Let's Revisit When The Giants 'sold The Farm' For Eli Manning
-
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
Endymion said:
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
Yes, we need a franchise qb. But not at the price of totally destroying our ability to draft players now & in the future. Both our first rounders, the high fourth, and next years second is as high as I rationally go (maybe a low 2013 pick if it gets really dicey). If the Redskins go first, second, third this year, first next year and start throwing in players like Orakpo, I say take him, too much.
It's not like there won't be any franchise qbs next year to pick from. Hell, we might well say screw it, draft Tannehill, and take Floyd. That costs us nothing in picks.
-
To hell with Jack DelRio and the refs of the Seattle game.
-
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
Endymion said:
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
On another thread we have a debate about who may have actually been the better QB: Terry Bradshaw or Archie Manning. and while nothing is settled it is entirely possible that Archie Manning could have been the better QB....but with a completely crap team around him that got them nowhere, while the guy with the much better team around him became a Hall of Famer.
What we want to avoid is to have an Archie Manning clone on our hands....a guy that played 10-12 years for a team that could never win because it could never find complimentary talent. I will take the team with the 10 Hall of Famers on it over the team with one potential HOF QB and absolutely nothing else. Giving up everything we have for one guy does may solve one problem, and create 10 more.
-
2003 Giants: 4-12 record, 30th out of 32 in offense, 29th out of 32 in defense
Kerry Collins - 3110 yards 58% 13 TDs 16 INTs
During the 2004 Draft, Giants trade two #1 picks + 3rd +5th + rights to Philip Riversto the Chargers for Eli Manning
Now, did the Giants fanbase sit there and make excuses for losing by saying "We're 30th in the league in offense, what's Manning going to do to change that?"
No, of course not. But then again, the Giants fanbase is accustomed to winning championships and they knew Kerry Collins wasn't going to be that player for them anymore.
So in addition to trading for Manning in 2004, the Giants brought in Kurt Warner to hold the fort at QB for a year.
In 2005, they signed Plaxico Burress and by the end of the season, the Giants were 3rd in offense and Manning is throwing for 4000 yards a year.
Now you may say Kerry was old but the guy had an established track record 50 miles longer than Colt McCoy. Giants made a transcending front office decision and they are reaping the rewards still today.
Continue to make excuses all you want but with no quarterback, the team has no vision or guidance or identity!!
2003 Giants: 4-12 record, 30th out of 32 in offense, 29th out of 32 in defense
Kerry Collins - 3110 yards 58% 13 TDs 16 INTs
During the 2004 Draft, Giants trade two #1 picks + 3rd +5th + rights to Philip Riversto the Chargers for Eli Manning
Now, did the Giants fanbase sit there and make excuses for losing by saying "We're 30th in the league in offense, what's Manning going to do to change that?"
No, of course not. But then again, the Giants fanbase is accustomed to winning championships and they knew Kerry Collins wasn't going to be that player for them anymore.
So in addition to trading for Manning in 2004, the Giants brought in Kurt Warner to hold the fort at QB for a year.
In 2005, they signed Plaxico Burress and by the end of the season, the Giants were 3rd in offense and Manning is throwing for 4000 yards a year.
Now you may say Kerry was old but the guy had an established track record 50 miles longer than Colt McCoy. Giants made a transcending front office decision and they are reaping the rewards still today.
Continue to make excuses all you want but with no quarterback, the team has no vision or guidance or identity!!
I believe it was 2 first rounders including the rights to Philip Rivers (the #4 pick in the draft) and a 3rd and 5th rounder..
If thats all St. Louis wants, I dont think that is too too over the top. But the Giants were trading from 4 to 1 for the best (not second best QB) Qb in the draft.. But 3 1st rounders is absurd for RGIII imo...
-
Of course the unknown isn't a certainty until it becomes a known.
What's new?
And your definition of a rational offer for RGIII may be different than the next person's, but ultimately, OT comes down to how much you believe in a certain player.
This is where having balls to have a vision as a front office. I see what they're trying to do on defense. I see the unit coming together nicely.
But what about the quarterback?
The team is lost offensively because they have no general. Browns are in a position to trade for a game changing talent. They can have him if they are willing to have balls as a FO to seal the deal. Outside a Ditka-like trade, Griffin should be a Brown. The pick is available. The Browns are in the best draft slot to get him and have extra picks to leverage the deal through.
Again, the Redskins can pony up some crazy offer that will force the Browns to wave the white flag, but 2012 #6, #38, #70, 2013 1st is not it. If we lose out on RGIII, would have to see the Redskins give up #1 picks in 2012, 2013, 2014 + filler to believe the Browns did everything they could to get him.
But what about the quarterback?
The team is lost offensively because they have no general. Browns are in a position to trade for a game changing talent. They can have him if they are willing to have balls as a FO to seal the deal. Outside a Ditka-like trade, Griffin should be a Brown. The pick is available. The Browns are in the best draft slot to get him and have extra picks to leverage the deal through.
Again, the Redskins can pony up some crazy offer that will force the Browns to wave the white flag, but 2012 #6, #38, #70, 2013 1st is not it. If we lose out on RGIII, would have to see the Redskins give up #1 picks in 2012, 2013, 2014 + filler to believe the Browns did everything they could to get him.
The red\bold is exactly what I'm saying RG. It could well escalate into a Ditka\Ricky Williams scenario. Good Lord man- we're talking about moving up TWO spots! What does that cost us? Blackmon or Floyd (wr solved), maybe Mike Adams (RT solved), Chase Minnifield (CB solved), and God knows what else in 2013. Like there will never ever be another Dan Marino or Drew Brees sitting at the bottom or round 1? Don't fall in love with one guy! The Browns sure haven't- they already know what they're willing to give up- and you or me can't do a damn thing about it.
-
3 potential starters > 1 potential starter
3 potential starters <<< 1 potential franchise QB.
3 potential starters <<< 1 potential franchise QB.
So, if last years draft we picked Cam Newton for a franchise QB (which alot of guys compare RG3 to around here) would you rather have JUST cam newton, or phil taylor, jaball sheard, and Joe haden?
May not be the best example but I'd rather have a GROUP of potential first/second round starters than just ONE potential, and I use that word with emphasis, POTENTIAL franchise QB.
-
the why not capitalize POTENTIAL before "first/second round starters" as well?
it certainly wasn't the best example. we took taylor, sheard, haden, ward, little, hardesty (all in 2nd round or above) and we lost more games than the year before (or, well...tied).
carolina went from 1-15 to 6-10. you tell me which one was the improvement? does this not help support the point that unless the player who touches the ball the most is really damn good, your team will not win?
it may only be one player...but that one player has more impact on the game than the perimeter positions/trench players who rely on him to lead. a group of people with no leader is a mob...one with a leader is an army.
-
the why not capitalize POTENTIAL before "first/second round starters" as well?
it certainly wasn't the best example. we took taylor, sheard, haden, ward, little, hardesty (all in 2nd round or above) and we lost more games than the year before (or, well...tied).
carolina went from 1-15 to 6-10. you tell me which one was the improvement? does this not help support the point that unless the player who touches the ball the most is really damn good, your team will not win?
it may only be one player...but that one player has more impact on the game than the perimeter positions/trench players who rely on him to lead. a group of people with no leader is a mob...one with a leader is an army.
the why not capitalize POTENTIAL before "first/second round starters" as well?
it certainly wasn't the best example. we took taylor, sheard, haden, ward, little, hardesty (all in 2nd round or above) and we lost more games than the year before (or, well...tied).
carolina went from 1-15 to 6-10. you tell me which one was the improvement? does this not help support the point that unless the player who touches the ball the most is really damn good, your team will not win?
it may only be one player...but that one player has more impact on the game than the perimeter positions/trench players who rely on him to lead. a group of people with no leader is a mob...one with a leader is an army.
Carolina didnt switch offenses!
they had a system in place, but with Clausen, who is worse than McCoy and even DA and BQ.
and I mean you have a better chance getting POTENTIAL starters when you draft 5-6 of them, not just one already determined franchise QB you gave up all your picks for.
the browns could've easily been 8-8 9-7 this year, without an idiot head coach, a young all around team thats still learning, ridiculous ways of losing the games (defense slip up against CIN, botched snap against STL, overtime at ARI, BOTH games agaisnt the steelers were close) and look at the talent we had on the team. TERRIBLE offense, mediocre defense.
The Browns simply played like the Browns this year.they should've won games that they didn't, due to rookie mistakes, rookie coaching, and most definetly a rookie offense.
Don't listen to Ghoolie's rants about the team being absolutely terrible, they are certainly not. "oh but they were 4-12 again!!!! ahhhh burn it down!!! anarchy anarchy!"
We are fine, and will only get better. for once in a long time the organization isnt trying to find the quickest way to "become in contention", they've tried that before, and it hasn't worked. only failed miserably and has caused the team to "rebuild" for like 3 years now.
CAR from 1-15 to 6-10, proves right there even with the pieces together, it takes freakin time.
-
Eli Manning is not why the Giants won 2 superbowls, he is just a piece to the puzzle.
You cannot deny the NY Giants D-Line
This bullcrap on every thread for RG3 blow a knee is getting old!
Eli Manning is not why the Giants won 2 superbowls, he is just a piece to the puzzle.
You cannot deny the NY Giants D-Line
This bullcrap on every thread for RG3 blow a knee is getting old!
You could make that case I suppose in their first SB, but without Eli they dont even make the playoffs this yr let alone win the SB.
-
I am with whatever the regime does but man, 3 number ones plus anything is to much unless this regime is 100% sure RG3 is our guy, and if they are not 100% sure than we may be better off to pander indy for luck by trading everything on this and next years draft..
Or even waiting to see if something changes before the draft and holding out at 4 and hoping RG3 falls to us..
IMHO the browns are not showing much interest in RG3 or even luck..
Thusfar this regime has been ultra conservative on and off the field and i dont really see that changing anytime soon i can easily see this regime passing on a bidding war even for a once in a decade type player like luck let alone a number 2 pick..
Exactly. Giving up 3 number ones AND some change for one dude. Yeah thats really smart, especially with a guy whose won the heisman and still will be picked after andrew luck.
3 potential starters > 1 potential starter
Exactly. Giving up 3 number ones AND some change for one dude. Yeah thats really smart, especially with a guy whose won the heisman and still will be picked after andrew luck.
3 potential starters > 1 potential starter
um so thats two picks not 3. 3-1 = 2.
-
Endymion said:
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
On another thread we have a debate about who may have actually been the better QB: Terry Bradshaw or Archie Manning. and while nothing is settled it is entirely possible that Archie Manning could have been the better QB....but with a completely crap team around him that got them nowhere, while the guy with the much better team around him became a Hall of Famer.
What we want to avoid is to have an Archie Manning clone on our hands....a guy that played 10-12 years for a team that could never win because it could never find complimentary talent. I will take the team with the 10 Hall of Famers on it over the team with one potential HOF QB and absolutely nothing else. Giving up everything we have for one guy does may solve one problem, and create 10 more.
On another thread we have a debate about who may have actually been the better QB: Terry Bradshaw or Archie Manning. and while nothing is settled it is entirely possible that Archie Manning could have been the better QB....but with a completely crap team around him that got them nowhere, while the guy with the much better team around him became a Hall of Famer.
What we want to avoid is to have an Archie Manning clone on our hands....a guy that played 10-12 years for a team that could never win because it could never find complimentary talent. I will take the team with the 10 Hall of Famers on it over the team with one potential HOF QB and absolutely nothing else. Giving up everything we have for one guy does may solve one problem, and create 10 more.
This is a fair statement but NO problem wasn't due to lack of draft picks here, it was a bad FO and bad talent evaluators. I am not for a Herschel Walker or Ricky Williams type trade, but you have to risk something sometimes to hit it big. Trading those picks are a risk, no doubt about it. Thats why the need to be sure he is the guy, if they believe that, then they need to do what they can, within some reason, to trade up to get him. If they have too many doubts then they shouldn't pull the trigger.
-
On another thread we have a debate about who may have actually been the better QB: Terry Bradshaw or Archie Manning. and while nothing is settled it is entirely possible that Archie Manning could have been the better QB....but with a completely crap team around him that got them nowhere, while the guy with the much better team around him became a Hall of Famer.
What we want to avoid is to have an Archie Manning clone on our hands....a guy that played 10-12 years for a team that could never win because it could never find complimentary talent. I will take the team with the 10 Hall of Famers on it over the team with one potential HOF QB and absolutely nothing else. Giving up everything we have for one guy does may solve one problem, and create 10 more.
This is a fair statement but NO problem wasn't due to lack of draft picks here, it was a bad FO and bad talent evaluators. I am not for a Herschel Walker or Ricky Williams type trade, but you have to risk something sometimes to hit it big. Trading those picks are a risk, no doubt about it. Thats why the need to be sure he is the guy, if they believe that, then they need to do what they can, within some reason, to trade up to get him. If they have too many doubts then they shouldn't pull the trigger.
This is a fair statement but NO problem wasn't due to lack of draft picks here, it was a bad FO and bad talent evaluators. I am not for a Herschel Walker or Ricky Williams type trade, but you have to risk something sometimes to hit it big. Trading those picks are a risk, no doubt about it. Thats why the need to be sure he is the guy, if they believe that, then they need to do what they can, within some reason, to trade up to get him. If they have too many doubts then they shouldn't pull the trigger.
Well, "they" will make that decision without a sliver of input from us or anyone else.
-
if the FO does give up the farm, then that's what they'll do. if they're smart they would stand pat and see who's there at #4. but it's not my decision. BUT if you gamble and lose, you lose your job and reputation and set back the browns for another 5 year rebuild. OH JOY!!!
BUT as mentioned above: all this yip yappin and jaw jackin about one player is insane.
-
Endymion said:
The Browns need a franchise QB to be relevant again. You can't tell me your fan base wouldn't be energized with a pick like RG3. If nothing else, a mobile QB will give your arch-rivals elderly defense fits. Most of the Browns fans comments here are against trading up for him, it's like reading the fable "the fox and the grapes."
There is no team that can outbid yours for RG3. Take a freaking chance, gamble. Do something this year that says you are serious about being contenders in our division.
Yes, we need a franchise qb. But not at the price of totally destroying our ability to draft players now & in the future. Both our first rounders, the high fourth, and next years second is as high as I rationally go (maybe a low 2013 pick if it gets really dicey). If the Redskins go first, second, third this year, first next year and start throwing in players like Orakpo, I say take him, too much.
It's not like there won't be any franchise qbs next year to pick from. Hell, we might well say screw it, draft Tannehill, and take Floyd. That costs us nothing in picks.
Yes, we need a franchise qb. But not at the price of totally destroying our ability to draft players now & in the future. Both our first rounders, the high fourth, and next years second is as high as I rationally go (maybe a low 2013 pick if it gets really dicey). If the Redskins go first, second, third this year, first next year and start throwing in players like Orakpo, I say take him, too much.
It's not like there won't be any franchise qbs next year to pick from. Hell, we might well say screw it, draft Tannehill, and take Floyd. That costs us nothing in picks.
Larry, we only have to give up a 3rd next year.....hardly a franchise wrecker since the others are extra picks.
How about meeting Melt again??
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Yes, we need a franchise qb. But not at the price of totally destroying our ability to draft players now & in the future. Both our first rounders, the high fourth, and next years second is as high as I rationally go (maybe a low 2013 pick if it gets really dicey). If the Redskins go first, second, third this year, first next year and start throwing in players like Orakpo, I say take him, too much.
It's not like there won't be any franchise qbs next year to pick from. Hell, we might well say screw it, draft Tannehill, and take Floyd. That costs us nothing in picks.
Larry, we only have to give up a 3rd next year.....hardly a franchise wrecker since the others are extra picks.
How about meeting Melt again??
Larry, we only have to give up a 3rd next year.....hardly a franchise wrecker since the others are extra picks.
How about meeting Melt again??
I think guys are taking what I'm saying wrong 'Peen.
MHO is McCoy's ceiling is very good long term backup, if he's willing to accept that role. OTOH, Griffin has measurables Colt won't be able to approach in his wildest dreams.
Of course I want RGIII, if it's an Eli Manning type deal- he's an elite talent. Like both firsts, ideally a fifth and next years three? Sign me up. I'm on record I'd even go as high as our high fourth this year and next years second. But both firsts, our second rounder and a first next year? That's where I draw the line. Yes, selling the farm to get him is risky- but the only remaining question about Griffin is can he read a pro defense and react quickly enough. It's a lot to give up- but guys bitching about giving up picks ought to ask themselves if Green Bay went crazy and Aaron Rodgers was somehow up for trade, what that would command- it would START at three first round picks- and go up- way up from there.
I'll trust H&H to know when to fold their hand if the bidding gets too crazy.
Meet at Melt? Sure- we'll make plans when the schedule comes out.
BTW I was with Dan when one of his friends tried the Melt Challenge, and failed miserably- it's idiotic to even try. Like three pounds of assorted cheeses on triple stacker bread. That's over 5,000 calories right there, not counting the mountain of fries and cole slaw you have to down along with it. -
the why not capitalize POTENTIAL before "first/second round starters" as well?
it certainly wasn't the best example. we took taylor, sheard, haden, ward, little, hardesty (all in 2nd round or above) and we lost more games than the year before (or, well...tied).
carolina went from 1-15 to 6-10. you tell me which one was the improvement? does this not help support the point that unless the player who touches the ball the most is really damn good, your team will not win?
it may only be one player...but that one player has more impact on the game than the perimeter positions/trench players who rely on him to lead. a group of people with no leader is a mob...one with a leader is an army.
Carolina didnt switch offenses!
they had a system in place, but with Clausen, who is worse than McCoy and even DA and BQ.
and I mean you have a better chance getting POTENTIAL starters when you draft 5-6 of them, not just one already determined franchise QB you gave up all your picks for.
the browns could've easily been 8-8 9-7 this year, without an idiot head coach, a young all around team thats still learning, ridiculous ways of losing the games (defense slip up against CIN, botched snap against STL, overtime at ARI, BOTH games agaisnt the steelers were close) and look at the talent we had on the team. TERRIBLE offense, mediocre defense.
The Browns simply played like the Browns this year.they should've won games that they didn't, due to rookie mistakes, rookie coaching, and most definetly a rookie offense.
Don't listen to Ghoolie's rants about the team being absolutely terrible, they are certainly not. "oh but they were 4-12 again!!!! ahhhh burn it down!!! anarchy anarchy!"
We are fine, and will only get better. for once in a long time the organization isnt trying to find the quickest way to "become in contention", they've tried that before, and it hasn't worked. only failed miserably and has caused the team to "rebuild" for like 3 years now.
CAR from 1-15 to 6-10, proves right there even with the pieces together, it takes freakin time.
Carolina didnt switch offenses!
really? so, they didn't switch offenses when rivera took over last year? so, tell us about the process of rivera adopting john fox's system (who btw, also changed his system to suit tebow).
you better not read this then -> http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d824d289c/article/newton-tebow-prove-spread-option-will-work-in-the-nfl
im not wasting anymore time just to prove a point thats so blatantly wrong.
the browns could've easily been 8-8 9-7 this year,
they also could have easily lost 15.
Don't listen to Ghoolie's rants
ive had ghoolie on ignore for over a year. i dont need his opinion to see this team sucks.
We are fine, and will only get better.
delusions of grandeur? yes, we're fine....being 4-12 after 2 years of the savior, showing no offensive improvement (wasnt that why mangini was fired) from a bunch of offensive gurus? oh hell yeah, everythings fine....
for once in a long time the organization isnt trying to find the quickest way to "become in contention",
oh, so taking 2 years to evaluate the talent on the team was fine for you? ok then...
they've tried that before, and it hasn't worked.
and ya know why? we've missed on almost all our draft picks since 99.
only failed miserably and has caused the team to "rebuild" for like 3 years now.
how long you been a fan? i dont think you grasp the gravity of whats happening. 3 years? your out to lunch....
CAR from 1-15 to 6-10, proves right there even with the pieces together, it takes freakin time.
what? pieces together? are you seriously saying that a 1-15 had the pieces together? where do you come up with this shit?
know what...dont bother. your next reply could very well be even more devoid of rational thought.
-
But what about the quarterback?
The team is lost offensively because they have no general. Browns are in a position to trade for a game changing talent. They can have him if they are willing to have balls as a FO to seal the deal. Outside a Ditka-like trade, Griffin should be a Brown. The pick is available. The Browns are in the best draft slot to get him and have extra picks to leverage the deal through.
Again, the Redskins can pony up some crazy offer that will force the Browns to wave the white flag, but 2012 #6, #38, #70, 2013 1st is not it. If we lose out on RGIII, would have to see the Redskins give up #1 picks in 2012, 2013, 2014 + filler to believe the Browns did everything they could to get him.
The red\bold is exactly what I'm saying RG. It could well escalate into a Ditka\Ricky Williams scenario. Good Lord man- we're talking about moving up TWO spots! What does that cost us? Blackmon or Floyd (wr solved), maybe Mike Adams (RT solved), Chase Minnifield (CB solved), and God knows what else in 2013. Like there will never ever be another Dan Marino or Drew Brees sitting at the bottom or round 1? Don't fall in love with one guy! The Browns sure haven't- they already know what they're willing to give up- and you or me can't do a damn thing about it.
Don't fall in love with one guy!
That's the key!
RG3-2-da...
What would be too much to offer for RG in your mind? Where would you draw the line?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Yes, we need a franchise qb. But not at the price of totally destroying our ability to draft players now & in the future. Both our first rounders, the high fourth, and next years second is as high as I rationally go (maybe a low 2013 pick if it gets really dicey). If the Redskins go first, second, third this year, first next year and start throwing in players like Orakpo, I say take him, too much.
It's not like there won't be any franchise qbs next year to pick from. Hell, we might well say screw it, draft Tannehill, and take Floyd. That costs us nothing in picks.
Larry, we only have to give up a 3rd next year.....hardly a franchise wrecker since the others are extra picks.
How about meeting Melt again??
Larry, we only have to give up a 3rd next year.....hardly a franchise wrecker since the others are extra picks.
Russ, the franchise wrecker to me is giving up our second first round pick.
-
[
Russ, the franchise wrecker to me is giving up our second first round pick.
If by some miracle, that's all we have to give up, then I'm good with it. I don't think there's a chance that we can move up to the #2 only giving up the 4 and 22 but maybe if Manning goes to Miami and Washington signs Flynn and we'll know where both of those guys end up long before the draft.
-
Carolina didnt switch offenses!
really? so, they didn't switch offenses when rivera took over last year? so, tell us about the process of rivera adopting john fox's system (who btw, also changed his system to suit tebow).
you better not read this then -> http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d824d289c/article/newton-tebow-prove-spread-option-will-work-in-the-nfl
im not wasting anymore time just to prove a point thats so blatantly wrong.
the browns could've easily been 8-8 9-7 this year,
they also could have easily lost 15.
Don't listen to Ghoolie's rants
ive had ghoolie on ignore for over a year. i dont need his opinion to see this team sucks.
We are fine, and will only get better.
delusions of grandeur? yes, we're fine....being 4-12 after 2 years of the savior, showing no offensive improvement (wasnt that why mangini was fired) from a bunch of offensive gurus? oh hell yeah, everythings fine....
for once in a long time the organization isnt trying to find the quickest way to "become in contention",
oh, so taking 2 years to evaluate the talent on the team was fine for you? ok then...
they've tried that before, and it hasn't worked.
and ya know why? we've missed on almost all our draft picks since 99.
only failed miserably and has caused the team to "rebuild" for like 3 years now.
how long you been a fan? i dont think you grasp the gravity of whats happening. 3 years? your out to lunch....
CAR from 1-15 to 6-10, proves right there even with the pieces together, it takes freakin time.
what? pieces together? are you seriously saying that a 1-15 had the pieces together? where do you come up with this shit?
know what...dont bother. your next reply could very well be even more devoid of rational thought.
really? so, they didn't switch offenses when rivera took over last year? so, tell us about the process of rivera adopting john fox's system (who btw, also changed his system to suit tebow).
you better not read this then -> http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d824d289c/article/newton-tebow-prove-spread-option-will-work-in-the-nfl
im not wasting anymore time just to prove a point thats so blatantly wrong.
they also could have easily lost 15.
ive had ghoolie on ignore for over a year. i dont need his opinion to see this team sucks.
delusions of grandeur? yes, we're fine....being 4-12 after 2 years of the savior, showing no offensive improvement (wasnt that why mangini was fired) from a bunch of offensive gurus? oh hell yeah, everythings fine....
oh, so taking 2 years to evaluate the talent on the team was fine for you? ok then...
and ya know why? we've missed on almost all our draft picks since 99.
how long you been a fan? i dont think you grasp the gravity of whats happening. 3 years? your out to lunch....
what? pieces together? are you seriously saying that a 1-15 had the pieces together? where do you come up with this shit?
know what...dont bother. your next reply could very well be even more devoid of rational thought.
my goodness.
RG3 will not be in Cleveland, doesnt take much "rational thought" to figure that.
"but he's the next mike vick/peyton manning/ben roethlesberger/arnold schwarzennegger lets trade every early pick we have for him and not fill much needed holes with starter caliber players"
there is no please in you, we both are stubborn asses who wont budge on our opinion so lets leave it at that.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login