Official Browns QB Prospect Discussion!

[Zombo]

AHA! I fuckin found it god damn I love the internet...remember this dude?

 

 

Not really .... but, yes, looks just like him.

 

Zombo

[The Gipper]

 

Not really .... but, yes, looks just like him.

 

Zombo

For some reason the photo is not coming up for me.

[Zombo]

For some reason the photo is not coming up for me.

 

[thenew23]

I think the point being made here is that while the D is elite, or close to, they still couldn't help us overcome the giant turd laid by offence and ST. ST are normally fine, so I'm happy writing that off as an aberration, but the O clearly needs to be improved in a big way. The D is there, but they can't win games on their own. They put us in a position to win, and if the offence could get the touchdown on a red zone trip we would have been 21-0 up instead of 13-0.

Yes. The only person who understood my post.

 

Our D is excellent, and they play great game-in and game-out, but D alone is not enough to win games. We need to get some sembelance of an offense... right now there is nothing...

[thenew23]

The D scored points and didn't get two kicks blocked. Quit talking like you don't know anything.

 

I don't agree we need a new QB. I think Hoyer can be a good player. I will say I won't mind if we bring in a new QB, be it a polished high rounder or a 2nd or 3rd rounder. To me it's all about improving the team is the best possible way. If that means we have a QB and he actually works out, great. If that means we don't like any we can get, then improve in another area.

 

It's easy to say get a QB. The problem is sometimes there aren't any to get.

 

You were probably all over Brady Quinns jock when we drafted him.

This is funny... I pretty much had Quinn as overrated and undraftable...

 

And... there are plenty of QBs. We need to get one...

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

Yes. The only person who understood my post.

 

Our D is excellent, and they play great game-in and game-out, but D alone is not enough to win games. We need to get some sembelance of an offense... right now there is nothing...

 

I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with that.

 

We just don't need to break the bank on a QB who, quite frankly, will probably not be any better than his peers in the draft.

[Shep]

It's certainly not like all the quarterbacks are equal and you take the one that falls to you. If that were the case, you wouldn't need a scouting department at all. The notion that they're all equally likely to succeed is wrong. The stats on QBs drafted after pick #37 are absolutely dreadful. It's beyond a needle in a haystack. It's a needle in the ocean.

 

It was like 15 years between Brady and Wilson, guys drafted after round 2 who succeeded for their original team over a period of time... and that's assuming Wilson WILL. It's rare. Super rare. Raw.

 

The Browns brass and scouting department is certainly being charged with finding the best and most appropriate quarterback for what they want to do. The answer might be Bridgewater, who's unavailable. Then you go to #2. Who is it? Can we get him? And so on. And the guy the Browns love might not be the guy most of the other teams love... meaning he might be there at 9 (current position) without a trade-up. It's certainly fluid, but Manziel is commonly going at #5 to the Vikings now.

 

By draft time, that might be Carr. Or Petty. It's such a strong QB draft (near the top at least) that I expect an unusual amount of movement. Tajh Boyd plummeted but I have a gut he has a rise left in him.

[The Gipper]

It's certainly not like all the quarterbacks are equal and you take the one that falls to you. If that were the case, you wouldn't need a scouting department at all. The notion that they're all equally likely to succeed is wrong. The stats on QBs drafted after pick #37 are absolutely dreadful. It's beyond a needle in a haystack. It's a needle in the ocean.

 

It was like 15 years between Brady and Wilson, guys drafted after round 2 who succeeded for their original team over a period of time... and that's assuming Wilson WILL. It's rare. Super rare. Raw.

 

The Browns brass and scouting department is certainly being charged with finding the best and most appropriate quarterback for what they want to do. The answer might be Bridgewater, who's unavailable. Then you go to #2. Who is it? Can we get him? And so on. And the guy the Browns love might not be the guy most of the other teams love... meaning he might be there at 9 (current position) without a trade-up. It's certainly fluid, but Manziel is commonly going at #5 to the Vikings now.

 

By draft time, that might be Carr. Or Petty. It's such a strong QB draft (near the top at least) that I expect an unusual amount of movement. Tajh Boyd plummeted but I have a gut he has a rise left in him.

Yea, I don't know if scouting has become better or what, but in like the last decade no real decent QBs have come out past like the second round. Here is a list of all semi-decent QBs that have been drafted in the 3rd round or lower since 1990:

 

1990 Neil O'Donnell 3rd rd.

1992 Brad Johnson 9th rd.

1993 Elvis Grbac 8th rd. (yea, "decent" is relative)

1998 Matt Hasselback 6th rd.

1999 Aaron Brooks 4th rd.

2000 Tom Brady 6th rd.

2002 David Garrard 4th rd.

2004 Matt Schaub 3rd rd.

2005 Derek Anderson ??? 6th rd.

2005 Kyle Orton 4th rd.

2012 Russell Wilson 3rd rd.

 

And in that same time even a second rounder is a crap shoot. Here is the best of the bunch:

Brett Favre

Drew Brees

Kordell Stewart???

Charlie Batch???

Jake Plummer???

Colin Kaepernick

Andy Dalton

Geno Smith???

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

It's certainly not like all the quarterbacks are equal and you take the one that falls to you. If that were the case, you wouldn't need a scouting department at all. The notion that they're all equally likely to succeed is wrong. The stats on QBs drafted after pick #37 are absolutely dreadful. It's beyond a needle in a haystack. It's a needle in the ocean.

 

It was like 15 years between Brady and Wilson, guys drafted after round 2 who succeeded for their original team over a period of time... and that's assuming Wilson WILL. It's rare. Super rare. Raw.

 

The Browns brass and scouting department is certainly being charged with finding the best and most appropriate quarterback for what they want to do. The answer might be Bridgewater, who's unavailable. Then you go to #2. Who is it? Can we get him? And so on. And the guy the Browns love might not be the guy most of the other teams love... meaning he might be there at 9 (current position) without a trade-up. It's certainly fluid, but Manziel is commonly going at #5 to the Vikings now.

 

By draft time, that might be Carr. Or Petty. It's such a strong QB draft (near the top at least) that I expect an unusual amount of movement. Tajh Boyd plummeted but I have a gut he has a rise left in him.

Thank God we have two picks before 37.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

For some reason the photo is not coming up for me.

Kind of looks like a blue box with a question mark in it.

[hoorta]

It's certainly not like all the quarterbacks are equal and you take the one that falls to you. If that were the case, you wouldn't need a scouting department at all. The notion that they're all equally likely to succeed is wrong. The stats on QBs drafted after pick #37 are absolutely dreadful. It's beyond a needle in a haystack. It's a needle in the ocean.

 

It was like 15 years between Brady and Wilson, guys drafted after round 2 who succeeded for their original team over a period of time... and that's assuming Wilson WILL. It's rare. Super rare. Raw.

 

The Browns brass and scouting department is certainly being charged with finding the best and most appropriate quarterback for what they want to do. The answer might be Bridgewater, who's unavailable. Then you go to #2. Who is it? Can we get him? And so on. And the guy the Browns love might not be the guy most of the other teams love... meaning he might be there at 9 (current position) without a trade-up. It's certainly fluid, but Manziel is commonly going at #5 to the Vikings now.

 

By draft time, that might be Carr. Or Petty. It's such a strong QB draft (near the top at least) that I expect an unusual amount of movement. Tajh Boyd plummeted but I have a gut he has a rise left in him.

 

OK, yes, I agree with you on that. But if you read Banner's most recent comments- they're not going to force the pick at the cost of screwing up the potential for long term success. Speaking of, RG III to the Redskins- is looking more and more like the Deadskins have done exactly that. My crystal ball predicts a 10 loss season for Washington with games & (losses) coming up against the 49ers, Chiefs, and at least one more within the division- and golly gee, they don't have a first round pick this year to fill in one of the many gaping holes on the team. After Andrew Luck, Griffin was everyone's Flavor of the Month Maybe he can turn it around- he certainly has the talent- .but he has to stay healthy. He might just get Carr-ted out of the League.

 

The draft is still six months away, I'll take Banner at his word that they're doing due diligence on every quarterback out there that might be an improvement over what we have. & it's way too early to say on how it's all going to shake out.

[Shep]

I don't think anybody MEANS to "force the pick." At the time, at least, they believed it was the right thing to do. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But going all in for the QB in today's league is pretty commonly accepted as the right thing to do. If you don't have The Guy, you desperately need The Guy and it's almost impossible to cap the value of The Guy.

 

I mean, Brady was a happy accident, but is Belicheck really a genius without him? Was he before? Will he be after? I don't know. Maybe we'll never know.

 

Bottom line: QB is the first priority and whatever's second (left tackle or pass rusher, neither of which we need) is REALLY down the line. This brass thinks the 2012 draft showed a complete lack of understanding of the how you win in today's NFL, prioritizing a running back over a quarterback. I've heard about 5,000 times since that everybody would've taken Tannehill and Martin (my draft), but I don't recall that much uproar when the Browns actually took Richardson.

 

But the real point is that this brass hated that draft and they aren't likely to recreate it. I wouldn't put a dime on the quarterback coming second. Or a penny.

[The Gipper]

I don't think anybody MEANS to "force the pick." At the time, at least, they believed it was the right thing to do. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But going all in for the QB in today's league is pretty commonly accepted as the right thing to do. If you don't have The Guy, you desperately need The Guy and it's almost impossible to cap the value of The Guy.

 

I mean, Brady was a happy accident, but is Belicheck really a genius without him? Was he before? Will he be after? I don't know. Maybe we'll never know.

 

Bottom line: QB is the first priority and whatever's second (left tackle or pass rusher, neither of which we need) is REALLY down the line. This brass thinks the 2012 draft showed a complete lack of understanding of the how you win in today's NFL, prioritizing a running back over a quarterback. I've heard about 5,000 times since that everybody would've taken Tannehill and Martin (my draft), but I don't recall that much uproar when the Browns actually took Richardson.

 

But the real point is that this brass hated that draft and they aren't likely to recreate it. I wouldn't put a dime on the quarterback coming second. Or a penny.

OK, so, this FO hated the picks of the prior FO. That doesn't mean that this FO is going to be any better at doing this than the prior FO. In fact this FO....Lombardi at least has proven over and over and over again to have been fairly piss poor at doing this job.

I mean, what have we gotten out of his first foray here at this? A guy that looks like he has potential as a pass rusher....Mingo....and a bunch of other guys who really, really seem like big big question marks. McFadden? Slaughter? Gilkey? Bryant?

Where's the Beef? Lombardi's first effort looks like he hit the Soy/Tofu rack than the meat counter.

 

Edit note: In terms of what we have on this team, it is all mostly the prior regime(s)' choices that are doing things here. Even the UFAs, Gipson, Robertson, Fort. Cooper are the prior regimes guys.

Kruger and Des Bryant are good pickups of this bunch....but those were fairly proven veterans for which the "no brainer" tag could be applied.

Hoyer was the only other decent pickup....but so much for that. Campbell too....maybe.

[hoorta]

I don't think anybody MEANS to "force the pick." At the time, at least, they believed it was the right thing to do. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But going all in for the QB in today's league is pretty commonly accepted as the right thing to do. If you don't have The Guy, you desperately need The Guy and it's almost impossible to cap the value of The Guy.

 

I mean, Brady was a happy accident, but is Belicheck really a genius without him? Was he before? Will he be after? I don't know. Maybe we'll never know.

 

Bottom line: QB is the first priority and whatever's second (left tackle or pass rusher, neither of which we need) is REALLY down the line. This brass thinks the 2012 draft showed a complete lack of understanding of the how you win in today's NFL, prioritizing a running back over a quarterback. I've heard about 5,000 times since that everybody would've taken Tannehill and Martin (my draft), but I don't recall that much uproar when the Browns actually took Richardson.

 

But the real point is that this brass hated that draft and they aren't likely to recreate it. I wouldn't put a dime on the quarterback coming second. Or a penny.

 

Neither would I. But the RG III experiment shows if you go "all in" you had damn better be right- or you're screwed beyond belief. However- "The Guy" the "REAL" guy is damn hard to come by. How many are there in the NFL Shep? Multi-time Pro Bowlers? Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers and who else? Plenty of second tier guys maybe knocking on the door- but not yet in my book. Good enough to win with the right talent- the other Manning, Stafford, Flacco.

 

Quit acting like you can go into the back yard and just pick one off a tree. If it was so damn easy- after 20 tries, the Browns would have found one by dumb luck. I don't have another 5 years of patience to wait out another massive qb screw up.

[Shep]

I said the opposite of "picking one off the tree." That's why teams have scouting departments. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?

[hoorta]

I said the opposite of "picking one off the tree." That's why teams have scouting departments. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?

 

Maybe. To try and clarify- It's just that "The Guy" doesn't happen every year- and for all we know this may not be the year. To get that super stud you have to be either lucky (Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Montana) or lucky enough to have the #1 overall pick with "the guy" there (Manning, Luck).

 

And having "The Guy" doesn't get you to the Super Bowl- or even the Playoffs every year. Just admit it- I'm right. Try telling any Steeler fan Rothlisberger isn't "The Guy". they're currently tied with the Browns who have trotted out a bust and two backups. Shaub's "The Guy" in Houston, and they're where? Matty Ice is "The Guy" in Atlanta, and the Falcons are where? Griffin was drafted to be "The Guy" in Washington, and it's not working out so well this year in DC, no? & LOL, let's not even get into Weeden or Quinn getting drafted by the Browns to be "The Guy".

 

Getting back to the Griffin giveaway, to show you how badly it hurts to mess up on the sell the ranch scenario- where would you put RG IIIs trade value right now? I sure as hell wouldn't put it at three firsts and a second- and I have a feeling 31 other GMs would agree with me. Washington would take that sort of deal in a New York minute. I'm going to trust Banner and Lombardi to not make that kind of mistake.

[slowburn]

For some reason the photo is not coming up for me.

 

I've been unable to upload any photos from the 'reply box' also

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

I don't think anybody MEANS to "force the pick." At the time, at least, they believed it was the right thing to do. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But going all in for the QB in today's league is pretty commonly accepted as the right thing to do. If you don't have The Guy, you desperately need The Guy and it's almost impossible to cap the value of The Guy.

 

I mean, Brady was a happy accident, but is Belicheck really a genius without him? Was he before? Will he be after? I don't know. Maybe we'll never know.

 

Bottom line: QB is the first priority and whatever's second (left tackle or pass rusher, neither of which we need) is REALLY down the line. This brass thinks the 2012 draft showed a complete lack of understanding of the how you win in today's NFL, prioritizing a running back over a quarterback. I've heard about 5,000 times since that everybody would've taken Tannehill and Martin (my draft), but I don't recall that much uproar when the Browns actually took Richardson.

 

But the real point is that this brass hated that draft and they aren't likely to recreate it. I wouldn't put a dime on the quarterback coming second. Or a penny.

 

You don't know what this brass thinks. Stop saying you do. Even when you quote them, you misquote them. You don't have to say "this brass thinks", "in every GM's opinion", "it's common knowledge among GM's", etc. You make great points and are more learned than many in terms of the NFL, you don't have to qualify your opinions by trying to sound like an insider. Adding those little phrases and qualifiers delegitimizes your point and I feel it alienates a lot of posters, hence the reason some are arguing with what I feel we all know to be common knowledge: we need a QB. Just post what you feel, not what you think the FO thinks.

 

 

Here's a quick list of first round QB's that have played/started this season, complete with when they were drafted and a very short synopsis of their careers. Players underlined are part of a draft day trade. Players italicized are no longer on teams that drafted them.

 

Peyton Manning- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter. Manning will go down as one of the, if not the, best QB's to play the game. HOF career.

Cam Newton- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter. Spectacular rookie season, succumbed to sophomore slump. Solid to good player with very high potential.

Andrew Luck- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter. Good to great player with extremely high potential.

Matthew Stafford- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter. Good player.

Sam Bradford- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter. Somewhat of a disappointment. Mediocre to solid player.

Alex Smith- Round 1 Pick 1- Rocky rookie season. Rocky sophomore season. Solid player.

Eli Manning- Round 1 Pick 1- Opening day starter, part of very strong QB class. Solid to good player.

Carson Palmer- Round 1 Pick 1- Didn't play at all his rookie year. Solid career.

 

Robert Griffin III- Round 1 Pick 2- Washington gave away two future first round picks and a second round pick to nab RG3. Good player with high ceiling.

 

Matt Ryan- Round 1 Pick 3- Opening day starter. Solid to good player.

 

Philip Rivers- Round 1 Pick 4- Didn't become full time starter for two years. Solid to good player.

 

Mark Sanchez- Round 1 Pick 5- Jets traded first and second round pick, plus three players, to move up and take Sanchez. Sanchez has had quite a rocky career and currently finds himself a second string quarterback behind second round rookie Geno Smith. Mediocre player.

 

Jake Locker- Round 1 Pick 8- Locker was considered a consensus first overall pick throughout his last collegiate season, but his value dropped before, and during the Combine. Considered a high value pick at 8. Mediocre player with decent potential.

 

Ryan Tannehill- Round 1 Pick 8- Tannehill was considered a raw talent coming into the NFL Draft. Many analysts considered him to be more of a developmental first rounder and not an immediate starter, yet the Dolphins made him their opening day starter. Mediocre player with solid potential.

 

Blaine Gabbert- Round 1 Pick 10- The Jaguars swapped first round picks and surrendered their second round pick to move up six places and take Gabbert. Gabbert has been a monumental disappointment and has since lost his starting job to Chad Henne. Poor player.

 

Ben Roethlisberger- Round 1 Pick 11- Original plan was to have Roethlisberger sit and learn, but Maddox got injured Week 2. Roethlisberger went undefeated in the regular season, led team to AFC Championship. Great player, HOF career.

 

Jay Cutler- Round 1 Pick 11- The Broncos surrendered their third round pick and swapped first rounders to move up four spots and take Cutler. Cutler has a vast amount of talent but is inconsistent and is known to have a bad personality. Solid player.

 

Christian Ponder- Round 1 Pick 12- Considered a reach by all analysts, Ponder's career has been lackluster to say the least. Mediocre player with limited upside.

 

E.J. Manuel- Round 1 Pick 16- The Bills traded down from 8 to 16, picked up a second and seventh round pick, and swapped third rounders. They got the QB they wanted, plus a second round pick, a higher third round pick and a seventh round pick. Manuel is a raw talent with an inconsistent arm, fantastic tangibles and even better intangibles. Opening day starter. Mediocre player with very high potential.

 

Josh Freeman- Round 1 PIck 17- The third QB picked in the 2009 NFL Draft, Freeman was considered by many to have the highest upside but was also the rawest talent. Sat on the bench for half of the season before becoming starter. Mediocre player with high potential.

 

Joe Flacco- Round 1 Pick 18- Baltimore traded down from 8 to 26, picked up two third round picks and a fourth round pick, then used a third rounder and a sixth rounder to trade back up to 18. They got the QB they wanted, plus an additional third rounder and fourth rounder. Good player with HOF potential.

 

Brandon Weeden- Round 1 Pick 22- It is widely believed that the Browns FO panicked in their selection of Weeden. He's been a disappointment and has lost his starting job to both Brian Hoyer and Jason Campbell this season. Poor to mediocre player.

 

Aaron Rodgers- Round 1 Pick 24- Rodgers was thought to be the best QB in the draft, yet after Alex Smith was taken first overall, Rodgers saw his stock slide. He was eventually taken at 24 and sat behind Brett Favre for a while. Great player, HOF career.

 

Jason Campbell- Round 1 Pick 25- The Washington Redskins surrendered a third round pick in 2005, plus future first and fourth round pick to trade back into the first and get Campbell. Campbell's career has been mediocre at best. He has a great amount of talent but has never put it together in a full season. Poor to mediocre player.

 

Drew Brees- Round 1 Pick 32- Technically a second round pick, Brees was taken by the Chargers with the 32nd overall pick. He's gone on to be a fantastic NFL QB. Great player, HOF career.

 

 

 

 

What's interesting to me is that, of the trade ups involving top 10 picks, two of the three listed don't even start anymore. Furthermore, of the first overall picks to start this NFL season, none of them were involved in trades. They were all taken by teams with their regular picks. Of the seven trades listed, two aren't starting, two are injured, one is having a bad year and one was a backup to start this season. Flacco is the only one who has been a consistent starter for his entire career, and even he has been accused of being a bottom tier "elite" QB.

 

There are 5 first round NFL QB's taken in last 7 years that don't even find themselves on NFL rosters anymore. (Leinart, Young, Russell, Tebow, Quinn).

 

What this shows me is that there's no right way to get a QB...but there are plenty of wrong ways. Drafting QB's is a crapshoot. You can trade up and take one in the top 10 and get RG3, Gabbert or Sanchez. You can trade up and get one in the middle to late first round and get Flacco or Campbell. You can let one fall to you and get a Rodgers or a Quinn. You can take one first overall and get a Manning or a Bradford. You can take a raw prospect and get a Tannehill or a Freeman. You can take a small school guy with great numbers and get a Locker or a Roethlisberger.

 

It seems the best way to take a QB is to determine which attributes are valued highest by you and your staff, and then take the QB who fits that mold best. Personally, I don't see us taking a player like Manziel no matter what his stats are or how many Heismans he wins. I don't see us taking Mariota simply because he won't be there when we pick and he doesn't warrant a trade up.

 

I see us either taking a Hundley or a Mettenberger with our first overall pick, Carr with our second first rounder, or a player like Blake Bortles or Logan Thomas in the middle rounds. All of those QB's share similar attributes: they are large bodied, mobile, with strong arms and good intangibles. They are lacking in footwork and mechanics- things Norv Turner can teach in his sleep.

[slowburn]

^^

[The Gipper]

To: TCPO

 

If I am not mistaken, Quinn IS still on a roster, is he not? I thought he was a backup in like Kansas City.

[Shep]

Well, Couch. That post had a whiff of phallus to it!!

 

Just about every year, especially lately, very good to great starting quarterbacks have come into the league. The biggest exception is probably that Russell-Quinn-Tebow-Clausen year. What's really weird is that if Quinn had agreed to take #5 money, he would've been taken #1... so they say.

 

Of course there are misses. The one certain thing is that you have to try. You have to take the bat off your shoulder. You absolutely can't hit a home run without swinging. As far as getting you Guy at QB, you just have to swing again. And again. Because without one, you don't matter. At all.

 

(Sorry, Couch. I know I should never vaguely reference what "they" say, or at least very specifically and carefully qualify that when I say what the brass thinks it's based on an accumulation of smaller quotes and signs in the draft room, etc., rather than one of them actually calling me. Can we just assume that from now on and you'll cease with the phallus-ey posts? Graci.)

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

Well, Couch. That post had a whiff of phallus to it!!

 

Just about every year, especially lately, very good to great starting quarterbacks have come into the league. The biggest exception is probably that Russell-Quinn-Tebow-Clausen year. What's really weird is that if Quinn had agreed to take #5 money, he would've been taken #1... so they say.

 

Of course there are misses. The one certain thing is that you have to try. You have to take the bat off your shoulder. You absolutely can't hit a home run without swinging. As far as getting you Guy at QB, you just have to swing again. And again. Because without one, you don't matter. At all.

 

(Sorry, Couch. I know I should never vaguely reference what "they" say, or at least very specifically and carefully qualify that when I say what the brass thinks it's based on an accumulation of smaller quotes and signs in the draft room, etc., rather than one of them actually calling me. Can we just assume that from now on and you'll cease with the phallus-ey posts? Graci.)

 

 

Well, Couch. That post had a whiff of phallus to it!!

 

Just about every year, especially lately, very good to great starting quarterbacks have come into the league. The biggest exception is probably that Russell-Quinn-Tebow-Clausen year. What's really weird is that if Quinn had agreed to take #5 money, he would've been taken #1... so they say.

 

Of course there are misses. The one certain thing is that you have to try. You have to take the bat off your shoulder. You absolutely can't hit a home run without swinging. As far as getting you Guy at QB, you just have to swing again. And again. Because without one, you don't matter. At all.

 

(Sorry, Couch. I know I should never vaguely reference what "they" say, or at least very specifically and carefully qualify that when I say what the brass thinks it's based on an accumulation of smaller quotes and signs in the draft room, etc., rather than one of them actually calling me. Can we just assume that from now on and you'll cease with the phallus-ey posts? Graci.)

My intention wasn't to be a dick. It was merely to tell you that you don't need to include what "they" say. We all are capable of reading what "they" say when we want to read it. We want to hear what "you" have to say.

 

You are a good poster with valid points nearly all of the time. Unfortunately, those valid points get lost when you say things like "the FO thinks this...".

 

You seem to infer things and then pass them off as fact when thats not the case. You keep claiming that it's a foregone conclusion that our FO wants to trade up when, based off actual quotes and anecdotes, it's been proven that Banner and Co. is saying the exact opposite.

 

Basically, the FO has said nothing about trading up as of late. If you have an example otherwise, I'd be glad to see it. But, until then, it seems safe to assume that we won't trade up, as there is nobody worth trading up and that, given the previous example, trading up rarely works.

 

Nobody is disagreeing that we have to take a QB. Nobody is even disagreeing that we have to take a first round QB. What we're saying is that you don't have to trade up to get one, especially in this draft.

 

 

Again, I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just trying to be helpful. I appreciate what you contribute.

 

 

 

 

And Gip, you're half correct. Quinn is on an NFL roster. It's just not KC's, its St. Louis'. I apologize for the error, I just assumed he was done. It's still an overwhelming stat, regardless.

[Zombo]

 

 

 

And Gip, you're half correct. Quinn is on an NFL roster. It's just not KC's, its St. Louis'. I apologize for the error, I just assumed he was done.

 

I think being a backup to Kellen Clemens is the equivalent of being "done".

 

Zombo

[ballpeen]

 

I might not have another 5 years to wait out another massive qb screw up.

Fixed it for you.....I am in the same rowboat my friend. The number of 5 year plans we can survive is starting to get limited.

[miktoxic]

 

I've been unable to upload any photos from the 'reply box' also

id don't know if you know this already BUT you have to upload your photo to an outside hosting site like imageshack. you upload it, then copy the direct link (it'll show a bunch of info below the photo you uploaded and one says direct. well copy that then in the reply box on the board you have to click on the little icon above in the border that looks like a picture of a mountain (hold your cursor over it for a sec and it will say 'insert image'. click on that icon and a window asking for an url will pop up and you paste that direct link info into that. your photo should show up.

 

 

[The Gipper]

And Gip, you're half correct. Quinn is on an NFL roster. It's just not KC's, its St. Louis'. I apologize for the error, I just assumed he was done. It's still an overwhelming stat, regardless.

 

Well, somewhere in the state of Mizzery.

[Tour2ma]

I think somebody else put it this way: The Browns don't want to draft 10 guys. That wasn't really the point of adding extra picks.

The point of adding picks was to create possibilities.

 

The point was they did not know what they had and what they needed. I speculated as much in my post-draft thread and Banner said so in an interview not a week later. He did not sorta say so; he said it exactly.

 

So picks were amassed because they did not know what to spend them on.

 

Now they sorta know... and a QB will be in the mix. However at what cost is still TBD.

 

Any franchise should always be looking to draft/ sign their next QB. What they spend depends upon their current circumstance. Our current circumstance is muddledby Hoyer's status and incomplete collegiate resumes.

[Tour2ma]

I have no problem trading up to get the next great. The problem is, I don't see a great anywhere in the draft. I see about five guys who have an equal stake at being either great or garbage. To me, that's not worth a trade up.

 

I'm willing to go into next season riding the Hoyer train if, and only if, we take a QB with our late first, second, or early third and let him sit and learn.

 

Agree... and if you strongly believe in one (or more) of those five, then by all means take him, if he falls to you. But...

 

The 1st round is an entirely different world of expectations than the 3rd where the Seahawks' FO can say, "Russell Wilson has a pretty good chance of being a pretty good NFL QB." Which is in turn a different world from the 6th where someone in the Pats' FO said, "There's just something about this kid, Brady, that makes me think he might have a surprise upside. Let's take a chance on him."

 

The question is how much do you have to believe in a prospect to spend a mid-1st round pick on him?

What odds on him being your next starter do you need to pull the trigger?

How much do the odds drop to spend a late-1st round pick?

 

I think the point being made here is that while the D is elite, or close to, they still couldn't help us overcome the giant turd laid by offence and ST.

Counterpoint remaining that our D is not yet "elite".

Good? Yes.

Very Good? Yes, on some days.

Great? No, not yet...

 

And elite is somewhere on the far side of "great".

[Shep]

By a ton of measures, it's certainly one of the league's best defenses. We can probably settle on that.

 

It's a great quarterback draft and we'll be taking one with our earliest pick. May or may not include a trade up. Bank it. If Hoyer didn't get injured... if he'd played all year and played great? Different story. But it didn't play out that way.

[Tour2ma]

Speaking of, RG III to the Redskins- is looking more and more like the Deadskins have done exactly that.

 

hoorta, I believe you have just solved that franchise's name problem...

 

Bottom line: QB is the first priority and whatever's second (left tackle or pass rusher, neither of which we need) is REALLY down the line. This brass thinks the 2012 draft showed a complete lack of understanding of the how you win in today's NFL, prioritizing a running back over a quarterback. I've heard about 5,000 times since that everybody would've taken Tannehill and Martin (my draft), but I don't recall that much uproar when the Browns actually took Richardson.

 

But the real point is that this brass hated that draft and they aren't likely to recreate it. I wouldn't put a dime on the quarterback coming second. Or a penny.

 

There you go again... brass this and that...

 

For the record:

- I was not in favor of a Tannehill/ Martin draft. I would not pull the trigger on Tannehill at #4 overall then, and still would not today.

- However, I had Martin in my mock with my 2nd #1...

- There was considerable "uproar" over the TR pick. I know. I was part of it.

 

A QB may well come first, but I'll put a dime on us not trading up for one...