FINALLY

[Pavo Joe]

I agree, but it has to be more than a game more.

 

That isn't a knock on Colt by any means.....I just recall how people were proclaiming Ben Gay one of the leagues next great backs.

 

So far, so good, but I'll take it a step at a time.....both in his play and the way I view/grade him.

 

Alright, then the question is how many more starts do you give him? When another qb gets healthy in a few weeks do you bench Colt ? Are 2 or 3 starts enough to convince the front office that Colt will be the future ? Why cant we ever just have a starting qb without constant questions ?

[rich4eagle]

I agree, but it has to be more than a game more.

 

That isn't a knock on Colt by any means.....I just recall how people were proclaiming Ben Gay one of the leagues next great backs.

 

So far, so good, but I'll take it a step at a time.....both in his play and the way I view/grade him.

 

That is cool but some of us gotta a lot of scorn and to this day not a single mea culpa.................because we called Willie Green...........DUPA Green......which he was

[rich4eagle]

Alright, then the question is how many more starts do you give him? When another qb gets healthy in a few weeks do you bench Colt ? Are 2 or 3 starts enough to convince the front office that Colt will be the future ? Why cant we ever just have a starting qb without constant questions ?

 

Start him every game and let it play out.........we have nothing else............so we can see him grow or shrink

[Frenchie]

The thing I liked about Colt on Sunday were the spirals on his passes. Whether on the run or in the pocket, the mechanics looked really good and the rotation/flight of the ball was smooth. Timing and not-tucking-the-ball too quickly will come with experience.

 

Hey, did anyone notice we ran a couple of screen passes? And they went for big yards. Why don't we do that more often?

 

Also, early in the first quarter, we ran a fake reverse. We run it every game it seems with a fake to Cribbs and a hand-off to Hills. It goes for a couple of yards but (I swear) the reverse would have gone for big real-estate. I don't understand why they don't run a trick play at least once per game. It's the same with the WildDawg. When is Cribbs going to fake the run and make a throw, or do some mis-direction or options off the WildDawg?

 

Also, although we can argue QB's all day long, can we agree that the 2010 draft was the most fruitful since the return of the Browns? If Colt pans out and the RB (Modesti) and the O-lineman turn into starters, that's 4 or 5 key players in one year. I know what our record is ... but that kind of drafting armed with a little bit of trading (as with getting Hillis) and some FA's, this team can be .500 next year and in the playoffs in 2 years.

 

Oh, and with all the reading I do on this board, the D-Line and especially the linebackers are not getting enough love! I thought they played a great game and contained the run for most of the game.

[Earl34]

Hey, did anyone notice we ran a couple of screen passes? And they went for big yards. Why don't we do that more often?

 

I agree. He was exceptional selling the screen...moreso than anyone I've seen do that for the Browns in a long time.

[Frenchie]

I agree. He was exceptional selling the screen...moreso than anyone I've seen do that for the Browns in a long time.

 

I didn't even think about that. But you are right. I was just glad to see it used once in a while. Even if a screen only goes for a few yards, it makes the defence hesitate that half-step on every play and that can make the world of difference.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

The thing I liked about Colt on Sunday were the spirals on his passes. Whether on the run or in the pocket, the mechanics looked really good and the rotation/flight of the ball was smooth. Timing and not-tucking-the-ball too quickly will come with experience.

 

Hey, did anyone notice we ran a couple of screen passes? And they went for big yards. Why don't we do that more often?

 

Also, early in the first quarter, we ran a fake reverse. We run it every game it seems with a fake to Cribbs and a hand-off to Hills. It goes for a couple of yards but (I swear) the reverse would have gone for big real-estate. I don't understand why they don't run a trick play at least once per game. It's the same with the WildDawg. When is Cribbs going to fake the run and make a throw, or do some mis-direction or options off the WildDawg?

 

Also, although we can argue QB's all day long, can we agree that the 2010 draft was the most fruitful since the return of the Browns? If Colt pans out and the RB (Modesti) and the O-lineman turn into starters, that's 4 or 5 key players in one year. I know what our record is ... but that kind of drafting armed with a little bit of trading (as with getting Hillis) and some FA's, this team can be .500 next year and in the playoffs in 2 years.

 

Oh, and with all the reading I do on this board, the D-Line and especially the linebackers are not getting enough love! I thought they played a great game and contained the run for most of the game.

 

They ran fake dive end around to MoMass later on, after the HB dive. I think he got stuffed at the line. I can't really remember though. We haven't double play action faked out of that play yet and come up passing, that's what I'm waiting for. You can bet your bippy that safety is hauling ass to the line almost every time he gets that read. And why not? He's got no wideout threats on his side with the split end coming in motion. There's no playside contain responsibilities, he's just got to come up and hit the RB.

 

We need to run the playside tight end on a block and go, or even a straight fly. Hit the zone the safety just vacated, and he could go for six. We've never thrown out of it, so there's no film on it. We should run it when were in the hole, it could possibly come up big.

 

[Strato]

Browns are so bad..i dont think even a good texan like Colt can save them.....yall should have Tombstones in the endzones ..because thats where good players go to die..

[miktoxic]

Browns are so bad..i dont think even a good texan like Colt can save them.....yall should have Tombstones in the endzones ..because thats where good players go to die..

 

dude, just leave now. your weak attempts at goading make you look silly in comparison to the steeler regulars on here (tron, freets, buns etc.). pack up the beads and chug some hurricanes because it could be a long time until your team does it again.

 

too bad cuz i think everybody pulled for your team and were happy when they won. only takes the matter of minutes to destroy good will when there are little turds like you washing up on the shores to destroy everything.

 

[ballpeen]

Alright, then the question is how many more starts do you give him? When another qb gets healthy in a few weeks do you bench Colt ? Are 2 or 3 starts enough to convince the front office that Colt will be the future ? Why cant we ever just have a starting qb without constant questions ?

 

Hopefully he gets about 200 more starts before it's all over.

 

As for now, which is the question and concern, I don't have that answer.

 

Colt seemed to pass the sniff test in so far as being able to handle the pressure. Now I guess we will have to wait and see how he does after he has a poor game. At least this start is a positive he can carry forward. He now knows he can operate at a fairly good level against one of the better teams in the league.....so that is a big plus.

 

I know Holmgren hoped he didn't play at all. Now that he has and did a good job, maybe that reluctance has diminished? The cat's out of the bag so to speak.

 

I think a big factor is we don't know what is going on in the meetings between Holmgren, Heckert, and Mangini. My personal opinion is the team looks much better and to me at least seems on track for good things, but that's my opinion. Maybe Holmgren and Heck don't feel the same way and wins is going to be a key criteria in Mangini retaining his job. Are they in agreement we are looking and playing better, understand we have had some injury problems, or are they asking all type of pointed questions after the games?

 

Mangini is the only one who has a feel for how those guys feel. If he feels he is on the hot seat, I would expect to see Jake back in operation. He's only played the one game. So Jake will come in at least 1 more time. If Holmgrem and Heck tell Mangini his job is safe....barring some unforeseen calamity...then we might see Colt a great deal the rest of the way.

 

I am good either way. In reality we are out of things, but it is a bit too soon to just call it quits, so going back with Jake makes some sense.....but add in a few more losses, which are on the way, then we can go with Colt as preparation for next season. I don't think he needs 10 starts for that preparation....my thinking is 5 solid starts is all a rook needs to no longer be a rook QB.

 

No doubt he is far from a sage veteran, but 5-6 starts or 5-6 starts of accumulated time on the field is enough for him to feel the fire. To me it's like a soldier in combat. There is a point where you have never been shot at to a point where you have...and it doesn't take all that long to understand it's a whole new ballgame. There is a time to fire and a time to duck, and you better learn that pretty quick.

[Earl34]

Hopefully he gets about 200 more starts before it's all over.

 

As for now, which is the question and concern, I don't have that answer.

 

Colt seemed to pass the sniff test in so far as being able to handle the pressure. Now I guess we will have to wait and see how he does after he has a poor game. At least this start is a positive he can carry forward. He now knows he can operate at a fairly good level against one of the better teams in the league.....so that is a big plus.

 

I know Holmgren hoped he didn't play at all. Now that he has and did a good job, maybe that reluctance has diminished? The cat's out of the bag so to speak.

 

I think a big factor is we don't know what is going on in the meetings between Holmgren, Heckert, and Mangini. My personal opinion is the team looks much better and to me at least seems on track for good things, but that's my opinion. Maybe Holmgren and Heck don't feel the same way and wins is going to be a key criteria in Mangini retaining his job. Are they in agreement we are looking and playing better, understand we have had some injury problems, or are they asking all type of pointed questions after the games?

 

Mangini is the only one who has a feel for how those guys feel. If he feels he is on the hot seat, I would expect to see Jake back in operation. He's only played the one game. So Jake will come in at least 1 more time. If Holmgrem and Heck tell Mangini his job is safe....barring some unforeseen calamity...then we might see Colt a great deal the rest of the way.

 

I am good either way. In reality we are out of things, but it is a bit too soon to just call it quits, so going back with Jake makes some sense.....but add in a few more losses, which are on the way, then we can go with Colt as preparation for next season. I don't think he needs 10 starts for that preparation....my thinking is 5 solid starts is all a rook needs to no longer be a rook QB.

 

No doubt he is far from a sage veteran, but 5-6 starts or 5-6 starts of accumulated time on the field is enough for him to feel the fire. To me it's like a soldier in combat. There is a point where you have never been shot at to a point where you have...and it doesn't take all that long to understand it's a whole new ballgame. There is a time to fire and a time to duck, and you better learn that pretty quick.

 

Nice post. I think the most interesting point though is that success is going to be defined by Holmgren and Heckert's criteria. I doubt that Mangini is in the dark about what that is. I get the feeling that this is not about wins and losses but it is...we will see a change soon absent some wins.

 

The Colt will stumble at some point. We need to see what he does when that happens. I get the sense though that most fans feel that if he can do as well as he did against the Steelers then perhaps this kid is capable far beyond what we (collectively) gave him credit for.

[ballpeen]

At least for me it was never about giving credit or not giving credit. It was simply a matter of seeing what he could do, and is still a matter of seeing how he develops.

 

No doubt this was a nice debut. So now that he was done that, we know he can do it because the performance wasn't filled with a bunch of lucky plays with the ball bouncing our way at every turn. One would expect the kid will get better. Maybe not next week. More as time takes it's course.

 

He also showed he is coachable. Early in the game he didn't give some plays time to take shape and didn't totally trust his line. You could see the coaches talking to him and knew they were talking to him about it. The announcers were mentioning the same thing.

 

Rather than keep doing what he was doing, he listened, and his performance took at from that point. That is a big positive IMO. Too many times young players hear, but don't listen.

 

At this point you can't tell what might be a negative. A bad play on a players part isn't a negative IMO. Negatives are something in their game that lead them to continued bad plays. I also don't consider things like arm strength, height, etc. negatives as long as it isn't some gross deviation from normal. I agree, a 5'4" QB isn't going to make it. They might not be a plus as they can be for some other players, but you know what they have going in. OK....maybe he won't lob it 65 yards in the air....so what?? Not many of those passes are completed anyway. He has more than enough arm to hit the 15-25 yard routes....routes you can complete with some degree of certainty.

 

In addition to the before mentioned ability to listen, he also shows the ability to extend plays, which is something you really can't coach. You either have it or you don't, so those two qualities make me think the kid can become a better than average Joe in this league.

 

That doesn't mean he will as there are other qualities a QB needs, and at this point we aren't far enough in to the book to know how that is going to play out. Those are story lines that take a while to develop, but at least at this point, the first few paragraphs have us hooked.

[Hawgdawg]

There are two thingss about McCoy that contribute to his developing into a good qb: (1) he HATES to lose!!! (2) he's got GUTS. Add those characteristics to his ability to play, lead, read defenses, and pass the ball accurately and you have the formula for a winner.

[ballpeen]

There are two thingss about McCoy that contribute to his developing into a good qb: (1) he HATES to lose!!! (2) he's got GUTS. Add those characteristics to his ability to play, lead, read defenses, and pass the ball accurately and you have the formula for a winner.

 

 

True, but I don't know many QB's who make it to a big conference college who like to lose.....shoot, even Jr. High QBs probably don't like to lose.

 

As for guts, I am not sure what that means??

 

I guess what I am saying is in many ways it would take some guts to walk on to the railroad tracks and stand there and watch the train mow you down, though not a very smart move.

 

That said, so far, Colt looks to have what it takes......for one game under the belt, that is.

 

[Frenchie]

There are two thingss about McCoy that contribute to his developing into a good qb: (1) he HATES to lose!!! (2) he's got GUTS. Add those characteristics to his ability to play, lead, read defenses, and pass the ball accurately and you have the formula for a winner.

 

I was just about to write the same thing before I saw your post. You can't under-estimate the importance of your 1 & 2

[Frenchie]

True, but I don't know many QB's who make it to a big conference college who like to lose.....shoot, even Jr. High QBs probably don't like to lose.

 

As for guts, I am not sure what that means??

 

I guess what I am saying is in many ways it would take some guts to walk on to the railroad tracks and stand there and watch the train mow you down, though not a very smart move.

 

That said, so far, Colt looks to have what it takes......for one game under the belt, that is.

 

 

You are correct in that no athlete likes to lose. I'm just saying that Colt's competitive spirit was obvious. Really, when was the last time we saw that in a Cleveland QB? I think it will mean a lot to his team mates and makes a difference on the field. I remember playing competitive sports with leaders who didn't like to lose. It propelled them, it propelled the rest of the team.