Good ole' Browns, gotta love them. They can beat so-so teams, can't always beat the "good" teams though. We'll see how this year shapes up. See if they can beat STEELERS, and BENGALS more importantly.
BROWNS: winners finally or.....?
- Thread starter 53' Stude
- Start date
- Status
LOL! Very true as look at today, and all the PENALTIES both teams took
The lost today to an also ran team.
Art Modell is laughing in his grave ,,The only way Haslam will have a winning team is to move them out to another state like Modell did , Art invested millions and proved Cleveland is not a city for football ,,,,50 years of rebuilding means , it NEVER is gonna happen and the believers have a better chance in santa becoming real before the browns will have a winning season
Originally Posted By: heyu
Art Modell is laughing in his grave ,,The only way Haslam will have a winning team is to move them out to another state like Modell did , Art invested millions and proved Cleveland is not a city for football ,,,,50 years of rebuilding means , it NEVER is gonna happen and the believers have a better chance in santa becoming real before the browns will have a winning season
The location of the team's home stadium has absolutely nothing to do with the team winning games( not in the NFL anyway ). That is nuts( sorry it is ). The NFL has a salary cap so no team can really be out spent plus the revenues, even for the worst teams, are so high money is not a problem for any of them. Spending a lot of money is not the answer to fix a team in the NFL anyway like it can be in say MLB.
The Browns, like every NFL team, have plenty of money and they have a loyal fan base who come to the games and spend even more money. So what does changing states/stadiums do for them if it isn't to increase the fan base and make more money which would let them sign better players? The answer is not a thing.
The problem with the Browns is poor decision making( i.e. coaches and personnel ). Plain and simple. So, if they are moved to another city it will make jack squat of a difference if the same people are running the team, coaching the team, and playing on the field.
Right now the Browns are actually not that bad of a team. Their biggest problem the last few years has been no QB. If they had even a half way decent QB the last couple years things could be very different because they have some good players elsewhere. I am not saying they would be Super Bowl champs or anything but making the playoffs is a reasonable thing to believe if they had a QB worth a [censored]. You need at least a decent QB to have any shot in the NFL and the Browns just haven't for a long time, and most definitely don't now, have that.
They haven't had a decent QB since Jake Delhomme in 2010 and he was hurt and at the end of his career playing just one more year( 2011 Houston ). The only other QB's of real note going back to the "new Browns" starting in 1999 only played one year for the Browns and were hurt and/or just awful. Derek Anderson had a couple years for the Browns where he didn't totally suck, and he actually made the Pro Bowl in 2007 and led the Browns to a 10-6 record, but he really was not a very good QB overall. He is the only other guy I see that was at least somewhat respectable.
Actually the Browns haven't had a true, legit, good, NFL starting QB that can be counted on since 1994/1995 and Vinny Testaverde who replaced the Browns legend and very good QB Bernie Kosar. You want to know why the Browns never win? Just look at their QB list since those 2 QB's were replaced( 2015 -1999 / no team 1996-1998 )and it says it all. Some of these guys couldn't win a pop Werner football game( includes starters and backups going back to Vinny T )...
Josh McCown
Johnny Manziel
Brian Hoyer
Connor Shaw
Jason Campbell
Brandon Weeden
Thad Lewis
Colt McCoy
Seneca Wallace
Jake Delhomme
Derek Anderson
Ken Dorsey
Bruce Gradkowski
Charlie Frye
Trent Dilfer
Jeff Garcia
Kelly Holcomb
Luke McCown
Tim Couch
Doug Pederson
Spergon Wynn
Ty Detmer
So the couple "decent" QB's the Browns have had since Vinny and Bernie are in bold but they were either hurt or failed in Cleveland in their short stints there. Other than those couple QB's who on that list inspires ANY confidence and is really a legit NFL QB? The answer is none of them. Just a bunch of jetsum, flotsam, and never will be's.
Fix the QB problem and the Browns will be in a much better place. Then let's talk about the choice of coaches...
Art Modell is laughing in his grave ,,The only way Haslam will have a winning team is to move them out to another state like Modell did , Art invested millions and proved Cleveland is not a city for football ,,,,50 years of rebuilding means , it NEVER is gonna happen and the believers have a better chance in santa becoming real before the browns will have a winning season
The location of the team's home stadium has absolutely nothing to do with the team winning games( not in the NFL anyway ). That is nuts( sorry it is ). The NFL has a salary cap so no team can really be out spent plus the revenues, even for the worst teams, are so high money is not a problem for any of them. Spending a lot of money is not the answer to fix a team in the NFL anyway like it can be in say MLB.
The Browns, like every NFL team, have plenty of money and they have a loyal fan base who come to the games and spend even more money. So what does changing states/stadiums do for them if it isn't to increase the fan base and make more money which would let them sign better players? The answer is not a thing.
The problem with the Browns is poor decision making( i.e. coaches and personnel ). Plain and simple. So, if they are moved to another city it will make jack squat of a difference if the same people are running the team, coaching the team, and playing on the field.
Right now the Browns are actually not that bad of a team. Their biggest problem the last few years has been no QB. If they had even a half way decent QB the last couple years things could be very different because they have some good players elsewhere. I am not saying they would be Super Bowl champs or anything but making the playoffs is a reasonable thing to believe if they had a QB worth a [censored]. You need at least a decent QB to have any shot in the NFL and the Browns just haven't for a long time, and most definitely don't now, have that.
They haven't had a decent QB since Jake Delhomme in 2010 and he was hurt and at the end of his career playing just one more year( 2011 Houston ). The only other QB's of real note going back to the "new Browns" starting in 1999 only played one year for the Browns and were hurt and/or just awful. Derek Anderson had a couple years for the Browns where he didn't totally suck, and he actually made the Pro Bowl in 2007 and led the Browns to a 10-6 record, but he really was not a very good QB overall. He is the only other guy I see that was at least somewhat respectable.
Actually the Browns haven't had a true, legit, good, NFL starting QB that can be counted on since 1994/1995 and Vinny Testaverde who replaced the Browns legend and very good QB Bernie Kosar. You want to know why the Browns never win? Just look at their QB list since those 2 QB's were replaced( 2015 -1999 / no team 1996-1998 )and it says it all. Some of these guys couldn't win a pop Werner football game( includes starters and backups going back to Vinny T )...
Josh McCown
Johnny Manziel
Brian Hoyer
Connor Shaw
Jason Campbell
Brandon Weeden
Thad Lewis
Colt McCoy
Seneca Wallace
Jake Delhomme
Derek Anderson
Ken Dorsey
Bruce Gradkowski
Charlie Frye
Trent Dilfer
Jeff Garcia
Kelly Holcomb
Luke McCown
Tim Couch
Doug Pederson
Spergon Wynn
Ty Detmer
So the couple "decent" QB's the Browns have had since Vinny and Bernie are in bold but they were either hurt or failed in Cleveland in their short stints there. Other than those couple QB's who on that list inspires ANY confidence and is really a legit NFL QB? The answer is none of them. Just a bunch of jetsum, flotsam, and never will be's.
Fix the QB problem and the Browns will be in a much better place. Then let's talk about the choice of coaches...
Could be the Rams, they can beat good teams (Seattle, Arizona) but can't beat so-so teams like the Redskins.
Go figure.
Originally Posted By: car51
Good ole' Browns, gotta love them. They can beat so-so teams, can't always beat the "good" teams though. We'll see how this year shapes up. See if they can beat STEELERS, and BENGALS more importantly.
Go figure.
Originally Posted By: car51
Good ole' Browns, gotta love them. They can beat so-so teams, can't always beat the "good" teams though. We'll see how this year shapes up. See if they can beat STEELERS, and BENGALS more importantly.
They need to rename the team. Browns doesn't sound like they even care about winning at all.
Javacontour: good point.
Turtlevette: something tells me they were named for Paul Brown; and me being a history nut, I kinda like the name. Their "new uniforms" suck
Turtlevette: something tells me they were named for Paul Brown; and me being a history nut, I kinda like the name. Their "new uniforms" suck
NHHEMI: thanks for the input sir
BROWNS may finally beat a RIVAL of theirs today
Haslam used to be a part owner of the Steelers which he had to divest. Shortly after buying the Browns his company, Pilot Flying J went through a big scandal involving ripping off its customers via promised fuel rebates then short changing them. So I'm sure that was a huge distraction for him. Not talking peanuts here either, he reached a settlement with the Fed for $85 million.
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/...n-federal-court
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/...n-federal-court
I'm amazed BROWNS beat Ravens in OT
- Status
