but allowing him to get eaten alive Weeks 1-3 instead of Football makes sense.

Start off 0-3 then make the switch during the bye week imo.

[FkLA]

obviously, he failed in proving wrong any of the commonly mentioned flaws he had. Not even one.

You talking about Hoyer, right?

[Raven]

You talking about Hoyer, right?

rrrrrright..

-immaturity
-lack of poise
-inaccurate long thrower
-lacks an nfl arm
-stupid runner
-undersized (well that one couldn't have been proven wrong)
-more a distraction than anything
.
.

[FkLA]

The 'starter' had two completions for 16 yds last game. He didn't complete a pass until the 3-minute mark of the second quarter, the other was a lateral pass to end the half.

Think what you want about Football but he outplayed that scrub both games. Pettine had his mind made up unless Football absolutely dominated. Let's not paint it out to be as Football losing a race here tbh.

[Clipper Nation]

Hoyer has been named the Browns starting QB per Schefter.

Brian Football

[benefactor]

Aggie

[Darth_Pelican]

[Avante]

Joe Montana could be the Browns starter and they still won't be making the playoffs. Two of the most important stats in football is TO margin and that sacks/sacked difference. The Browns sucked in both and they had nothing they did well other than pass defense at 8th. This is not a good team regardless of who is at QB, so why not go with the guy you took as your first pick? What's he going to learn sitting on the bench?

If Hoyer blows it you now rely on a rookie? No, you start the rookie and if he stinks it up the vet comes in to save things, that's the smart way to do business. (not that either scenario matters the Browns are 6-10 regardless)

The Browns really don't know they need to start planning for the future because the right now is a 6-10 at best?

[Pelicans78]

Joe Montana could be the Browns starter and they still won't be making the playoffs. Two of the most important stats in football is to margin and sacks/sacked difference. The Browns sucked in both and they had nothing they did well other than pass defense at 8th. This is not a good team regardless of who is at QB, so why not go with the guy you took as your first pick? What's he going to learn sitting on the bench?

The Browns really don't know they need to start planning for the future because the right now is a 6-10 at best?

I think sitting on the bench and just learning the game more will be beneficial. Otherwise, he's just gonna freelance which won't help any development. He can also build some strength, learn the playbook better, and just mature overall. This is not the type of QB where throwing him to the wolves will be a good thing. He's not ready to start right now so why just throw him to the wolves where he's probably gonna get injured since he doesn't have any knowledge of the playbook, he's frail, and he freelances. The coaches are doing him a favor and the team long-term by making him watch. He's not an Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson type who can step in right away.

[Bill_Brasky]

bandwagonning the ing browns because they drafted johnny one read

[Avante]

I think sitting on the bench and just learning the game more will be beneficial. Otherwise, he's just gonna freelance which won't help any development. He can also build some strength, learn the playbook better, and just mature overall. This is not the type of QB where throwing him to the wolves will be a good thing. He's not ready to start right now so why just throw him to the wolves where he's probably gonna get injured since he doesn't have any knowledge of the playbook, he's frail, and he freelances. The coaches are doing him a favor and the team long-term by making him watch. He's not an Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson type who can step in right away.

My point is................they spent their first pick on the guy, so what does that tell us? If they'd taken him in the third round as a project, cool sit him and let it all soak in, that wasn't the case. If they want to win right now you don't waste your first pick on a project. They had nobody with over 5 sacks last season, if they wanna win right now they needed a pass rusher.

We don't know what he can do, and we won't as long as it hangs on the sideline. He wasn't taken that high to be a backup. He's going to have to play sometime, might as well get as much experience as possible in 2014.

You can start a rookie and if he s up no big deal he's a rookie. Ok bring in the vet. You can't start the vet and then replace him with a rookie, if the rookie now s up you bring back the vet you benched..........that would suck.

[monosylab1k]

My point is................they spent their first pick on the guy, so what does that tell us? If they'd taken him in the third round as a project, cool sit him and let it all soak in, that wasn't the case. If they want to win right now you don't waste your first pick on a project. They had nobody with over 5 sacks last season, if they wanna win right now they needed a pass rusher.

We don't know what he can do, and we won't as long as it hangs on the sideline. He wasn't taken that high to be a backup. He's going to have to play sometime, might as well get as much experience as possible in 2014.

Green Bay used a 1st round pick on Aaron Rodgers and let him sit 3 years. Worked out okay.

[Avante]

Green Bay used a 1st round pick on Aaron Rodgers and let him sit 3 years. Worked out okay.

The Packers situation was totally different than what we see with the Browns.

[leemajors]

My point is................they spent their first pick on the guy, so what does that tell us? If they'd taken him in the third round as a project, cool sit him and let it all soak in, that wasn't the case. If they want to win right now you don't waste your first pick on a project. They had nobody with over 5 sacks last season, if they wanna win right now they needed a pass rusher.

We don't know what he can do, and we won't as long as it hangs on the sideline. He wasn't taken that high to be a backup. He's going to have to play sometime, might as well get as much experience as possible in 2014.

You can start a rookie and if he s up no big deal he's a rookie. Ok bring in the vet. You can't start the vet and then replace him with a rookie, if the rookie now s up you bring back the vet you benched..........that would suck.

No, Pelicans78 was right on the money.

[monosylab1k]

The Packers situation was totally different than what we see with the Browns.

During Rodgers' rookie season, Favre threw 29 picks and had a 70 passer rating. Basically he was Brian Hoyer that year.

[Avante]

No, Pelicans78 was right on the money.

Watch how this works out, and after the sixth week tell me if you still feel this way.

The Browns could easily be 0-3 heading into their bye week, next up Tennessee. Watch how this works.

[Avante]

During Rodgers' rookie season, Favre threw 29 picks and had a 70 passer rating. Basically he was Brian Hoyer that year.

Brett favre was having a Hall of Fame career, and the previouS year he had over 4000 yards and 30 td's with a 92.4 passer rating. The Packers could afford to waste a first round pick on a QB, that is not the Browns.

[Fabbs]

This

He's an absolute scrub but allowing him to get eaten alive Weeks 1-3 instead of Football makes sense.

Start off 0-3 then make the switch during the bye week imo.

and this
monoslob

During Rodgers' rookie season, Favre threw 29 picks and had a 70 passer rating. Basically he was Brian Hoyer that year.

[JoeTait75]

Joe Montana could be the Browns starter and they still won't be making the playoffs. Two of the most important stats in football is TO margin and that sacks/sacked difference. The Browns sucked in both and they had nothing they did well other than pass defense at 8th. This is not a good team regardless of who is at QB, so why not go with the guy you took as your first pick? What's he going to learn sitting on the bench?

If Hoyer blows it you now rely on a rookie? No, you start the rookie and if he stinks it up the vet comes in to save things, that's the smart way to do business. (not that either scenario matters the Browns are 6-10 regardless)

The Browns really don't know they need to start planning for the future because the right now is a 6-10 at best?

I'm sorry, I can't get behind the mindset of writing off an entire season before it even begins. We do that year after year after year after year around here. It's a corrosive mindset. At some point you have to at least try and win games. You go with the guy that gives you the best opportunity to do that. If that guy is Manziel (which I don't think it is) he should start. If that guy is Hoyer he should start.

[Raven]

Brett favre was having a Hall of Fame career, and the previouS year he had over 4000 yards and 30 td's with a 92.4 passer rating. The Packers could afford to waste a first round pick on a QB, that is not the Browns.

dude, you're not making any sense .. why having a hall of fame qb makes then being able to afford to throw a first rounder on a qb? if anything, they should have used it to improve the rest of the team and be in win now mode.

[Avante]

I'm sorry, I can't get behind the mindset of writing off an entire season before it even begins. We do that year after year after year after year around here. It's a corrosive mindset. At some point you have to at least try and win games. You go with the guy that gives you the best opportunity to do that. If that guy is Manziel (which I don't think it is) he should start. If that guy is Hoyer he should start.

The Browns do this year after year after year because of stupid moves like this one.

The Browns will go 0-3 no matter who is back there so why not give your future starter all the experience he can get?

[Avante]

dude, you're not making any sense .. why having a hall of fame qb makes then being able to afford to throw a first rounder on a qb? if anything, they should have used it to improve the rest of the team and be in win now mode.

Favre was 35 years old, like I say a whole different deal than what we have at Cleveland. No doubt the Packers needed to start thinking about life after Favre. The Browns aren't thinking about life after Brian Hoyer.