Beware The Next Jeff George & David Carr Greatest Workouts Ever Types Today.

[Canton Dawg]

The definition of "franchise QB" is subjective, so here's the guys I consider franchise.

 

Franchise QB's NOT taken in the first round (pretty short list):

 

Brady 6th round

Brees 2nd round

Wilson 3rd round

 

Franchise QB's that were first rounders:

 

Luck

Newton

Ryan

Flacco

Rodgers

Manning

Rivers

Roethlesberger

 

I don't consider guys like Smith, Cutler, Palmer, Bradford, or Stafford (all first round picks) as "franchise" due to lack of post season success.

 

I also don't consider guys like Mariota, Winston (both first rounders) Prescott, or Carr as franchise due to not enough data. However, I would say Prescott and Carr look very good during their short tenure in the league.

[Tour2ma]

Luck ---- #1 overall

Newton- #1

Ryan---- #3

Flacco-- #18

Rodgers-#24

Manning-#1

Rivers----# 4

Roethlesberger- #11

 

So your list had three, untouchable, #1 overall picks. Every other pick, five in total, was within reasonable reach of a "6-win" team... although for some we'd have to reach/trade down.

 

And for the record your "not-franchise" list, Smith, Cutler, Palmer, Bradford, or Stafford, included four, overall #1's and an 11.

[The Gipper]

While we want to see some accuracy and arm strength out there today - let's try to keep it all in perspective. That is there is no pass rush changing time to throw, releases and mechanics as ALL QBs coming to our T-shirt tradition have painfully experienced. There's also no DCs confusing the crap out of young WRs and QB tandems trying to be on the same page in adjustment to either a zone blitz or a brilliant disguise of one. There will be NO corners today to press a WR or challenge the QB to fit a tight window.

 

In essence, the combines as well as the scripted workouts (that often hide weaknesses) have often created a lot of false positives and fast risers over the years. In fact, the Combines took a guy like Tom Brady and buried him all the way down the pecking order to late round 6 not too long after a very impressive Bowl Game performance where erased a big deficit to win. Even Bill Walsh got confused and took a QB Gino Carmozzi from Hofstra instead of Brady so even Paul Brown's best pupil got confused by workouts. After not suiting up for about 90% of NE's games as a rookie - BB told Brady he needed to get stronger in the weight room if he wanted to make it in this league. Just 1 year later, he won his 1st of 5 Superbowl Championships. On the other hand, the combines made Jay Cutler a very overpaid QB that wins even less frequently than he did for a Bowl-less Vandy team.

 

 

I think it is a Captain Obvious statement that you don't pick a QB based on combine workouts.

[The Gipper]

 

Not disagreeing with your opinion. You've seen way more of Garrett than I have. One of the last JM survivors. If we draft Garrett I won't be disappointed (well, OK maybe a little). Yup, I've seen enough of Myles to believe he's the real deal. Potential Lawrence Taylor type.

 

Here's the funny thing Ag. The shoe is sort of on the other foot now. I was deadly cold blooded evaluating Manziel. Don't think you were on the Board pre draft, but I was the leader in the clubhouse in anti-Manziel rants. I could have puked when we drafted him. Every one of my fears about the guy came true, in spades. So now you're the one that's being objective about Mitch, and me and Gip are seeing things through the eyes of a Cleveland fan. Yeah- it's been 13 games, but I've seen everything I want to see out of a potential franchise qb. Accuracy, quick release, decent arm, good mobility, good pocket presence.

 

He goes to the Browns the hopes are going to be it's the second coming of that other hometown guy Bernie Kosar. (Yeah mom is worried about the pressure he'll be under) We love our local guys to make good. I can tell you this- if Trubisky wins a SB for the Browns, they'd take down the 80' poster of LeBron and put Mitch up there instead. He wins a couple, and they'll put his statue outside the stadium right next to Jim Brown's in 20 years.

The problem I have with Garrett is that of his like 32 career sacks, over half of them came against the like of cupcakes like Lamar, Rice, Northernwesternsoutherneastern Louisiana, McNeese State etc. When it came to playing Alabama....he was a ghost.

[The Gipper]

 

 

And Ill take it one further....

 

In addition to the 10 out of the last 20 drafts that did NOT produce a 1st round franchise QB....lets look at a few years that did...

 

2012 produced Luck.....but someone else drafted RG iii at #2...

 

2011 is the most comical mess Ive ever seen....Jake Locker at #8....Blaine Gabbert at #10.....Christian Ponder at #12

 

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha.....cant stop laughing long enough to list the rest....but it goes on and on and on.....

On the other hand of course you can get a year like 2004 where you may have 3 HOF QBs come out of that class.

You just never know with QBs.

And I am of the opinion that if you don't take a risk...you will get no reward.

[The Gipper]

 

So your list had three, untouchable, #1 overall picks. Every other pick, five in total, was within reasonable reach of a "6-win" team... although for some we'd have to reach/trade down.

 

And for the record your "not-franchise" list, Smith, Cutler, Palmer, Bradford, or Stafford, included four, overall #1's and an 11.

Taking a QB anywhere anytime is a risk. Probably far more risky taking one later than earlier. Of course, the same can be said of any position...not just QBs. As Bad as the Browns track record has been at taking QBs...it is hardly any better taking players at any other position.

Are Quinn/Weeden/JMZ any bigger busts for the Browns than Gilbert, Mingo, Erving etc.? Difficult to quantify. It is just the importance of the QB position that makes it seem the QB picks have been more of a disaster.

[Flugel]

I think it is a Captain Obvious statement that you don't pick a QB based on combine workouts.

 

Or, we could just remember the title of this thread I selected. I was just saying I didn't see the weak arm from Watson I read so much about from 1 guy in Camp Trubisky.

[TexasAg1969]

The problem I have with Garrett is that of his like 32 career sacks, over half of them came against the like of cupcakes like Lamar, Rice, Northernwesternsoutherneastern Louisiana, McNeese State etc. When it came to playing Alabama....he was a ghost.

 

Give some credit to the SEC teams whose offensive game plans were set up to either stay away from him or double/triple team him. The injury from Ark. on made it easier to do this year. Add to that some of the worst LBs in the SEC backing him up. See any of them on anyone's radar? Nope.

[calfoxwc]

I watched these two youtubes this morning - for what it's worth... Voch Lombardi seems to know a lot....

 

https://youtu.be/f7oqWHirNQ0

https://youtu.be/gwONkFHias8

 

That's on Watson, and Trubisky. One the the glaring things on Watson, is that he reads only half the field, as

Voch mentions....Trubisky certainly looks like he can be a terrific pocket passer... but I would want to

give up our 33 for Garappollo. That would give the stupid pats two picks in a row at the bottom of the round.

But give up our 12??? No way in hell.

 

I don't know. I don't see the Browns passing on Garrett - he's elite good. Maybe the Browns say "we can rush the passer

here, but we can't stop the pass".... and trade down with Chicago or something.

[The Gipper]

 

Give some credit to the SEC teams whose offensive game plans were set up to either stay away from him or double/triple team him. The injury from Ark. on made it easier to do this year. Add to that some of the worst LBs in the SEC backing him up. See any of them on anyone's radar? Nope.

I don't know about the rest of the a/m Lbs. I only know that to be highly touted, you should be doing top performances against top competition.

And here, it seems that is not the case. He was handled by the "nearest to NFL quality" teams of the SEC....just not so much by the little sisters of the poor. And despite some teams seeming like it....there are no little sisters of the poor playing in the NFL.

[hoorta]

 

Or, we could just remember the title of this thread I selected. I was just saying I didn't see the weak arm from Watson I read so much about from 1 guy in Camp Trubisky.

Weak? No, inaccurate? Maybe. Did look OK at the combine, but then again R Glass impressed Hue under similar circumstances.

[TexasAg1969]

I don't know about the rest of the a/m Lbs. I only know that to be highly touted, you should be doing top performances against top competition.

And here, it seems that is not the case. He was handled by the "nearest to NFL quality" teams of the SEC....just not so much by the little sisters of the poor. And despite some teams seeming like it....there are no little sisters of the poor playing in the NFL.

 

He's gonna have the best OT in the business teaching him how to get by all the little sisters of the poor in the NFL. If Garrett arrives along with 2-3 more top D players, the Browns will be fun to watch again. Far better than watching them carting off yet another QB who has no D to back him up when games start to go south.

[wargograw]

No quality LBs by your own admission in year 5 and you still like Summy, Ag? Come on man.

[The Gipper]

 

He's gonna have the best OT in the business teaching him how to get by all the little sisters of the poor in the NFL. If Garrett arrives along with 2-3 more top D players, the Browns will be fun to watch again. Far better than watching them carting off yet another QB who has no D to back him up when games start to go south.

Just because we don't take Garrett does not mean that the Browns would not have a D.

As I said, I have been equally impressed by Derek Barnett who had 52 tackles for loss and 32 sacks....both of which are more than Garrett over the same period and against the same SEC competition. In fact, he led the SEC in both categories...not Garrett.

I don't know specifically how they break down, i.e. did he, like Garrett get most of his sacks etc. vs. the multiple cupcakes that SEC invariably schedule, or were they against the more stiff competition.

[TexasAg1969]

Just because we don't take Garrett does not mean that the Browns would not have a D.

As I said, I have been equally impressed by Derek Barnett who had 52 tackles for loss and 32 sacks....both of which are more than Garrett over the same period and against the same SEC competition. In fact, he led the SEC in both categories...not Garrett.

I don't know specifically how they break down, i.e. did he, like Garrett get most of his sacks etc. vs. the multiple cupcakes that SEC invariably schedule, or were they against the more stiff competition.

 

Don't know the answer on Barnett either, but they do play in the SEC East, not the much stronger West. I do know that Bama put up 49 on 'em though. A&M put up 45. Those were the only two from SEC West they played. Stats can sometimes deceive. Point is that it was not the same SEC competition.

 

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-16/2016-tennessee-volunteers-football-schedule.php

[The Gipper]

 

Don't know the answer on Barnett either, but they do play in the SEC East, not the much stronger West. I do know that Bama put up 49 on 'em though. A&M put up 45. Those were the only two from SEC West they played. Stats can sometimes deceive. Point is that it was not the same SEC competition.

 

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-16/2016-tennessee-volunteers-football-schedule.php

Well, of course, you can't expect him to be a one man team. And while the SEC east MAY be (or maybe not) the weaker of the two divisions....it is not as weak as the Lamar's Rice, Mcneese's where Garrett made his hay.

[wargograw]

There is no maybe. When it comes to OT play in the last three years, it is absolutely the weaker of the divisions. The comparison is not between the East and the cupcakes, it's between the East and the West.

[RoyceRolls]

This is basically a political discussion at this point. it's all ego and emotion parading around as logic. The truth is that Gipper read an article saying Trubisky was good several months ago and he jumped on board, now anything that goes against that emotional investment must be attacked in order to preserve the core belief. Its the same as when all the democrats who so strongly opposed the war fell silent once Obama took office even though he dropped more bombs on more countries than George Bush. Just the same as when the republicans so concerned about authoritarianism and "king Obama" said jack shit once Trump went on an executive order spree. Gipper has already staked his ground that Trubisky should be selected #1. Everyone on planet earth saying Garrett is the obvious choice is an affront to his ego, his overinflated, bitten by a radioactive Axl Rose ego. Just your run of the mill, garden variety cognitive dissonance.

[hoorta]

This is basically a political discussion at this point. it's all ego and emotion parading around as logic. The truth is that Gipper read an article saying Trubisky was good several months ago and he jumped on board, now anything that goes against that emotional investment must be attacked in order to preserve the core belief. Its the same as when all the democrats who so strongly opposed the war fell silent once Obama took office even though he dropped more bombs on more countries than George Bush. Just the same as when the republicans so concerned about authoritarianism and "king Obama" said jack shit once Trump went on an executive order spree. Gipper has already staked his ground that Trubisky should be selected #1. Everyone on planet earth saying Garrett is the obvious choice is an affront to his ego, his overinflated, bitten by a radioactive Axl Rose ego. Just your run of the mill, garden variety cognitive dissonance.

 

I've even backed off Mitch @ #1 overall- though there's still a 1% chance it could happen.

 

I will be pissed beyond belief if Trubisky winds up being a franchise qb for another team. Going back to another era- if I had to pick and choose, I'd still draft Joe Montana over Lawrence Taylor.

[wargograw]

This is basically a political discussion at this point. it's all ego and emotion parading around as logic. The truth is that Gipper read an article saying Trubisky was good several months ago and he jumped on board, now anything that goes against that emotional investment must be attacked in order to preserve the core belief. Its the same as when all the democrats who so strongly opposed the war fell silent once Obama took office even though he dropped more bombs on more countries than George Bush. Just the same as when the republicans so concerned about authoritarianism and "king Obama" said jack shit once Trump went on an executive order spree. Gipper has already staked his ground that Trubisky should be selected #1. Everyone on planet earth saying Garrett is the obvious choice is an affront to his ego, his overinflated, bitten by a radioactive Axl Rose ego. Just your run of the mill, garden variety cognitive dissonance.

Phenomenal summary.

[TexasAg1969]

RR has bugged Gipper's office-sad, very sad.

[Flugel]

 

I've even backed off Mitch @ #1 overall- though there's still a 1% chance it could happen.

 

I will be pissed beyond belief if Trubisky winds up being a franchise qb for another team. Going back to another era- if I had to pick and choose, I'd still draft Joe Montana over Lawrence Taylor.

 

Interesting considering Joe Montana was drafted in the 3rd round in 1979 while Lawrence Taylor was drafted #2 overall in 1981; but we'll pretend you were calling it ahead way back then. Now factor in how similar Montana's college stats, accuracy and arm strength was to that of Watson (with slight edges to Watson most likely due to era). The biggest difference is skin color so you've already gone on record repeatedly that Watson can only be RG4 or the next R Glass.

 

You haven't backed off at all - you're full court pressing anyone that doesn't like Trubisky the best in this QB class or want him in round 1. You told Zombo about his guy. You're arguing with Tour, me and many others. Nobody has been allowed to type a weakness yet without facing you in your Lancelot armor for the kid - so keep thinking he's Peyton Manning in spite of only watching him twice.

 

I'd like us to draft Garrett at #1, OJ Howard at #12 and a QB somewhere after in the round his talent belongs in. We've already reached on Quinn, Weeden and Manziel in round 1 so guess what hasn't been the answer? Reaching on the wrong guys. 2 of those times better QBs were found in a later round like Derek Carr and Russell Wilson. Guys like Montana and Brady were also found well after round 1 so this has been going on for a long time now. Kurt Warner wasn't even drafted while guys like Warren Moon, Joe Theisman and Jeff Garcia had to start out in the CFL before NFL playoffs and Pro Bowls.

[The Gipper]

This is basically a political discussion at this point. it's all ego and emotion parading around as logic. The truth is that Gipper read an article saying Trubisky was good several months ago and he jumped on board, now anything that goes against that emotional investment must be attacked in order to preserve the core belief. Its the same as when all the democrats who so strongly opposed the war fell silent once Obama took office even though he dropped more bombs on more countries than George Bush. Just the same as when the republicans so concerned about authoritarianism and "king Obama" said jack shit once Trump went on an executive order spree. Gipper has already staked his ground that Trubisky should be selected #1. Everyone on planet earth saying Garrett is the obvious choice is an affront to his ego, his overinflated, bitten by a radioactive Axl Rose ego. Just your run of the mill, garden variety cognitive dissonance.

It is merely a matter of recognition of talent and potential. He has Aaron Rodgers like potential. I have seen in every film I have seen of him. Nothing to do with cognitive dissonance.

People who rate him down have one issue basically: inexperience.

People who don't see his talent are themselves "staking" out their position. They feel it is an affront to their egos that someone may question their annointed one at the top spot.

 

My position is simple, logical, accurate: The Browns #1 need priority IS a QB. We have someone available with what I believe is incredible potential....more so than his competitors. DE is NOT a primary priority for this team.....we just invested our 2d and 3rd round picks last year on DEs.

So...I am going by what our absolute priority need is...I am going based on what talent we already have on this team, and I am going based on potential.

I have never said that Garrett may not be a good choice. But I have countered the fagginess toward him that goes on around here. And, I have pointed out that perhaps the love affair with him may not necessarily be all that warranted based on his actual performance on the field..in comparison even to someone else in his own conference who had better production at the same position.

So...go on, take Garrett. Maybe he will help this team go from 1-15 to 2-14.

I want a franchise QB. I see no other option...not with what is on this team, not with what is available in trade/Free Agency. Nor what is available in the draft. Watson would be perhaps a #2 choice...but not as good as the #1 choice.

Logical, accurate.

[The Gipper]

Phenomenal summary.

So sayeth Gayrett Fag #1

[The Gipper]

RR has bugged Gipper's office-sad, very sad.

So sayeth Gayrett Fag #2.

 

Now...tell me...who is it that has the emotional investment?

I am not a Mentor HS fan...not like Stan. (If he had gone to Norton/Wadsworth/Barberton/St.V.St.M...that may be different)

I am not a North Carolina fan...

I am not saying this because the guy came from Northeast Ohio. Charlie Frye is from NEO, Brian Hoyer from NEO. Brady Quinn from O-H_I-O. I wasn't of the belief that any of them were a franchise like talent.

I am certainly no Texas A&M fag like Fag #1 and Fag #2. That clouds their vision far far far more than the fact that both I and this prospect come from the same Metropolitan region.

If he were a Zip or a Buckeye...I may have had some skewed vision...but he didn't. I didn't even advocate for the Zip (Frye) that much...or the Buckeyes...(like Cardale/Barrett etc)

I am simply going based on talent/potential.

And it is people with THEIR personal agendas that take affront.

I mean...do they not want this team to have a good QB?

[TexasAg1969]

So sayeth Gayrett Fag #2.

 

Now...tell me...who is it that has the emotional investment?

I am not a Mentor HS fan...not like Stan. (If he had gone to Norton/Wadsworth/Barberton/St.V.St.M...that may be different)

I am not a North Carolina fan...

I am not saying this because the guy came from Northeast Ohio. Charlie Frye is from NEO, Brian Hoyer from NEO. Brady Quinn from O-H_I-O. I wasn't of the belief that any of them were a franchise like talent.

I am certainly no Texas A&M fag like Fag #1 and Fag #2. That clouds their vision far far far more than the fact that both I and this prospect come from the same Metropolitan region.

If he were a Zip or a Buckeye...I may have had some skewed vision...but he didn't. I didn't even advocate for the Zip (Frye) that much...or the Buckeyes...(like Cardale/Barrett etc)

I am simply going based on talent/potential.

And it is people with THEIR personal agendas that take affront.

I mean...do they not want this team to have a good QB?

 

Too serious Gip-read it again in Donald Trump land.

[The Gipper]

 

Too serious Gip-read it again in Donald Trump land.

Please...you wouldn't wish that on our worst enemy, would you?

 

And I don't mean to affront you....I just mean to disagree with you on whom I believe the Browns should draft.

If you are affronted...well, that is a ticket that you bought for yourself.

[Tour2ma]

This is basically a political discussion at this point. it's all ego and emotion parading around as logic. The truth is that Gipper read an article saying Trubisky was good several months ago and he jumped on board, now anything that goes against that emotional investment must be attacked in order to preserve the core belief. Its the same as when all the democrats who so strongly opposed the war fell silent once Obama took office even though he dropped more bombs on more countries than George Bush. Just the same as when the republicans so concerned about authoritarianism and "king Obama" said jack shit once Trump went on an executive order spree. Gipper has already staked his ground that Trubisky should be selected #1. Everyone on planet earth saying Garrett is the obvious choice is an affront to his ego, his overinflated, bitten by a radioactive Axl Rose ego. Just your run of the mill, garden variety cognitive dissonance.

 

Felt like I was stumbling through a maze until at last I burst through the exit, into the sunshine and the audible-embrace of Sweet Child o' Mine.

[hoorta]

 

You haven't backed off at all - you're full court pressing anyone that doesn't like Trubisky the best in this QB class or want him in round 1. You told Zombo about his guy. You're arguing with Tour, me and many others. Nobody has been allowed to type a weakness yet without facing you in your Lancelot armor for the kid - so keep thinking he's Peyton Manning in spite of only watching him twice.

 

I'd like us to draft Garrett at #1, OJ Howard at #12 and a QB somewhere after in the round his talent belongs in. We've already reached on Quinn, Weeden and Manziel in round 1 so guess what hasn't been the answer? Reaching on the wrong guys. 2 of those times better QBs were found in a later round like Derek Carr and Russell Wilson. Guys like Montana and Brady were also found well after round 1 so this has been going on for a long time now. Kurt Warner wasn't even drafted while guys like Warren Moon, Joe Theisman and Jeff Garcia had to start out in the CFL before NFL playoffs and Pro Bowls.

 

My, my- getting touchy aren't you? Like I'm the only guy who doesn't like Kizer- (who Tour doesn't care for him either) or Watson? You starting a vendetta with me or something? As far as weaknesses? And Garett doesn't have any either, I suppose. I commended the link that pointed out Trub's weaknesses FYI. What part of my statement "there's around a 1% chance of drafting Trubisky @ #1" you having trouble with? Obviously, I like Mitch's chances of succeeding- but I'd appreciate it if you'd respect my opinion to say so. No need to get all pissy about me bringing up some history. If you ask a random group of fans- who turned out to have more success in the NFL? I'd bet 80% of them would say Montana. Even Hue is giving credence to all things being equal- qb trumps pass rusher. Sorry if you don't get it yet- WHAT I'M SAYING IS AFTER THE COMBINE- IT'S NOT EQUAL ANYMORE. Not just on talent level, but body of college work- Garrett checks off way more boxes than Mitch. Don't forget the NFL put a first round grade on Trubisky- not me. So if he's not worthy of the #1 overall- I'm OK with that now. Me and Gipper have a couple bets he's not going to be there @ #12. Happy now?

 

Bringing up qbs that have been drafted in later rounds not second- there's a few gems there besides Carr. Dalton, Brees, and Esaison. The exceptions don't prove the rule Tom- the later you draft a qb, the poorer the odds he's going to be a top qb. Yeah they're not exactly great in the first round either, but they're a damnsite better than taking flyers in the sixth like Spergon Wynn. The stats that bear that out have been posted here plenty of times. For every Brady, there's probably 20 qbs taken in that round you've never heard of, because they were out of the league after a year or two. How many times have we gotten skunked taking factory second qbs @ #22, not to mention Frye and McCoy in the third? Or perhaps I should put the shoe on the other foot, and go on a continuous rant that taking a certain TE from Alabama at #12 is just as stupid an idea, when there's far more pressing needs at CB, safety, and DUH! quarterback.

[TexasAg1969]

Please...you wouldn't wish that on our worst enemy, would you?

 

And I don't mean to affront you....I just mean to disagree with you on whom I believe the Browns should draft.

If you are affronted...well, that is a ticket that you bought for yourself.

 

If I were that easily affronted, I'd a left a longtime ago.

 

I wouldn't wish that clearly disturbed individual on anyone and I suspect even fellow party members are quaking in their boots about what may happen on any given day the next 4 years.

 

But I do kind of like using his disturbed voice with comments. I know...............sad, very sad.