Gunz41

He MAY be a bad pick. He has not played enough to be judged as of now. Again, would you consider RG3 a bad pick? Most probably would, yet he was the Rookie of Year. One year (and in Austin case little time on field) and 2 preseason games doesn't give an answer. Again, I am NOT saying he will be good or was the right pick. But there are NUMEROUS examples of guys needing some time to work, and there are NUMEROUS examples of guys who came out of the gates on fire and then fizzled out

I'm still not saying he was the right pick, just the thinking behind it for going OL first. And yes, a trade can always happen but that isn't something you can predict. And just as easily can see that Dorsey had talked to Gettleman. One thing is for sure though, it doesn't mean a whole lot to say Hernandez is a starter in NY. Their line play has been atrocious haha

I'll clarify a few statements. I'm not saying he is moving around too much, I'm saying that moving around and being able to succeed in that job takes time. I'm also not saying he will eventually get it, or be good. But any expectations on him are not his fault. Where he was drafted is not his fault. The main reason that people are calling for his head is the expedited timeline for the Browns. Everyone here is quick to judge, off of a rookie season (with little playing time) and 2 preseason games. But here is a list. Rashaan Salaam, Ickey Woods, Lawrence Dawsey, Michael Clayton, Kendrell Bell, Vince Young, Steve Slaton, John Stephens, Robert Griffin III, Cadillac Williams Jadeveon Clowney, Jared Goff, Cris Carter, Roddy White, Alex Smith, Wes Welker, Melvin Gordon, Troy Aikman, Terry Bradshaw The 1st list is guys who ended up with their 1st year as their best (one year wonder). The 2nd list is guys who had bad 1st years. Some were considered busts after that year. Hoorta, it wasn't you I don't believe, but the reason I spoke about his Draft position was because someone was talking about taking him before Chubb and how stupid it was. That part wasn't about Corbett in particular, but saying taking someone over Chubb. The point of doing that was that the Giants weren't going for a RB, so get the OL you want AND Chubb.

I can understand the frustration with Corbett, but he has had little experience, so to just expect him to be good already because of his Draft position isn't fair to the guy. Especially when realizing he is moving around and the techniques for each position are different. Dorsey or any other GM aren't going to take someone they think will fail. It would only make sense that the thought was he wouldn't be available later. As for taking Corbett before Chubb, since it seems as though Austin was who the Browns wanted for an OL pick, they made the smart decision to draft him 1st. There was 1 pick in between their 2 picks, and the Giants had just drafted Saquon, which means they weren't going to draft Chubb. So they got both players they wanted (whether they work out or not), but if they had taken the better player at the present they could have been with only one of them. I'm not saying Corbett was a great pick, or 1 that I would have made. But the expectations don't seem fair. There are plenty of examples of guys who have played sparingly and struggled early only to become really good players, and there are examples of guys who have started quickly, had plenty of experience and struggled early and went on to have pretty good careers, and then of course the guys who are busts. The Browns timeline to compete has come quickly, but that doesn't mean that every player progresses at the same rate. And it seems extremely harsh to label him a "p***y" because he hasn't progressed as fast as wanted. Not one person playing the game is that, and even if he isnt as mean as one thought or expected, doesn't make him that.

There's a reason why Taki was taken where he was and Mack went where he did. That doesn't mean that Mack isn't better, but it's not like there wasn't other LBs taken in between them. Not taking up for either, but logic would seem to say that Dorsey thought he had to take him there or he wouldn't have had an opportunity later. We really have no idea what the boards for teams look like, just "experts" that grade these players. And I only know of 1 of those experts that got a real job selecting them, and who knows how that will work. There are certainly many reasons why a "better" prospect will get drafted lower than someone else, and not always are negative things like say Tyreek Hill

Of course that can work, and you will see it all over different levels of football and not just 3rd down strategy, but it also hamstrings you for short/intermediate yardage. If there is little or no threat for a run, a team can just drop in coverage. I saw you mention Ajayi, he doesn't fit the mold of what a team would want as a 3rd down back. Haven't watched enough of Hilliard to know his strengths, but the best option is to pick up someone who is similar to Duke

He isn't playing by the same rules. He switches from side to side and makes excuses for his incorrect picks. What he does seem to do well is pick winner of regular season games. I wont get into all his stuff with Baker again, but if you read back on here, or even go look at his Twitter it's easy to see

I haven't followed this thread or what happened with Mr. Name doesn't need to be mentioned, but you don't need to be a former player or coach to see the difference in a post by him and an actual real one. There is some very knowledgeable people on here, I have seen other coaches besides myself on here, and there are people who appear to not have much knowledge about the actual game, and even those guys can see the difference in "all OL are fat" and something along the line of "all OL lack the overall athletic ability of others." You don't gain knowledge from nonsense. You can gain the motivation to learn more for yourself from nonsense. But I'll tell you I can hear from a parent/fan/opposing coach etc something like your RT "insert dumb comment", it isnt constructive so I gain nothing from it, and if it is something that comes from a "troll" type then it is usually something that IF true is easy for anyone to see.

I have noticed that, but before recently he was against the Warriors in that way. He was on the Lebron train. So yea flip flops on some things. But the reason he is probably on this Warriors thing right now is because he was all in on Celtics winning it all. I tried to find it and couldn't, but after game 1 when they played Mil, he went on air going really hard. Then he wah wah wah his way through the rest of that series. I would definitely say from what I have seen he is way more on Lebron than the rest of NBA. As for Durant, I feel really bad for him with the injury, but I don't care for him. Not as much as James for me, and I dislike Harden WAY more than either. But dislike him still. I would prefer Warriors win, but I don't dislike the Raptors at all. I am a Kobe guy, and there are a few guys in the league I like now, Curry, Thompson, Leonard. But the real reason I want Warriors is because of some of the talk about Steph and his "failures" in playoffs. I certainly wouldn't mind Toronto winning, and certainly Lakers as my team. If the Lakers had won though, I would want someone like Kuzma to be MVP, not LBJ haha. It may seem like its strange the teams I like, but got to remember there is no pro team in my state. And it really just came like a lot of people passed down. So I got teams I like and players I like. And players I dislike and teams I dislike in some of those sports.

What football were you watching in those days? I don't even care that you have your opinion on this situation btw. But those certainly aren't good examples to use for your argument about Baker. Rodgers was the backup QB going into his 2nd year, so he certainly didn't have the clout Baker does now. Brady was also the backup going into his second season. It wasn't until into the season he became the starter after Bledsoe got hurt. Brees going into his 2nd season, not as a 1st round pick mind you, he was actually the starter going into that season. But he was replaced as the starter in that season by Doug Flutie. And as mentioned by someone else, the next year SD had the 1st pick and selected Eli Manning, who they then traded for Rivers. So while you may have a point (maybe not), its certainly an opinion that you are entitled to, those are not good examples to prove a point.

I do have an account, but just read. I needed access for something else. Sad part is it really won't be much of a backtrack. Just his MO. He will find something (just like the BB thing) to use. He will absolutely use a different set of rules to justify something (like playing off INTs for Darnold or Luck, but kill Mayfield). I'll give you an example from this past year that has nothing to do with the Browns or any Cleveland team. He wasn't sold on Mahomes all year. In the playoffs, I guess he expected his wonder boy Luck to win. His premise was that Luck was the real MVP. So he declared that the winner of the game should win MVP. Chiefs win, well MVP is a regular season award, and look at the difference when they weren't the starters and Colts are still a rebuilding team, therefore Luck MVP. So he did backtrack, but just to double down on the same thing.

Someone brought up a good point the last time I saw that post. By Colin's logic, the Browns have 2 Super Bowl wins lol

You would think your other way would work (winning), but with these guys like Skip, Cowherd, Smith, etc it doesn't. They find some way to justify their incorrect takes, or find something meaningless to continue it. Baker as the example with CC, from undraftable to well you didn't celebrate with your team 1 time in 3 years, to childish actions with Hue, to being overrated, to it now being a bad thing having a teammates back and having a different personality than Brady or Luck. He even says INTs don't matter to him, especially when talking about 1 of his boys, Darnold or Luck. After the BALT game, he threw INTs. And while I dislike him, I really have nothing to really dislike with the actual game of LBJ. Its really how he is talked about, things that appear to happen behind the scenes, and in between whistles for me. But look at how Skip talks about him. He doesn't use the same criteria for his guys.

I have never written a word on Twitter, just read

You would have to read the posts to understand what I meant. Yes, they always existed, as nothing but employees went with them to Bal, and I don't think they were saying different, but at that time Cleveland had no team per say so the point was that whether he deserved fired or not, Coward is saying that is how bad this Browns franchise is and pointing to that as one reason why, when in fact it was Baltimore by then. Just think its funny no matter how you slice it that he has a tell when something stupid he says is disproved that he shuts up, and even with proof he digs in. That is how obsessed he is with his stupid Baker take/fued

Anyway, back to the original topic. I just saw on Twitter Colin still dissing the Browns. Go check it out. Saying this is franchise that fired BB. He continues to argue with people that he couldn't have been fired by the Ravens (it was already announced) because he was never an employee of the Ravens. So his argument is he was fired by the Browns WHO DIDN'T EXIST AT THE TIME. If you have ever seen his Twitter, once he is proven wrong or called out about something he shuts up. So this tells me he actually believes this HAHA

I certainly think that the Warriors benefited from those 2 being out, but I certainly hear more often that they were out over suspension and Bogut. Maybe they were the better team both those years, but I really saw no way to say that. There were obvious questions both years with the 2 things mentioned. And perhaps those could have changed either series, we will never know. But even the decisive game the 2nd time around was decided on 1 shot. I certainly don't agree with the opinion that I hear more often than either the Cavs injuries or suspension and injury with GS, the "Curry KNEW he couldn't beat James so he had to get the 2nd best player and give him the team." There was nothing I saw that would give me reason to think that a close series like that couldn't occur, and Cavs were minus Kyrie. The one thing I will say with the Warriors now that doesn't get mentioned much is how the team changed because of KD, which is now showing big time. They have absolutely no bench that can be consistently relied upon. When KD is in there, it masks that problem. They can even compete (maybe not with Raptors), but take another one out, Klay and Curry has to do it all. People (no one here that I seen) can bring up the still has X number of All Stars, but that doesn't tell the story. Cousins is a shell of himself and has actually been a liability last 2 games, Iggy is just too old, and Draymond is really a system player and unreliable on offense. Just the same way James was by himself that 1st finals. I will say that Curry has some more help than James did, even if I hate to admit that. But James is also an easier player for that situation because he relies on isolation, while Curry relies on movement and space. And James is better. Since I don't like him and hes on my favorite team, I think Lakers need to trade James to Toronto for Kawhi lol

I'll just comment on the number of points and not quote anyone. What the Cavs and LBJ did to win was very impressive, and while I dislike Bron, and do like GS, really just Curry and Thompson (not my favorite team, but in a bit of a quandary since Bron is a Laker and that's my team), I don't consider them the best of all time. Maybe the most accomplished regular season of all time, but remember a couple years ago when ATL had the best record in the NBA? They weren't the best team that year. Cleveland won yes, but it could have went either way. That was with Love and Irving and without Draymond (who deserved it) and someone for 6 and 7. I think both those years that they were about as evenly matched as 2 teams could be. That's just my opinion on it. The problem with the Warriors now is with the money they shelled out for KD and with age of guys who played bigger back then, that they have no bench now. That was a key to their winning. And Toronto is really good. Doesn't bother me 1 bit that they are going to win. As for most valuable players ever, I think there are a few that can be considered. James isn't the only guy who left this Cavs team, and I think it was pretty obvious that they were tanking. And James was 28-27 this year with Lakers. If I had to give a definitive answer on MV ever, I probably would say LBJ, but not like it a wide margin. One thing that does knock him down to me is things around him. But certainly one of the best players ever. I don't even knock him for the 3-6 record. Even if he was playing in a weaker conference, that is impressive. The Jordan guys point out 6-0, well how about the other years he played and didn't make it? Those count too. But I certainly don't think his win in CLE is most impressive of all time. As for Colin and Njoku, that was my point that he is trying to use it as an ah ha in the future. But he only thinks in the moment on a hot take. You can bet at some point in next year a Kelce, Kittle, etc will be called best. My point was the same thing could be accomplished with one of the best, but hey now Cle has the best TE

Oh, I know his persona. It just jumped out at me, not just one of best TEs, but I think his words were and probably the best TE. Figured everyone would like to hear that Browns have the best TE. But I would be willing to bet that if he did his Top 10 TEs that he wouldn't be mentioned in Top 5. He seems to forget things he said in past to support that minutes agenda. For another Cleveland guy, I distinctly remember him talking about LBJ. Now everyone knows I dislike him. But Colin was one of them James is so great, over the top, Bron can do no wrong guys. Last year in the middle of the series with Indiana 1st round, Cleveland had lost a game. He comes on with his hot take that the league has passed him by, he will never make a huge impact again, etc. Fast forward within the next couple weeks (I don't know how long), Bron is soooooooo great, arguably the best player of all time.

I saw the thread about TEs and it just popped in my head, apparently Njoku is the best TE in the NFL He has gotten so far into this stuff with Baker that he is actually saying things like this so that when inevitably the Browns lose a game that he can do the I told you so about Baker. The funniest yet though was saying he never said Baker was like JM, when the week before he did. He cowered when Baker was there. So I guess things are looking up guys, the Browns now have the best TE in football.

I don't know how to respond to certain spots like that, so I am just going to reference it. As for smugness, that may not have been your intention, but it was how it came off. When a question is asked, when the response is "I didn't know I was obligated..." it comes off a certain way. I said that about ranking them because you said you didn't. So you actually went from "I didn't really rank others much" to yeah I did, but here's why. Those are 2 different things. And I obviously said that I don't even see anything wrong with having that bias, its certainly understandable. Most things that would be deemed flaws would occur in comparison, thus really can be argued and opinion. The point was that people sometimes wont point out those flaws. Everyone has flaws, its just I have so many less than everyone else lol jk

It was just the smugness it seemed to have when saying you weren't obligated. You kinda did rank some of them: Cam, Foles, Eli and said so and so would be behind them. And if you can't see how people, not just this forum, not just Browns fans, not just football fans, etc tend to ignore the flaws when it is something they like, have, etc then I don't know what to tell you. I'm not even saying it is wrong to do so. Beauty/worth is in the eye of the beholder. A perfect example that you have even referenced is the Steeler guy and how he changed up on Brown.

I get that, I'm not saying anyone has to have a spot for him. I don't know where I would put him. That was just a question, no right or wrong answer. It was really just about saying so and so hasn't done anything, so they would be lower than so and so.

I'm not saying that they cant be, but certainly way too early to make that claim, especially as a pitch for a player.

Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest. And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others. And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.