The Brian Hoyer thread...

[JSS2306]

@Tornicade is the worst. You're up there though.

Literally just had a dream last night of C*** Mc*** taking the reigns of the offense and leading that piss poor team of his to a S****b***.

 

[CosmoKramer]

here is the problem kramer you had this to say


so once again i ask the question. So basically if you ignore his good numbers, and highlight his bad numbers, he isnt very good? is that what you are arguing?

What good numbers am I ignoring???

I've repeatedly said Hoyer's been around the 15th to 20th best QB in the NFL so far, is that calling him not very good? I think that's amazing considering we picked him up off the street to be our 3rd QB behind Weeden and Campbell last year.

because the way i see it his numbers balance out to be right around the top 10, im pretty sure there is a"strong case there" that he is a top 10 QB if his numbers indicate he is a top 10 QB.

There's the thing, I don't think his numbers have indicated he's a top-10 QB. If you're pretty sure there's a strong case there, the floor is yours to make it.

Jesus Christ. This stupid fucking debate about how he's good, but noone's sure how good, is still going on?

You guys are the worst.

What else is there to talk about on a Wednesday night? Is anyone interested in how my team did in trivia tonight?

 

[godfather]

I'd agree with this, but I was directly responding to a post that said "Brian Hoyer is definitely playing like a top-5 QB."



What? Hoyer wasn't drafted and signed for nothing off the street, how could he possibly be a bust? No one is arguing he wasn't a great signing, one of the few good moves Lombardi made at the helm.

I don't know what your definition of playing like a top-5 QB is? Throwing 500 yards every game? Okay, he's clearly not playing like a Peyton Manning, but who does?

No, I'm not. There's no possible way anyone outside of Cleveland is putting what Hoyer's done at QB near what Luck and Wilson are doing for their respective teams. Andrew Luck leads the league in touchdowns while Wilson is tied with Peyton Manning for the highest completion percentage (70.3%) while averaging as many rushing yards a game as LeSean McCoy.



I agree with most of this, except maybe you should give Eli Manning a watch. Now that he's adjusted to two-step dropbacks he's looked more comfortable in the short passing game than he's ever looked before.

Peyton Manning is completing 66% percent of his passes.

Don't get me started on a Wilson tirade, that's an entirely different topic. He's a really good QB, that one day might be great, but he's probably the most overrated QB in the NFL right now. This notion that he's a great QB needs to stop.

He plays with the best defense in the NFL, and get's to be the perfect game manager that he can be.

There's a CLEAR difference between playing with a security blanket in the great defense that he has in Seattle, than a QB that plays with a shitty defense, that's required to go out there and win with his arm.

I want to see if Russell can win games with his arm, when he doesn't have a great defense that can spot him a low scoring game. If he can start doing that, then I'll be impressed, right now he's just playing will a full deck, and is doing a great job of not screwing it up.

 

[Ocelot]

Ok guys, serious question on how you view Brian Hoyer going forward:

Who wins if it's Hoyer vs. a hurricane?

But hold on... the hurricane is named Hurricane Hoyer

 

[Tornicade]

@Tornicade is the worst. You're up there though.

and Sylvia's mother said. Sylvia's busy. too busy to come to the phone.

perhaps Hoyer is the guy from Galveston way

 

[CosmoKramer]

I don't know what your definition of playing like a top-5 QB is? Throwing 500 yards every game? Okay, he's clearly not playing like a Peyton Manning, but who does?



Peyton Manning is completing 66% percent of his passes.

Don't get me started on a Wilson tirade, that's an entirely different topic. He's a really good QB, that one day might be great, but he's probably the most overrated QB in the NFL right now. This notion that he's a great QB needs to stop.

He plays with the best defense in the NFL, and get's to be the perfect game manager that he can be.

There's a CLEAR difference between playing with a security blanket in the great defense that he has in Seattle, than a QB that plays with a shitty defense, that's required to go out there and win with his arm.

I want to see if Russell can win games with his arm, when he doesn't have a great defense that can spot him a low scoring game. If he can start doing that, then I'll be impressed, right now he's just playing will a full deck, and is doing a great job of not screwing it up.

Russell Wilson isn't the most overrated QB in the NFL, he's been tearing teams apart this year with his arms and legs. The stats don't even tell the whole story of how dominant he's been, he's had multiple long touchdowns to Percy Harvin negated by penalties already.

And I apologize, he's tied for the league's highest completion percentage with Philip Rivers, not Peyton Manning as I previously stated.

Some of the plays he's made this year are downright incredible, plays that led to opposing players calling him the best player in the league. That has nothing to do with the Seattle's defense, IMO he's clearly shed the game manager label at this point. Give some of those highlights from the Washington game a look, game managers don't make plays like that.

I guess I gave a different idea of what a top-5 QB is, and it's not some arbitrary number of passing yards. I try to look at it in a vacuum, if you were building a football team for one game what 5 QBs would give you the best shot at winning? It's an imperfect science, the answer will be different for many based on how you'd rate things like arm talent, mobility, poise, experience, etc. In my mind, and by that criteria, Brian Hoyer doesn't come out as a top-15 QB.

 

[MoFlo]

And what good numbers am I ignoring? If you're referring to MoFlo's second half numbers they're inflated from the Browns being down 27-3 and 28-10 at halftime in two of their four games this year. I'm not going to isolate his first half numbers from those games in an attempt to show how bad he was, just like isolating his numbers from the second halves of games doesn't show how good he is.

-That means he's had to throw more in the 2nd half of games than other teams, so wouldn't that mean his numbers are that much more impressive for someone who a lot of people suggest is "just a game manager"?

-Secondly, I didn't post the numbers to show how good he is, I posted them to argue that he's not "shitting the bed when it matters", as somebody (Not sure how many have said it - I remember the Baltimore game being mentioned as an example) mentioned earlier.

 

[CosmoKramer]

-That means he's had to throw more in the 2nd half of games than other teams, so wouldn't that mean his numbers are that much more impressive for someone who a lot of people suggest is "just a game manager"?

-Secondly, I didn't post the numbers to show how good he is, I posted them to argue that he's not "shitting the bed when it matters", as somebody (Not sure how many have said it - I remember the Baltimore game being mentioned as an example) mentioned earlier.

Well, being down big at halftime is partially on Hoyer not performing great during the first half. His second half numbers are much more impressive, but we've been forced into playing catchup in half our games already. That doesn't change the game manager label for him yet, let's see him clinch a game on the road with clock chewing first downs or some strong performances against playoff caliber teams first.

Completely agree Hoyer hasn't shit the bed when it matters though, I don't understand why anyone wants to point to the Baltimore game when he came out last week and was phenomenal when it mattered.

I'm just lost for what good numbers I'm ignoring about Hoyer, can anyone answer what I seem to be missing?

 

[Ocelot]

Haven't seen this mentioned yet, but figured it was worth citing an outside take on this topic...

In the Grantland NFL Podcast from yesterday Bill Barnwell and Robert Mays spent a decent amount of time discussing the Browns and they touched on a lot of the topics we've been discussing.

On Hoyer, Mays started off by calling him "impressive again," which Bill Barnwell then countered with such ringing endorsements as "been fine so far," "he's made some iffy decisions," "not a problem," "not holding the Browns back," and finally an incredibly specific "very viable 24th best QB."

Robert Mays also said that he's going to watch the Browns every week just to see the O-line, saying they keep Hoyer incredibly clean and can also beat people up in the running game. Both agreed that the Browns were just a very fun team to watch and always seem to be competing.

 

[elcheato]

He seemingly performs better when the Browns are behind and it's later in the game because he's able to run a no huddle offense with success, which is obviously harder for a defense to combat.

I've harped on it a lot, but I still don't get why they would come out and say they can't use the no huddle all the time. If Hoyer can consistently run it, there isn't much of a reason to huddle. Obviously they're not going to go no huddle all game, that's unrealistic, but they should do it more often than not. You've got a smart, athletic and incredibly good offensive line. It's only going to make it harder to combat that as a defense if you're scrambling and becoming tired. If the receivers are capable of understanding the play calls from Hoyer without a huddle then it should be used more.

And to the Browns credit, they do operate without a huddle a good amount as is, but they should use it as much as possible

 

[The Oi]

I never really think about things like this while I'm watching the game, but does Hoyer appear to audible often? Obviously, being able to that is a huge key to being able to run no-huddle often. He's certainly smart and a good-decision maker, but I haven't really thought about whether he is making the right decisions before the plays start.

 

[AZ_]

He seemingly performs better when the Browns are behind and it's later in the game because he's able to run a no huddle offense with success, which is obviously harder for a defense to combat.

I've harped on it a lot, but I still don't get why they would come out and say they can't use the no huddle all the time. If Hoyer can consistently run it, there isn't much of a reason to huddle. Obviously they're not going to go no huddle all game, that's unrealistic, but they should do it more often than not. You've got a smart, athletic and incredibly good offensive line. It's only going to make it harder to combat that as a defense if you're scrambling and becoming tired. If the receivers are capable of understanding the play calls from Hoyer without a huddle then it should be used more.

And to the Browns credit, they do operate without a huddle a good amount as is, but they should use it as much as possible

Controlling the clock is where this team needs to be, so weighing Hoyer's comfort level against that of trying to grind out the clock with the running game and intermediate passing game has to be the concern there IMO.

Plus, they don't have a ton of depth in order to make a full-time no huddle offense much of an option.

 

[elcheato]

Controlling the clock is where this team needs to be, so weighing Hoyer's comfort level against that of trying to grind out the clock with the running game and intermediate passing game has to be the concern there IMO.

Plus, they don't have a ton of depth in order to make a full-time no huddle offense much of an option.

You don't have to hurry up every time you get set without a huddle though.

I see where you're coming from though. I just think there's a lot to gain from it. Hawkins/Benjamin/Gabriel are all guys you want in open space, and I think a confused and fatigued defense will open up space even more.

But you're right, they do lack depth so maybe it's not possible, but I'm not sure this team is ready to compete at a high level for a playoff spot, so I don't think it's that big of a deal for this season to take that risk.

But Hoyer did talk about how exhausted he was running it last week, so my argument isn't exactly flawless.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Well, being down big at halftime is partially on Hoyer not performing great during the first half. His second half numbers are much more impressive, but we've been forced into playing catchup in half our games already. That doesn't change the game manager label for him yet, let's see him clinch a game on the road with clock chewing first downs or some strong performances against playoff caliber teams first.

Completely agree Hoyer hasn't shit the bed when it matters though, I don't understand why anyone wants to point to the Baltimore game when he came out last week and was phenomenal when it mattered.

Leading a great drive against the Titans when it mattered doesn't erase shitting the bed against Baltimore in the 4th Q, just as shitting the bed in Baltimore doesn't erase what he achieved against the Titans. Both go into the hopper of "overall evaluation", but partisans on both side tend to emphasize the games that support their opinion.

 

[Lee]

It comes down to this. At any given time there is about 80-100 qb's in the nfl on a roster. In the past decade the browns were lucky to have an average qb as the starter, meaning our starter wouldnt even make some team's roster's as a third string qb.

Now we have a qb who most agree is somewhere between the 11-20 range. This makes him a top 15% but not top 10%. We have had 50% qb's as our starter in the past.

So what percentile is good enough? QB is the most important position, but not the only position. We finally have a QB worth starting and is an average starter to good starter.

This hole debate comes down to some think you need a stud qb in today's nfl, others think a good but not great qb is fine and you strengthen other positions.

Most seem to agree on what Hoyer is, but the above debate has manifested itself into 44 pages of lunacy because we are debating how to construct a team and calling it the Hoyer debate.