May 25, 2013

The Colt McCoy Dilemma

October 11, 2010 by 46 Comments

The shame of yesterday’s Browns 20-10 home loss to Atlanta was they played well enough to win with Seneca Wallace at the helm. Seneca is the perfect backup QB. He does everything just well enough coming off bench, but isn’t so spectacular that you pine for him to be your #1 guy (unless that town is Cleveland and the team is the Browns). The mobility makes all the difference.

If we didn’t learn that yesterday, we never will.

Watching Jake Delhomme, yesterday’s #2 QB come off the bench and hobble around on an ankle that clearly wasn’t healed begs the question to be asked; if you aren’t comfortable enough to put rookie QB Colt McCoy into a game, then why is he on the roster?

All the Falcons had to do was watch Delhomme’s first play to know he wasn’t right and couldn’t escape any sort of pressure. So the Falcons rush overpowered the Browns offensive line and anytime they got near Jake, the pass was either battered down, thrown away, or he was intercepted.

This is not an indictment of Delhomme in any way. While I clearly acknowledge he isn’t the second coming of “The Lord” Bernie Kosar, I give him a ton of credit for showing the guts to get out there and battle as best as he could yesterday. The point is he should never have been out there in the first place.

And this brings us to McCoy.

The Browns had multiple opportunities to draft McCoy in the first three rounds and passed him over. Only his (and Jimmy Classen’s) slide made him available at #85 where the Browns snagged him. Several reports had the Browns all set to take DE Corey Peters from Kentucky, only to see him taken by Atlanta two picks before they were going to.

In the preseason, many clamored to see more of the star from Texas. When we got our chance, not many came away impressed. What struck me when looking at McCoy in an NFL game was how small he looked. The knocks on him were the lack of size,  small hands, played mostly out of the shotgun, and showed average arm strength. But he was a four year starter at one of the top programs in the country and won more games than any QB in the history of College Football.

His preseason with the Browns was so lackluster that there were rumblings that he was in danger of not making the team. In the end, Mike Holmgren, Tom Heckert, and Eric Mangini chose to keep McCoy over veteran Brett Ratliff.

Yesterday’s QB injury situation told me all I need to know about who really made that final roster decision. Holmgren and Heckert, not Mangini.

Its no secret the affinity Mangini had towards Ratliff, who he brought over with him from the Jets. He was last year’s third QB but never saw the field. In preseason games, he clearly looked more confident moving the offense than McCoy did, but McCoy’s long-term prospects seemed better. But really, are they?

On to yesterday. Mangini had to know that Delhomme couldn’t move. I mean, we all saw it after one play. But it was the Head Coach’s choice to make Jake the #2 QB rather than the emergency third QB. When Wallace sprained his ankle, Mangini decided to go to a 80-year old moving Delhomme rather than a 100% McCoy, who’s best quality at this point is his escapability.

“Jake was a better option,” said Mangini, when asked about playing the rookie. The more we saw Delhomme, the worst he moved, AND there was a second half still to play!

The point is simple, if McCoy can’t play under these circumstances on his home field on a beautiful day, than he isn’t good enough to be on the roster. Think if Ratliff was still here, Mangini wouldn’t have gone to him yesterday? He absolutely would have. This is a guy still auditioning for his job and he is willing to go with a gimpy Delhomme over the third round draft pick, who was the winningest QB in College Football history.

I think that speaks volumes about McCoy.

It’s not like this situation doesn’t come up elsewhere. The Arizona Cardinals voluntarily have gone to undrafted rookie Max Hall at Quarterback after an impressive training camp (anyone is better than Derek Anderson). He beat the defending Super Bowl champion Saints yesterday. The Carolina Panthers have turned their reins over to Claussen, a second round pick out of Notre Dame.

Now I’m not sitting here saying the Browns should be starting Colt, but choosing to play a clearly injured Delhomme off the bench in place of the injured Wallace speaks to the coaching staff’s lack of confidence in their rookie QB.

In the meantime, if neither veteran signal callers can go in six days, McCoy will have to to his first NFL snaps on the road, in Pittsburgh.

I’m sure that would go well.

(AP Photo/Mike Roemer)

Related Posts

Zemanta
Filed Under: Browns Tagged With: , , , , ,
  • stin4u

    I hear D.A. is available. *Cringe*

  • http://www.waitingfornextyear.com Craig Lyndall

    Easy there TD… Let up on Colt McCoy. The Browns are being understandably cautious with him. If he is going to play at all, he should do so with a full week of practice with the first team getting ready.

    Also, let’s look a little deeper at Max Hall “leading” the Cards to victory yesterday. First of all, the Cards had THREE defensive touchdowns yesterday. Drew Brees threw three interceptions and fumbled once.

    Yes, Max Hall successfully avoided losing the game, but he did throw an interception yesterday, without a touchdown. Max Hall led the Cards on three field goal drives and Jay Feely converted a 37, 44, and 29 yarder.

    On top of all that, let’s not forget that Max Hall has a top-5 wide receiver talent in the NFL in Larry Fitzgerald. To say that the Browns should just toss McCoy out there for his first NFL action against the Falcons with no Peyton Hillis and suspect wide receivers without getting the first team reps all week could say something opposite of what you are thinking.

    Maybe the Browns think more of McCoy than to let him get crushed into a pulp in his first meaningful NFL action? The Cards were understandably desperate with Derek Anderson.

  • MrCleaveland

    Excellent column, TD, and excellent counterpoint, Craig.

    Look, I can understand a reluctance to put in McCoy, but I cannot understand a refusal to do so. The object is to win the game, and it was “painfully” obvious that Delhomme couldn’t play. Other teams play rookie QBs without shattering their precious little psyches or having the entire franchise devolve into collapse.

    Mangini has a number of good qualities as a head coach, but on Sundays from 1 to 4 o’clock, he is a lousy coach.

  • brownsfan019

    So let’s just repeat what we’ve done to QB’s here in Cleveland since 1999? Are you not tired of watching a young kid with potential get hammered both physically and mentally by now?

    Go through the list – we’ve killed our young QB’s so that fact that Holmgren wants to sit him (at least that’s what we last heard) is a nice change of pace. Our OL is getting our QB’s hammered, so why put the kid out there this year? And yes, it’s coming from the all pro side.

    I hope Holmgren sticks to his guns about not playing McCoy this year at all.

  • stin4u

    I agree with Craig here. I doubt the preseason helped McCoy’s confidence at all, and to drop him into a game in the second quarter against a tough defense with an ultra dinged running game could have been damagaing.

    If McCoy takes all the first team reps at practice I guess that answers the question on how they feel about him in the immediate future. If he doesn’t take the first team snaps I still don’t look too far into it, all that says to me is that “he’s not ready now.” I trust the F.O. to do the right thing in this situation.

    Also, consider me unimpressed with the Max Hall victory. I was however, impressed with the run he took to the one and was promptly blown into pieces.

  • http://www.waitingfornextyear.com TD

    I don’t see how he could have done any worse than Jake yesterday. At least he could have avoided pressure. Why not go Wildcat a ton and have Colt play QB rather than a few Wildcat plays and a QB who couldnt move? Did that give the Browns a better chance to win?

  • http://www.whitecollarredneck.com Narm

    Was there hope Wallace would come back in? Because if you play your 3rd QB before the 4th quarter your 1st and 2nd string QBs can’t re-enter the game. They could have been concerned if they put McCoy in and he was injured, they would be forced to use Cribbs the remainder of the game.

  • Harv 21

    Won’t paste my “don’t play McCoy” posts here. Only wanted to add that on the other hand I’ve heard good arguments to play callow rookie QBs before. Hanford Dixon was pushing for them to play Quinn as a rookie.

    WWBD? (“What would Belichik do?”) He saw something in Brady in practices. But Colt gets no real practice reps – he’s third string. We’ve heard no scuttlebutt from players whispering, “hey, this guy can play.” After so many wasted drafts, guess I’d rather them try to carefully nurture a QB if he might be of future value.

    Re Derek Anderson’s availability … what’s so funny? Same double coverage brain locks as Delhomme, similar deer-in-the-headlights look, better arm, knows the “system” (such as it is), is already used to scorn in Cleveland. Throw him on the windshield, let him rip everyone in the post-game locker room, and cut him again.

  • Chris

    So you’re assuming that there is no way Holmgren and Heckert agreed with the decision to play Delhomme over McCoy yesterday. Being that a Wallace injury was the only thing stopping us from possibly seeing McCoy yesterday, I’m fairly certain the possibility had been discussed in the days leading up to the game yesterday.

    I know people like to pile on Mangini for everything going wrong, but I’d bet that there was a consensus reached on who played if Wallace went down.

    We all know that quarterback and wide receiver are two absolutely glaring holes in this lineup. Can we admit that Atlanta is a team with superior talent compared to the Browns, and in spite of the injuries, they really kept it close as long as they could?

  • Bryan

    I really don’t see what is so confusing about the decision to not play McCoy. Just because he is not ready for action now, doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve a roster spot. He is a player they are developing for the future. Right now, he is not NFL ready. This seems pretty simple to me. Why is this even a debate?

  • boogeyman

    McCoy has looked less prepared to be an NFL QB then Anderson or Quinn I just can’t fathom the Browns sacrificing this kid now. There is absolutely nothing to gain by throwing him to the wolves or in this case who else but the Steelers defense. How many times do we have to repeat this mistake? But back to McCoy I’m indifferent on his drafting I mean he doesn’t fit my prototype for a QB: Size, arm, a college system that wasn’t gimmicky but given where he was drafted at least it wasn’t a first or second round pick. That being said the pick was high enough that the Browns could have obtained value elsewhere. I really hoped the upcoming draft was where we would find a QB I mean there will be plenty of first round worthy guys this go around then the last. It was painfully obvious to people who watch football that the Browns had nowhere near the talent to compete this season and I think that is why you saw another patch job at QB. Well that and I’m sure the Browns thought Delhomme was worth the risk. So far he’s looked as bad as he did in his last year at Carolina.

  • Chris

    “So far he’s looked as bad as he did in his last year at Carolina.”

    I’m not sure how you can say that. He’s played a total of 4 quarters, 2 of them being while he was injured.

  • ben

    I don’t want to be “this guy,” but this article is premised on a fallacy, and it permeates and distorts its entirety.

    1) “If you aren’t comfortable enough to put rookie QB Colt McCoy into a game, then why is he on the roster?” The presumed (and eventually articulated) conclusion being that Colt should not be on the roster.

    1) This statement is disingenuous in that it:

    - Ignores the common occurrence that not all rookies see significant playing time, if any;
    - Ignores any notion of “building a team” or “projects” or “future;”
    - Wrongfully assumes that because an injured Delhomme is better than McCoy right now, that McCoy is not deserving of a roster spot and cannot be better in the future.

  • ben

    the numbers and bullets are screwed up b/c I lost my train of thought – ignore them

  • jimkanicki

    i keep flashing on bill paxton in aliens. ‘That’s it man, game over man, game over! What __ are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?’

    i agree with your point, TD. we shouldnt use roster spots for clipboard holders. ken dorsey taught us this if we didn’t know it before. the big difference versus the couch fiasco is: this is not ‘rushing’ mccoy into action. he’s there as an emergency qb and this is an emergency.

    i dont buy this ‘development’ crap. how well did quinn develop holding a clipboard? how exactly does not doing your job contribute to one’s development? i mean.. these guys are paid to do a job just like us. did you get better at your job by watching others do their job or by actually doing it, failing, learning, and doing it again?

    all you who want to nurture colt mccoy’s delicate development: did you see anything from him in pre-season that leads you to believe that he will be our long term franchise qb? seriously?

    sometimes were called to step up. colt has the benefit of very low expectations. the game plan will be ridiculously conservative. BUT!! but if he should happen to win in pittsburgh?! all hail the conquering hero and new chosen one.

  • ben

    Oh I remember:

    You pulled a “Cleveland Frowns,” citing an earlier question-discussion point as fact.

    - Tony Grossi (who’s clearly an awesome sports journalist /sarcasm) very loosely suggests that maybe colt won’t make the team. That suggestion was more of a discussion point than anything else.

    - That discussion point is now being asserted as fact; “Colt almost didn’t make the team.”

    - In reality, Colt was never in danger of being cut.

  • http://cleveland.com JT

    What everyone is forgetting is that McCoy was the third QB. If he goes into the game, the other two can’t return. If McCoy is hurt, that leaves – who – Cribbs? Hard to win that way when they know the Wildcast is allyou can do.

  • el daveablo

    I know this isn’t easy for us Browns fans, but let’s try and take a deep breath and relax a bit.

    At the beginning of the season, everyone was in full agreement that McCoy is sitting and watching this year. EVERYBODY was saying it. Predictably, the first situation where it might make sense if McCoy plays people are questioning his talent and questioning the coaches intelligence.

    People even use examples of why they are right (and REALLY you are using Max Hall as an example of why to play McCoy, REALLY?). The fact is that for every Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, and Max Hall, there is an Aaron Rodgers, Steve McNair, and Steve Young. Each are different players, in different situations, with different demands. I’m willing to trust that the coaching staff knows the team better than we (I know, a CRAZY suggestion) and that they also care about winning the game while not mortgaging their future to finish 6-10 instead of 4-12.

    We all have doubts about McCoy’s preparedness right now, I think we can agree on that. Heck, if I had to project his career, I see him as a Seneca Wallace type that will be a top-tier backup.

    Because his experience and preparedness are in question, I just think it would have been inviting disaster to bring him in with the O-Line getting constantly gouged and the running game that was either banged up or completely inept. Besides, how many practice snaps did McCoy get this week? Any?

    I am curious as hell to see what the kid can do, but if there is a time to give him a shot, this week was NOT it. That’s just a recipe for disaster. Let him gets some reps with the 1st team offense. Let the coaching staff make up a game plan. Throwing him to the wolves with no weapons would have been a disaster.

  • boogeyman

    Oops forgot to say, “And Colt has as much of a chance at a win against Pittsburgh as I do with…”

  • JackGonzo

    It doesn’t matter whether or not we think Colt is ready. Jake could not move and his inability lead to our loss. Whether or not Colt completes more than twenty percent of his throws he can still move around and just manage the game. The Falcons were getting pressure pretty consistently and you decide to go with Delhomme? If anything this puts Mangini’s butt on the hot seat.

    Trying Delhomme, I get that. When it became obvious to everyone that he shouldn’t be on the football field Colt should have gone into the game. If not that just run the Flash package the rest of the game or have Cribbs play QB. The problem wasn’t on Jake or Colt, the problem was on Mangini inability to think of a solution to a situation.

  • JK

    trade out 1st round draft pick and colt, senca and jake to the ncaa for Mallet and Locker

  • http://www.waitingfornextyear.com Jon

    Mary Kay says Jake incurred a new injury yesterday: now he has both a high and a low ankle sprain. Luckily, the mid-section of his ankle looks to be in remarkably good shape.

    http://twitter.com/#!/MaryKayCabot/status/27042961604

  • http://www.60bpm.com/ Robbie

    Regardless of the QB situation, I’m just sick to death that once again and absolutely injury-riddled Browns team is going to go up against the Steelers, who happen to get their star QB back with two weeks to prepare.

    Why the **** can the Browns never stay healthy?!?

  • BuckeyeDawg

    We’re going to find out exactly what the powers that be think of Colt McCoy this week. If Holmgren really thinks that McCoy could be the QB of the future, there’s no way he sees the field this this season, let alone this Sunday. Holmgren’s not going to throw the “future of the franchise” to the wolves in this situation.

    Whatever is decided, I’m fine with it. Holmgren has forgotten more about NFL QB’s than I’ll ever know.

  • Mark

    @Jon – I’m laughing and crying at the same time.

  • http://www.twitter.com/aaronaloysius Aaron Aloysius

    Some spread offense QBs take time to develop. For McCoy, it could take even longer (or not happen) — at UT, he was so reliant on Shipley that he looked completely lost when he had to go through his progressions and find another target.

    The Oklahoma game was a good example of that (3.3 YPA, a pick, and two fumbles). You could say the same thing about the Nebraska game, though SUUUHHHHHHHH played a big role in that one.

  • lstavole13

    @ben- TD merely said there were rumblings of McCoy not making the team. He never asserted it as fact.

  • C-Bus Kevin

    How sad are we as Browns fans that the expectation is that a rookie quarterback is more likely to be “psychologically damaged” than succeed if he gets thrown out on the field. Rookie quarterbacks play all the time and many of them go on to have decent careers.

    Ben Roethlisberger – took over as rookie after Tommy Maddox injury. Two-time Super Bowl winner.

    Matt Ryan – plugged in as starter because Michael Vick and that stooge in Arkansas left the team in ruins. Now, he’s leading his team to a likely repeat appearance in the playoffs.

    Peyton Manning – He went 2-14 in his rookie season after being named starter before the season began. He had his jaw destroyed part way through that season and went on to be one of the best ever.

    Eli Manning – Struggled early in rookie year. Went on to win Super Bowl.

    The point is, the debate over whether or not Colt would be “damaged” by a potentially poor game against Pittsburgh is possibly the saddest reality for Browns fans. Really, the only ones that would be damaged would be us! We are so ready for the bottom to drop out that we would rather sit back and think about the potential of Colt McCoy than actually risk failure by hoping that he plays. It sounds like we need some time on the psychologist’s couch (no pun intended).

    The belief that a quarterback can be “broken” by playing too soon and failing is completely based on our experience watching one person play…Tim Couch. In reality, the best solution would be to pick the best player available and put him on the field. In this case, I believe that player is Colt McCoy. If he totally blows it against the Steelers…SO WHAT!?!?!?!?! I’d rather see a health Colt McCoy have a chance to win than watch a gimp Jake Delhomme and have virtually no chance.

    We should put Colt on the field and expect greatness…not failure. Until we hang up the expectation that nobody can succeed as the QB on this team unless the conditions are perfect (by the way…never gonna happen!), we will continue to sound pathetic.

  • GhostToMost

    I think Colt McCoy is Brady Quinn part deaux, but thats just me.

    I mean, you dont necessarily need a bomb thrower to win in this league, but this guy has no arm.

  • stin4u

    @26 – David Carr. Joey Harrington. Ryan Leaf. Just to name a few. Not to say you’re totally wrong, but you’re not totally right either.

  • Jae

    @7
    Good point on the 3rd QB ruling, seeing Wallace on teh sideline wearing a helmet I wondered if he would return also.
    However, would they be able to argue that Colt is just playing a few possesions in a “wildcat” package and then bring one of the others in again later? How is this situation viewed regarding the QB rulings and the wildcat, must just pertain to the way they are listed on the roster and not the possition they play on the field.

  • Jackson

    @ 26, thank you. So sick of hearing that we need a top flight RB, O-Line, and WRs to consider playing a rookie QB. Fact is, this o-line is nowhere near as bad as what was out there in 1999. Plenty of rookie QBs play, take their lumps, and develop into good starters.

    We had a gimp out there yesterday that gave us ZERO chance to win while a healthy QB who we took with a 3rd round pick sat there. Is it preferrable to play McKoy now, no. But given the circumstances, if he is not a better option than Gimp 1 (JD, who is not even that great when healthy) and Gimp 2 then he shouldn’t be on the team and he was a wasted pick.

  • Big Nick Z

    @TD

    Thank you for saying what we were all thinking. I don’t necessarily buy into the idea that Colt McCoy isn’t good enough to play, however.

    1st off, Eric Mangini is probably one of the worst quarterback managers in the league – he showed it with Chad Pennington, Kellen Clemons, and Brett Ratliff in NY, and Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn here in CLE. The guy just doesn’t know what he’s looking at when it comes to QB’s, and I believe that he actually stated such (not in so many words) in an interview at some point after last season.

    2nd off, if Jake keeps telling Mangini he’s ready to go and insists on staying on the field, Mangini kinda has to honor his word, he’s the starting QB. If I have a 10+ year veteran telling me that he’s alright to play and pleading for me to leave him on the field, I’d probably opt to take his word before letting a QB who’s never taken a snap go into the game.

    3rdly, the PLAN is to have Colt sit down and learn this year. I’m sure Mangini’s down with the plan and want’s to stick with it to the best of his abilities. Also, Holmgren, the ultimate QB guru, has probably issued Mangini some strict orders regarding said plan.

    I’m not defending Mangini’s decisions or Jake’s performance, I’m just blabbing about my most-likely ridiculous thoughts on why McCoy didn’t play yesterday. Great article!

  • Garry Owen

    Not sure I get this premise that it was “obvious” that Jake couldn’t play yesterday. Sure, I get that he threw 2 interceptions; however, the one (for 6) was simply a GREAT play by the “Beer Man.” The other wasn’t entirely Jake’s fault, either. We can rip on Mangini for keeping him in, but if I’m in his shoes and faced with a 3 point lead (or 4 point deficit) against a pretty good team, I’m going with the guy that has “been there, done that” (including playing injured from time to time), than the rookie that shows “some” potential but hasn’t really shown anything at all. If Jake doesn’t “throw” that pick-6 (in one of the best defensive highlights of 2010 thus far), and connects with Cribbs on that seam route, we’re all singing a different tune today (something on the order “Jake’s the gutsiest guy since Chesty Puller”, in 20-part harmony).

    Two big plays yesterday by the Falcons, and a couple of missed big plays by the Browns. That’s it, and that’s the NFL. I thought the Browns looked pretty good, all things considered. I’m concerned for the rest of the season, but not concerned enough to throw out the long-term plan and the next season by shoving McCoy in front of the on-coming train (unless both Jake and Seneca really can’t play next week).

  • Garry Owen

    Sorry, should be “4 point lead (or 3 point deficit).” Makes my point look better (at least in my eyes).

  • C-Bus Kevin

    @ stin4u…point taken. Rather than giving examples, I should have explained it like this…

    Colt McCoy’s chance of playing well in an actual game is 100% better if he’s on the field rather than holding a clipboard.

    But if we’re using your examples…

    David Carr = No O-Line (led the league in sacks allowed, I believe)

    Joey Harrington = This is your best argument for a rookie not working out. He certainly struggled, though I’m not sure how much I can chalk that up to poor play versus the fact that he played for the Lions during the Matt Millen era.

    Ryan Leaf = Bat-Poop Crazy

    The best example I can think of, though I don’t like it, is probably Alex Smith. He has enough tools to win, as demonstrated on Sunday Night Football last night (with the exception of one TERRIBLE fumble), but he started as a rookie and has become an adequate QB for the 49ers (0-5 record aside). If Colt McCoy looked as good as Alex Smith does now, or even marginally better, I think you could be happy, because we have a bruising running back in Hillis (when healthy), and our defense is proving to be able to keep some pretty good offenses in check. By my twisted logic, we’d be one draft of a good WR away from being a playoff contender.

  • stin4u

    @C-bus Kev – All good points.

    In the end I think it boils down to knowing your guy. I doubt any situation with a rookie QB is exactly like another. The guy has to be mentally and physically ready to perform. They may say they are ready but behind the eyes they might be doubtful,scared, or unprepared. This is what makes coaching and F.O. positions so difficult in dealing with rookies (esp. QB’s).

  • Alex

    You can make great arguments for anything with sitting/starting rookie QBs. For every Peyton Manning and Matt Ryan there are the following:
    -Alex Smith and Joey Harrington (started too early, as pointed out above)
    -Tim Couch and David Carr (nobody will ever know because of how terrible their teams were)
    -Ryan Leaf and Jamarcus Purple Drank (terrible picks with all the physical tools but no brains)
    -Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady (sat behind experienced guys for a year or more and are Pro Bowl/HoF caliber players)

    Since we can all bring up examples for any point, I think we should trust the Walrus on this. I don’t care about Colt personally – if he turns out fine, I’ll cheer him every week. If he turns out to be a backup, whatever. It’s about what he can do for the team and what the experienced QB guru thinks he can do.

  • Dan

    Not sure if Delhomme is getting enough blame from these quarters -not only did he have the two picks (not totally his fault, esp. the pick 6) but he also had the egregious toss into the end zone that 3 falcons had a better chance to catch than we did. Couple that with the fumble on the goal line (does anyone really think Hillis wasn’t running that one in?) and the overthrow of a WIDE OPEN josh cribbs for a near-certain TD and the loss falls squarely on his shoulders as far as I’m concerned.

    From what I saw of Colt in the preseason i’m not saying he would have done much better but it was painfully clear from the moment Jake entered the game that our offense was not putting up points on the board.

    I didn’t expect to be typing this at any point during the season but if Seneca Wallace is not ready to go we’ve got no shot.

  • C-Bus Kevin

    @ stin4u…I agree. As spectators, we don’t get to talk to Colt face to face to judge whether or not he is ready to go. As a side note, I think we just proved that you can have a civil conversation on a blog.

    Also, I can’t think about your Ryan Leaf example without hearing the words “Knock it OFF!!” and thinking of that clip of him screaming at his teammate on live TV. See below…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMe0Rz1frdE

  • mgbode

    its seems simple to me. Colt is our #3 QB. QB1 and QB2 are now injured, so our #3 QB starts.

    besides, we need to complete our Texas Triangle

    Offense: Colt
    Defense: Rogers
    STs: Dawson

  • Tommy

    @17

    Well said. Please comment more.

    Crazy Browns fans = trying like hell to win against Atlanta
    Mike Holmgren = trying like hell to win a Super Bowl

    Man am I glad that Holmgren doesn’t seem to be as short-sighted as we are. Let’s look at the big picture.

  • historycat

    Two Words:

    Tim Couch.

    I’m fairly certain that Colt is QB #5 this year behind Wallace, Delhomme, Cribbs, and some guy from the stands.

    He’s here to learn, not to be thrown in and destroyed mentally and physically like some other QB’s who have been through town in the past decade.

    Who cares if we beat the Falcons? I’d rather take the loss than ruin another QB before his time.

  • Brad

    Okay, 2 things about 2010 and 2009. 1) the coaches always seem intimidated by other teams, at least offensively. We see it every time a quarterback makes 1 mistake. The rest of the game, it’s all lateral passes that don’t go anywhere. Then we blame the quarterback; 2) the coaches seem to stick with players that consistently fail. Why not give someone else a try…we’re not exactly playing for playoff home field advantage here. James Davis, perhaps? No, no…let’s stick with a hurt running back and another back because he played well last year.

    What would be the harm in giving McCoy 1 game worth of experience. At least we can see if he can play! Look at the Jets and Cardinals…

  • Ike

    Personally, I wanted to see McCoy yesterday, simply because playing Delhomme for the rest of the game was essentially conceding defeat…at halftime…with the lead. Did you really think the Browns were going to win with a one-legged, 35 year-old QB for the rest of the game?

    I think TD makes a great point and a logical one as well, but the fact remains that McCoy is only 5 weeks into his NFL career. If this was McCoy’s 2nd or 3rd year in the league, then I’d fully agree that Mangini passing him over fundamentally conflicts with him having a roster spot.

  • tikihat

    If you are trying to build a winning team for the future, holding Colt McCoy out until he at least gets to take a week’s worth of reps with the first string offense and getting a few heart-to-hearts with a quarterback guru makes sense. If you have no thought but the game in question, you throw him in the deep-end with no preperation on the off-chance that a miracle happens. Of course that would also require Brian Dabol to use his vaunted skills at improvising and adjusting to come up with a workable gameplan for a unit with Colt playing and no rushing attack to help him. Hey, it might have happened.

  • Pingback: The Colt Report: Week 2 | WaitingForNextYear