NFL News: Cleveland Browns stick with Brandon Weeden as starter

The Browns surprised few today when Rob Chudzinski announced that they were sticking with Brandon Weeden as starter. Sure, Weeden might have thrown one of the worst passes in NFL history yesterday in a loss to the Detroit Lions, but who else were they going to use? Did you also forget that Jason Campbell’s brief appearance for the Browns in the second game of the year also included an awkward shovel pass?

Short of a free agency move like Buffalo did in signing Matt Flynn, there really wasn’t much chance the Browns would make a change at quarterback. So the Browns will continue to work with what they have. Even if they did choose to go outside the organization for an available player like Flynn, it wouldn’t have been easy to get him ready to play this week in Green Bay. Signing to play quarterback and then playing a few days later isn’t a good idea for anyone. Just ask Brad, er I mean, Bruce Gradkowski.

[Related: Browns defense disappointed following loss to Detroit Lions]

  • matt underwood

    How does Tony Grossi still have twitter followers? He blocks everyone. Such a prick with thin skin.

  • SteveKnicks

    Chud said “spurts” but I think he meant to say “squirts”. Was this a misprint?

  • FearTheRoo

    Brandon Weeden played pretty well the first half. Have to give him credit for that at least. He did lay an egg in the second but the defense played just as bad. They let Detroit score on almost every possession…

  • 216in614

    Sticking with Weedan is still the best option. We live and die by him.

    If he completely lays an egg and we go 3-15 hello Johnny Football or whoever.

    If not we win some games, he cements his place as the backup and we maybe sneak into the playoffs. Either way he makes it harder for us to get that real QB in next years draft.

  • MrCleaveland

    Craig, I think a better headline would be “Browns stuck with Brandon Weeden as starter.”

  • lollercopter

    Sounds like someone was flaming Grossi on twitter!


  • Sam

    So you are saying that Brandon Weeden could be so bad that the NFL will add two extra defeats to our loss column?

  • Wow

    Naw, it’s easier to just blame him for everything.

  • NoVA Buckeye

    Is Jason Campbell really that bad? He wasn’t Weeden bad when he was in DC, why not start him?


  • I’m so tired that I thought this was a grammar critique for a second. I was trying to figure out what I messed up. Well done.

  • BenRM

    “umadbro” and “lollercopter”

    It’s like the internet circa 2005! Nostalgia!!!

  • BenRM

    I want to punish Weeden for upsetting me so much, but I realize that this is the only choice available.

    When you are clearly drafting a QB, signing Flynn or Freeman doesn’t make sense (oh, and Flynn is actually not any good). Campbell is also terrible from what little we’ve seen of him this year.

    Weeden is only about 90% terrible. It’d actually be a lesser percentage, except for the fact that you know Weeden is good for 2 or 3 “Worst Plays in NFL History” per game.

  • RGB

    Thad Lewis vs. Buffalo… 19/32, 216 yds, 2 TD, 0 Int.
    I’m not sayin, I’m just sayin.

  • Return of the (Alex) Mack

    vs. Cincinnati playing for Buffalo

  • Jay

    Are you fking kidding me. Why are they putting this bum back on the field. Cleveland has gave this Weeden guy enough time to win gms and to show he’s a starting qb. I think on most nfl team’s this guy we have as a starter is a 3rd stringer on most. It’s almost to hard to watch this team play with weeden in at qb how many 3 and out’s does this guy do. No wonder why the defence looked so bad last week they was on the field the whole damn game. Weeden blows and as long as they keep this clown in Cleveland they will not win another game.

  • RGB