RG3 Signs with the Browns

[The Gipper]

It's was part of a trade up from 26 to 22 to get Manziel.

 

No one said superior, but if you keep doing or suggesting the same shit you really must believe in a methodology that no one else is trying. It's seems like most around here come to the conclusion that if you don't want a QB at #2, you're not as smart as their superior ideology of drafting Qbs until the team starts to win. Didn't work for Couch, won't work now. Fucking Grounds Hog Day.

OK...I didn't realize that we gave up a 3rd round pick to get JMZ. That deal, in retrospect, just keeps getting worse and worse.

 

And I am in the camp of building up the team around the QB first. Yes, we need a QB...but like you said, I have no interest in repeating the Couch scenario.

[The Gipper]

When exactly have we drafted the top QB since Couch?

I think anyone taken in the first round should be considered a "top QB".....at least they are expected to be that ultimately by the team that drafts them.

[The Gipper]

You know who started on a terrible team with no blocking and still turned the team around? Goff. Food for thought from a guy who is leaning Wentz.

Hear what you say....but then college is nothing like the NFL. Not that it couldn't happen. I just would not be predicting it.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

I think anyone taken in the first round should be considered a "top QB".....at least they are expected to be that ultimately by the team that drafts them.

 

 

But they shouldn't. Johnny, Quinn, Weeden - none of them were the "top" prospects in their respective classes. Each of them had their own legitimate concerns that knocked them down the draft board.

 

This is the first time we've been in a position to take any QB we want in the draft whatsoever since Tim Couch. This isn't a situation we've been in at any point in this millennium. At no point is this a situation of us doing the same thing over and over and over again, and there's no logical way it can be deemed as such.

[Tour2ma]

But they shouldn't.

 

Agree...

 

There is a difference between THE top QB and a top QB...

[hoorta]

More likely annoyed with the echo of the same old song and dance. If we draft Goff this year you will understand in 2 short years from now. He WILL suck during that time, as any Qb prospect would on this horrid fucking team. Next thing you know everyone's trying to run your man crush out of town, despite holes everywhere on team.

 

It's all his fault of course, he's the reason the receivers have small windows, he's the reason the run game is useless, he's the reason this team gets destroyed at the line. Yeah ok. It's his fault on 2nd and 13 he didn't get off a pass to a receiver who couldn't get open until the NT and DE are already sandwiching him. Until we find that theoretical Qb who can overcome the ineptitude of his surroundings, we'll keep on doing this shit. It's fucking embarrassing.

 

Seem like the 2015 Browns QBs got crushed with an o-line that had two first round pick pro bowlers, & 2 second round picks. Maybe we should wait until we have 5 first round picks on o-line? Keep drafting guys like Gilbert, Mingo and Erving that weren't worth high picks? The key to success is drafting guys who aren't bums. As I pointed out htown- you can rag on our lousy quarterback selections- but the Browns draft history since 1999 with very few exceptions, is a textbook on picking the wrong players at virtually every position.

 

FWIW, there have been plenty of instances where HOF quarterbacks (most notably Bradshaw and Aikman) got absolutely killed their first couple years because the offense stunk to high heaven. To be fair, that ruined Couch and Carr. It also looks like the Browns are going to be smarter than that this time around, picking up RG III to start a few games so they don't have to throw the rookie in there game 1.

[Westside Steve]

Maybe it's just that they weren't playing together, probably switching schemes every year.

WSS

[The Gipper]

 

 

But they shouldn't. Johnny, Quinn, Weeden - none of them were the "top" prospects in their respective classes. Each of them had their own legitimate concerns that knocked them down the draft board.

I don't care whether they were THE top prospect of their class. They were fucking First round draft picks. I expect ever first rounder the Browns ever take to be a long term starter...no matter the position...and possibly compete for the Pro Bowl.

 

This is the first time we've been in a position to take any QB we want in the draft whatsoever since Tim Couch. This isn't a situation we've been in at any point in this millennium. At no point is this a situation of us doing the same thing over and over and over again, and there's no logical way it can be deemed as such.

If we had been drafting Defensive ends, offensive tackle, wide receivers...or punters.....even if they were'nt the first DE, OT, WR or P drafted....I would still want first round production out of them.

Obviously we have not gotten that from our recent picks....regardless of position.

[The Gipper]

 

Agree...

 

There is a difference between THE top QB and a top QB...

So.....you agree that a 1st round pick shouldn't be expected to play like a first rounder. That its OK for them to just be throw away picks.

Because that is essentiallywhat we have had....first round throwaway picks. Weeden, Richardson, Mingo, Manziel, Gilbert.

Fucking throw away picks that I think should have been top notch players.

 

Sorry that I feel that way. I am a Browns fan and I expect our first round picks to play like that is what they are. I want them all to be Joe Thomas....or at least Joe Haden in terms of their production. I don't care if they are #1 overall or #32.

[hoorta]

I think anyone taken in the first round should be considered a "top QB".....at least they are expected to be that ultimately by the team that drafts them.

 

Well Gip probably the only quarterbacks that were considered "can't miss" since 1983 were Elway and Luck. In 1998, there was debate about Manning & Leaf as to who was the better prospect. The farther down in the first round a qb falls, the more question marks. Can't remember why I hated Quinn- but I did. Wee-done was old, JFF had off field concerns- BTW so did Dan Marino. They might be expected to be a "top QB" but any team drafting one in the first round knows history says 2 out of 3 first round quarterbacks are never going to live up to that expectation, as well as any other position player drafted in the first round.

 

So.....you agree that a 1st round pick shouldn't be expected to play like a first rounder. That its OK for them to just be throw away picks.

Because that is essentiallywhat we have had....first round throwaway picks. Weeden, Richardson, Mingo, Manziel, Gilbert.

Fucking throw away picks that I think should have been top notch players.

 

Sorry that I feel that way. I am a Browns fan and I expect our first round picks to play like that is what they are. I want them all to be Joe Thomas....or at least Joe Haden in terms of their production. I don't care if they are #1 overall or #32.

 

That's the Browns problem in a nutshell- far too many under performing, or non-performing first round picks. It doesn't get any better in the second round either. With guys like Greg "little production" Little, "Hardly played" Hardesty, & how's this for a second round trifecta? Mohamed Massive Drop, Brian Slowbiski, and David Veikune?

 

The first three rounds are considered your "premium" picks, and the Browns have failed miserably assessing talent there.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

 

 

 

But they shouldn't. Johnny, Quinn, Weeden - none of them were the "top" prospects in their respective classes. Each of them had their own legitimate concerns that knocked them down the draft board.

I don't care whether they were THE top prospect of their class. They were fucking First round draft picks. I expect ever first rounder the Browns ever take to be a long term starter...no matter the position...and possibly compete for the Pro Bowl.

 

This is the first time we've been in a position to take any QB we want in the draft whatsoever since Tim Couch. This isn't a situation we've been in at any point in this millennium. At no point is this a situation of us doing the same thing over and over and over again, and there's no logical way it can be deemed as such.

If we had been drafting Defensive ends, offensive tackle, wide receivers...or punters.....even if they were'nt the first DE, OT, WR or P drafted....I would still want first round production out of them.

Obviously we have not gotten that from our recent picks....regardless of position.

 

 

First round pick != top prospect...especially when you have the Browns picking. If I took Josh Cribbs in the first round, does that automatically make him a superstar stud of his position, despite the fact that analysts/scouts/etc. have him ranked as a UDFA?

 

Your frustration is well-founded in that we should be getting first round production from our first rounders. However, our past first round picks weren't considered first round talent, so getting upset at their lack of production is like pissing in the wind - it does nothing but make you more frustrated.

 

Which is why the argument that we're repeating past mistakes isn't necessarily valid. Both Goff and Wentz are consensus first round picks (despite your insistence otherwise). You'd be hard-pressed to find a recent (read: last three months) mock from any sort of respected analyst or scout that says otherwise.

 

This is a year where BPA very much aligns with the greatest need we have. Unlike previous years where we've taken BPA at non-QB positions (Gilbert, Erving, Shelton, Mingo, Richardson, Taylor, Mack, Thomas, Wimbley, Edwards, Winslow, Faine, Green, Warren, Brown) and tried to value our way into a QB later (Manziel, Quinn, Weeden, McCoy), two of the top seven prospects (according to CBS Sports) or top twelve prospects (according to NFL.com) are QB's.

 

This isn't like 2014, where Manziel was ranked as the 26th best prospect, or 2012 where Weeden was ranked 57th. We have an opportunity to take a QB who is ranked in the top ten of all of the prospects in this draft - why in the hell would we not take it?

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

So.....you agree that a 1st round pick shouldn't be expected to play like a first rounder. That its OK for them to just be throw away picks.

Because that is essentiallywhat we have had....first round throwaway picks. Weeden, Richardson, Mingo, Manziel, Gilbert.

Fucking throw away picks that I think should have been top notch players.

 

Sorry that I feel that way. I am a Browns fan and I expect our first round picks to play like that is what they are. I want them all to be Joe Thomas....or at least Joe Haden in terms of their production. I don't care if they are #1 overall or #32.

 

 

We've had far more non-QB first rounders underperform their draft position than QB's...

[The Gipper]

 

First round pick != top prospect...especially when you have the Browns picking. If I took Josh Cribbs in the first round, does that automatically make him a superstar stud of his position, despite the fact that analysts/scouts/etc. have him ranked as a UDFA?

 

Your frustration is well-founded in that we should be getting first round production from our first rounders. However, our past first round picks weren't considered first round talent, so getting upset at their lack of production is like pissing in the win - it does nothing but make you more frustrated.

Well of course it does. When large investment is made in bad players...you get frustrated.

 

Which is why the argument that we're repeating past mistakes isn't necessarily valid. Both Goff and Wentz are consensus first round picks (despite your insistence otherwise). You'd be hard-pressed to find a recent (read: last three months) mock from any sort of respected analyst or scout that says otherwise.

Well, maybe they will be as good as the guys that we have drafted in the 1, 2, 3 spots, you know....great players like Couch, Courtney Brown, Braylon, TR...err, wait.

 

This is a year where BPA very much aligns with the greatest need we have. Unlike previous years where we've taken BPA at non-QB positions (Gilbert, Erving, Shelton, Mingo, Richardson, Taylor, Mack, Thomas, Wimbley, Edwards, Winslow, Faine, Green, Warren, Brown) and tried to value our way into a QB later (Manziel, Quinn, Weeden, McCoy), two of the top seven prospects (according to CBS Sports) or top twelve prospects (according to NFL.com) are QB's.

I agree: BPA is a pass rusher. We need a pass rusher. We need a QB too. Maybe we can have 2 picks in the top 7.

 

This isn't like 2014, where Manziel was ranked as the 26th best prospect, or 2012 where Weeden was ranked 57th. We have an opportunity to take a QB who is ranked in the top ten of all of the prospects in this draft - why in the hell would we not take it?

Maybe we will....but they could be as good as Joey Harrington....or maybe they will actually, finally, be able to play this game a little.

The thing that bothers me: no one can make up their minds on which was is really "it". Makes me nervous.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

 

 

First round pick != top prospect...especially when you have the Browns picking. If I took Josh Cribbs in the first round, does that automatically make him a superstar stud of his position, despite the fact that analysts/scouts/etc. have him ranked as a UDFA?

 

Your frustration is well-founded in that we should be getting first round production from our first rounders. However, our past first round picks weren't considered first round talent, so getting upset at their lack of production is like pissing in the win - it does nothing but make you more frustrated.

Well of course it does. When large investment is made in bad players...you get frustrated.

 

Which is why the argument that we're repeating past mistakes isn't necessarily valid. Both Goff and Wentz are consensus first round picks (despite your insistence otherwise). You'd be hard-pressed to find a recent (read: last three months) mock from any sort of respected analyst or scout that says otherwise.

Well, maybe they will be as good as the guys that we have drafted in the 1, 2, 3 spots, you know....great players like Couch, Courtney Brown, Braylon, TR...err, wait.

 

This is a year where BPA very much aligns with the greatest need we have. Unlike previous years where we've taken BPA at non-QB positions (Gilbert, Erving, Shelton, Mingo, Richardson, Taylor, Mack, Thomas, Wimbley, Edwards, Winslow, Faine, Green, Warren, Brown) and tried to value our way into a QB later (Manziel, Quinn, Weeden, McCoy), two of the top seven prospects (according to CBS Sports) or top twelve prospects (according to NFL.com) are QB's.

I agree: BPA is a pass rusher. We need a pass rusher. We need a QB too. Maybe we can have 2 picks in the top 7.

 

This isn't like 2014, where Manziel was ranked as the 26th best prospect, or 2012 where Weeden was ranked 57th. We have an opportunity to take a QB who is ranked in the top ten of all of the prospects in this draft - why in the hell would we not take it?

Maybe we will....but they could be as good as Joey Harrington....or maybe they will actually, finally, be able to play this game a little.

The thing that bothers me: no one can make up their minds on which was is really "it". Makes me nervous.

 

 

BPA isn't a pass rusher, at least not Bosa, and at least not according to the aforementioned CBS and NFL rankings. It's an OT, or a FS, or a DE not named Bosa.

 

BPA aligned with need, however, points to a QB - since a franchise QB is the number one similarity between all Super Bowl winning teams over the last 15 years...not DE. Maybe these guys do turn out like Harrington, and maybe Bosa turns out like Gholston.

 

Odds are greater, however, that one (likely both) of these QB's ends up having a long and prosperous NFL career. Because, once again, these guys are legitimately ranked as top prospects, unlike any of the QB's we've taken.

 

Your argument as a whole doesn't make sense. You want us to take the BPA on the board instead of taking the top QB (really you just want us to take Bosa, you're just thinly veiling it behind a BPA argument) because our first round drafting has been so bad...yet you are completely disregarding the fact that we HAVE more often taken BPA over the last 15 years than we have drafted the top QB. Overall, it's not very logical.

[The Gipper]

 

 

We've had far more non-QB first rounders underperform their draft position than QB's...

QB is one of only 22 positions on the field. Lets look at that. Browns first rounders by position since 1999.:

 

QB: Couch, Quinn, Weeden, Manziel

 

DT: Shelton, Taylor, Warren

 

OL: Erving, Mack, Thomas, Faine

 

DB: Gilbert, Haden

 

OLB/DE: Mingo, Wimbley, Courtney Brown

 

RG: Richardson, Green

 

WR: Braylon...one good year, the rest far below expectation

 

TE: K2. Coulda/shoulda been a lot better..underperformed.

 

I have highlighted those whom I think did NOT underperform....in other words...at least halfway decent choices. Those in green are too green yet to tell.

So...out of 20 picks...4 became worthy of 1st round production. I think the first round hit rate average should be about 50%. We haven't come close to that.

[The Gipper]

 

BPA isn't a pass rusher, at least not Bosa, and at least not according to the aforementioned CBS and NFL rankings. It's an OT, or a FS, or a DE not named Bosa.

Bosa will become the best player out of the top of this draft.

 

BPA aligned with need, however, points to a QB - since a franchise QB is the number one similarity between all Super Bowl winning teams over the last 15 years...not DE. Maybe these guys do turn out like Harrington, and maybe Bosa turns out like Gholston.

QB may be our #1 need, sure. But, I would bet against the last half of your last sentence...but not against the first half.

 

Odds are greater, however, that one (likely both) of these QB's ends up having a long and prosperous NFL career. Because, once again, these guys are legitimately ranked as top prospects, unlike any of the QB's we've taken.

Where do you get these stupid odds? Historically you would be dead ass wrong.....I detailed it on here in a different post: TWO ThIrds of all first round QBs become busts...including all the very high picks. THAT is the historical fact that we have to go on. It is far more accurate to say historically that BOTH these QB will be busts than it is to say both will be greatly successful.

I hope they beat the odds...especially if the Browns choose one. But the odds are against them.

 

Your argument as a whole doesn't make sense. You want us to take the BPA on the board instead of taking the top QB (really you just want us to take Bosa, you're just thinly veiling it behind a BPA argument)

I want Bosa because I think he will become the best pro player of those high on the prospect list. And I think maybe he has a 50/50 chance of making it.

The others have about a one third chance.

 

because our first round drafting has been so bad...yet you are completely disregarding the fact that we HAVE more often taken BPA over the last 15 years than we have drafted the top QB. Overall, it's not very logical.

I haven't ignored it at all....I just detailed it on my last post.

Facts: The Browns have "hit" on only 20% of their first round picks. Fact: The Browns have drafted more QBs in the first round than any other single postiton....and have gone O'fer that position. Their hit rate is exactly -0-%.

Maybe they SHOULD draft the OT.....they are batting 100% there (Thomas). Or center. They have gotten two good players...and a green prospect.

[Mike H]

 

 

BPA isn't a pass rusher, at least not Bosa, and at least not according to the aforementioned CBS and NFL rankings. It's an OT, or a FS, or a DE not named Bosa.

Bosa will become the best player out of the top of this draft.

 

BPA aligned with need, however, points to a QB - since a franchise QB is the number one similarity between all Super Bowl winning teams over the last 15 years...not DE. Maybe these guys do turn out like Harrington, and maybe Bosa turns out like Gholston.

QB may be our #1 need, sure. But, I would bet against the last half of your last sentence...but not against the first half.

 

Odds are greater, however, that one (likely both) of these QB's ends up having a long and prosperous NFL career. Because, once again, these guys are legitimately ranked as top prospects, unlike any of the QB's we've taken.

Where do you get these stupid odds? Historically you would be dead ass wrong.....I detailed it on here in a different post: TWO ThIrds of all first round QBs become busts...including all the very high picks. THAT is the historical fact that we have to go on. It is far more accurate to say historically that BOTH these QB will be busts than it is to say both will be greatly successful.

I hope they beat the odds...especially if the Browns choose one. But the odds are against them.

 

Your argument as a whole doesn't make sense. You want us to take the BPA on the board instead of taking the top QB (really you just want us to take Bosa, you're just thinly veiling it behind a BPA argument)

I want Bosa because I think he will become the best pro player of those high on the prospect list. And I think maybe he has a 50/50 chance of making it.

The others have about a one third chance.

 

because our first round drafting has been so bad...yet you are completely disregarding the fact that we HAVE more often taken BPA over the last 15 years than we have drafted the top QB. Overall, it's not very logical.

I haven't ignored it at all....I just detailed it on my last post.

Facts: The Browns have "hit" on only 20% of their first round picks. Fact: The Browns have drafted more QBs in the first round than any other single postiton....and have gone O'fer that position. Their hit rate is exactly -0-%.

Maybe they SHOULD draft the OT.....they are batting 100% there (Thomas). Or center. They have gotten two good players...and a green prospect.

 

Ain't not nobody named not a one of us nobody darned one of us can say that for certainty until after the dang kids plays dah dang darn games

[calfoxwc]

Doing an analysis of the bad first round picks doesn't mean much - except that

the Browns fo and coaches drafted stupidly. There are guys who have elite physical

talent, but WHO are they on and off the field?

 

Do they love the game? Have the work ethic and desire to succeed?

 

That bit of criteria would pretty much have saved the Browns from a lot of drafting failures.

 

Some folks say they don't care about off the field, but with the qb who will remain nameless, and

the wr who can't stay on the field.... it matters a hell of a lot, especially when you draft in the first

couple of rounds.

[The Gipper]

Ain't not nobody named not a one of us nobody darned one of us can say that for certainty until after the dang kids plays dah dang darn games

That is completely true. Its just what I believe.

 

Your pithy arguments are not persuasive.

 

And the difference between us is that I admit that none of us know shit from shinola about this. You just delude yourself by thinking you do know shit from shinola.

Well at least you may know shit...that's for sure.

[The Gipper]

Doing an analysis of the bad first round picks doesn't mean much - except that

the Browns fo and coaches drafted stupidly. There are guys who have elite physical

talent, but WHO are they on and off the field?

Well, as opposed to not meaning much....that actually means quite a lot doesn't it? Perhaps you mean it means nothing toward analyzing what the Browns should do in this draft....then I would agree.

 

Do they love the game? Have the work ethic and desire to succeed?

 

That bit of criteria would pretty much have saved the Browns from a lot of drafting failures.

 

I don't know....if they had indices that these guys were fuckups or fuckoffs I don't think they would have drafted them. I think it is to some respect just dumbass bad luck.

 

Some folks say they don't care about off the field, but with the qb who will remain nameless, and

the wr who can't stay on the field.... it matters a hell of a lot, especially when you draft in the first

couple of rounds.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

 

 

BPA isn't a pass rusher, at least not Bosa, and at least not according to the aforementioned CBS and NFL rankings. It's an OT, or a FS, or a DE not named Bosa.

Bosa will become the best player out of the top of this draft.

 

BPA aligned with need, however, points to a QB - since a franchise QB is the number one similarity between all Super Bowl winning teams over the last 15 years...not DE. Maybe these guys do turn out like Harrington, and maybe Bosa turns out like Gholston.

QB may be our #1 need, sure. But, I would bet against the last half of your last sentence...but not against the first half.

 

Odds are greater, however, that one (likely both) of these QB's ends up having a long and prosperous NFL career. Because, once again, these guys are legitimately ranked as top prospects, unlike any of the QB's we've taken.

Where do you get these stupid odds? Historically you would be dead ass wrong.....I detailed it on here in a different post: TWO ThIrds of all first round QBs become busts...including all the very high picks. THAT is the historical fact that we have to go on. It is far more accurate to say historically that BOTH these QB will be busts than it is to say both will be greatly successful.

I hope they beat the odds...especially if the Browns choose one. But the odds are against them.

 

Your argument as a whole doesn't make sense. You want us to take the BPA on the board instead of taking the top QB (really you just want us to take Bosa, you're just thinly veiling it behind a BPA argument)

I want Bosa because I think he will become the best pro player of those high on the prospect list. And I think maybe he has a 50/50 chance of making it.

The others have about a one third chance.

 

because our first round drafting has been so bad...yet you are completely disregarding the fact that we HAVE more often taken BPA over the last 15 years than we have drafted the top QB. Overall, it's not very logical.

I haven't ignored it at all....I just detailed it on my last post.

Facts: The Browns have "hit" on only 20% of their first round picks. Fact: The Browns have drafted more QBs in the first round than any other single postiton....and have gone O'fer that position. Their hit rate is exactly -0-%.

Maybe they SHOULD draft the OT.....they are batting 100% there (Thomas). Or center. They have gotten two good players...and a green prospect.

 

 

If that's how we're going to do things...

 

Fact: The Browns have drafted the top ranked QB prospect exactly zero times since Tim Couch.

 

Fact: The Browns have had exactly zero "franchise" QBs over the same span.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson is largely considered a QB "guru".

 

Fact: The Browns are in position to draft the top QB in this draft.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson was at Jared Goff's Pro Day and Carson Wentz's Pro Day.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson did not attend Joey Bosa's Pro Day.

 

Opinion: Joey Bosa will have an average, to slightly above average NFL career, falling short of the career of one (if not both) of the top two QB prospects.

[hoorta]

That is completely true. Its just what I believe.

 

Your pithy arguments are not persuasive.

 

And the difference between us is that I admit that none of us know shit from shinola about this. You just delude yourself by thinking you do know shit from shinola.

Well at least you may know shit...that's for sure.

 

Hey, Bosa may be "Da Bomb" or just bomb like a couple other OSU college studs like the (previously mentioned) Vernon Gholston, or Dan "Big Dud-dy" Wilkinson. I freely admit I was dead wrong about Wilkinson- I saw the second coming of Bruce Smith there. Sooooooo..... we get it, you loves some Bosa. FWIW, I don't particularly.

[The Gipper]

 

If that's how we're going to do things...

 

Fact: The Browns have drafted the top ranked QB prospect exactly zero times since Tim Couch.

Who cares......if they take a QB 1st round....I want him to play like first rounders.

 

Fact: The Browns have had exactly zero "franchise" QBs over the same span.

Sure....their choices have all been busts.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson is largely considered a QB "guru".

OK, hope he lives up to that reputation.

 

Fact: The Browns are in position to draft the top QB in this draft.

They are in position to draft the #2 player in this draft....regardless of position.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson was at Jared Goff's Pro Day and Carson Wentz's Pro Day.

Sure....and a lot of other players.

 

Fact: Hue Jackson did not attend Joey Bosa's Pro Day.

Its called laying in the weeds.

 

Opinion: Joey Bosa will have an average, to slightly above average NFL career, falling short of the career of one (if not both) of the top two QB prospects.

Opinions are like assholes...and some come from the same location. We shall see in a few years. ( But, If the Browns do take the QB....I hope you are right.....even if Bosa is HOF I would hope the Browns QB is even better)

[The Gipper]

 

Hey, Bosa may be "Da Bomb" or just bomb like a couple other OSU college studs like the (previously mentioned) Vernon Gholston, or Dan "Big Dud-dy" Wilkinson. I freely admit I was dead wrong about Wilkinson- I saw the second coming of Bruce Smith there. Sooooooo..... we get it, you loves some Bosa. FWIW, I don't particularly.

Well, or, maybe Bosa will be the one to fulfill your Bruce Smith fantasy.

 

As for my fantasies?

[Mike H]

That is completely true. Its just what I believe.

 

Your pithy arguments are not persuasive.

 

And the difference between us is that I admit that none of us know shit from shinola about this. You just delude yourself by thinking you do know shit from shinola.

Well at least you may know shit...that's for sure.

 

I was kidding around you old bag. Don't be so butthurt and defensive.

 

And I know close to nothing, but you know nothing. I'm OK with that.

[The Gipper]

 

I know close to nothing. And you know nothing. I'm OK with that.

I may be a sidekick, but I am not a psychic.

[htownbrown]

I'll say right now, we could have been a winning team last season with McCown, if not for the complete break down of the rest of the team. QB wasn't the issue, but it's the first thing we want to address? That's the pill that won't go down easy for me. So in my mind at least, after day 1 of the draft we will be no better as a team then we already were if we draft a Qb. We will be younger there, but not better. 300+ yards passing isn't enough to win games with this roster obviously.

[Canton Dawg]

Doing an analysis of the bad first round picks doesn't mean much - except that the Browns fo and coaches drafted stupidly.

Yep, kinda like a road map of where we've been. It also shows the root cause of why the Browns have sucked so bad since '99.

[Tour2ma]

So.....you agree that a 1st round pick shouldn't be expected to play like a first rounder. That its OK for them to just be throw away picks.

Because that is essentiallywhat we have had....first round throwaway picks. Weeden, Richardson, Mingo, Manziel, Gilbert.

Fucking throw away picks that I think should have been top notch players.

 

Sorry that I feel that way. I am a Browns fan and I expect our first round picks to play like that is what they are. I want them all to be Joe Thomas....or at least Joe Haden in terms of their production. I don't care if they are #1 overall or #32.

 

First, do you actually stomp your feet when you make your little nonsensically unresponsive posts or is that just what i imagine when I read them?

 

Second, do you honestly believe that all first rounders are created equal? All 32 of them?

[hoorta]

I'll say right now, we could have been a winning team last season with McCown, if not for the complete break down of the rest of the team. QB wasn't the issue, but it's the first thing we want to address? That's the pill that won't go down easy for me. So in my mind at least, after day 1 of the draft we will be no better as a team then we already were if we draft a Qb. We will be younger there, but not better. 300+ yards passing isn't enough to win games with this roster obviously.

 

OK, finally get where you're coming from. I respectfully disagree. I'm looking beyond day 1 in the draft. We need a RT to replace Schwartz, should be one there. Hope and pray Erving does better at center than he did at guard. The X factor to improve is Josh Gordon. The silence is deafening there. The way I read the reinstatement policy-

 

"1. Within 45 days of receipt of the application, the player will be interviewed by the Medical Director and the Medical Advisor, who will make a recommendation to the Commissioner.

2. Gordon will provide access to information about his substance abuse history, including but not limited to attendance at counseling sessions (individual, group and family); attendance at 12-step and other self-help group meetings; periodic progress reports; and all diagnostic findings and treatment recommendations.

3. He'll submit to urine testing by the NFL at a frequency determined by the Medical Advisor.

4. He'll agree in a meeting with the Commissioner or his representative(s) to comply with the conditions imposed by the Commissioner for his reinstatement to the status of an active player.

5. All individuals involved in the process will take steps to enable the Commissioner to render a decision within 60 days of the receipt of the application."

 

YO, Comish- time is almost up, we should hear something by April 3rd at the latest. (60 days from February 3rd, the date he was banned last year)