Here Is My Concern If We Take A Qb At #2......
-
-
Goff is the guy, sorry fellas.
Last time we've taken the consensus #1 was 1999 (was it even consensus then?)
Everybody here will be happy with Goff when he takes us to our first super bowl.
Goff is the guy, sorry fellas.
Last time we've taken the consensus #1 was 1999 (was it even consensus then?)
Everybody here will be happy with Goff when he takes us to our first super bowl.
Im in Camp Goff if you have hot bartenders.
Yes it was consensus in 1999, and Camp Couch versus The Darkside was the best board wars you have ever seen ... but you were probably nine.
Camp Trade Down got a lotta love ... Ricky Williams had small hands and Andy Katzemoyer was a "Big, Dumb Redneck" ... ahh, memories.
Z
-
for those that want Bosa, and believe me i would love to have Bosa, what has JJ Watt done for the Texans with no QB to speak of ? We have to take Goff.
-
for those that want Bosa, and believe me i would love to have Bosa, what has JJ Watt done for the Texans with no QB to speak of ? We have to take Goff.
Didn't he get them to the playoffs?for those that want Bosa, and believe me i would love to have Bosa, what has JJ Watt done for the Texans with no QB to speak of ? We have to take Goff.
-
The Browns don't just need "a" quarterback, we need a quality starting QB. If none of those guys are plug and play top ten talent you don't take one in the top ten. Betting there are analytics that back that.
Who is your QB ? Common Sensalytics tells me Josh McCown wont complete a full season in the AFC North.The Browns don't just need "a" quarterback, we need a quality starting QB. If none of those guys are plug and play top ten talent you don't take one in the top ten. Betting there are analytics that back that.
-
I think our defensive needs are greater and that building a strong defense leads to more wins over a longer period of time.
We could get an impact DE/DT or LB with the #2.
But given that Hue is an offensive coach and Haslam has commented that winning teams need a franchise QB, it's almost a lock that we draft a QB with the #2 pick. I don't think the franchise guy is in this draft, though. Who knows? Haslam might also be looking at all the media and fans crying for a QB and want to draft one high in order to sell more tickets.
I'm also not a big believer in drafting a QB and playing him from day 1, so it will take time for this guy to get acclimated.
But, they'll probably do that too - again, maybe just to sell tickets.
Without a defense, the Browns don't go to a Super Bowl.
Doesn't matter who the QB is in that case...
-
Some of the folks here genuinely strike me as not realizing that every failed QB represents someone that could have been a potential studly defender on this team. Like the only downside to a failed QB is that you wasted a roster spot and a few starts on him. IT'S ALOT MORE THAN THAT.
-
What concerns me about taking a QB at #2 is overvaluing this draft class and its players even though its a consensus 'weak' class.
the concensus weak class isnt concerning because its just one pick.....it can be a weak class overall with a true stud in it.
What is more concerning will be if other teams dont have any interest to get to 1....that means they have essentially passed on these guys.
the concensus weak class isnt concerning because its just one pick.....it can be a weak class overall with a true stud in it.
What is more concerning will be if other teams dont have any interest to get to 1....that means they have essentially passed on these guys.
UM,no. What it will mean is teams don't want to give up multiple picks to move up. The stench of RG III still lingers heavily around the NFL.
Goff is the guy, sorry fellas.
Last time we've taken the consensus #1 was 1999 (was it even consensus then?)
Everybody here will be happy with Goff when he takes us to our first super bowl.
It was pretty consensus BB. I was in Camp Couch from day one. Probably not a great choice on my part. I wanted nothing to do with Donovan McNabb, who turned out to be the best of the bunch- questions about "college system". Atenears was all in on Torrey Holt- he was correct. There was a guy who liked Daunte Culpepper- half decent for a couple of years. At least we didn't Bungle the pick taking Akilli Smith.
-
Some of the folks here genuinely strike me as not realizing that every failed QB represents someone that could have been a potential studly defender on this team. Like the only downside to a failed QB is that you wasted a roster spot and a few starts on him. IT'S ALOT MORE THAN THAT.
A "failed QB" just means a team selected the WRONG QB, not that they shouldn't have selected a QB.Some of the folks here genuinely strike me as not realizing that every failed QB represents someone that could have been a potential studly defender on this team. Like the only downside to a failed QB is that you wasted a roster spot and a few starts on him. IT'S ALOT MORE THAN THAT.
For example, Browns needed a QB and chose Manziel when Carr and Bridgewater were available. The problem isn't that they picked a QB, the problem is they picked the WRONG QB.
-
some scouts have said Goff needs to show he has the arm strength to make all the throws in difficult situations...
and Wentz, who I like a lot, needs to show he can make the quicker decisions and reads in the pros, and other things.
and Lynch needs to show he can progress into the NFL from his college days.
But Goff is pro ready, except they say it would be good to let him gain strength into his core, before having
to be a starter. He can learn from McCown for a while.
Goff does many things needed in the pros already, and his footwork, and other things, are excellent.
Being the best prospect out there this year, this article says a lot about him. But he isn't superman enough for
any team to kill their draft trading up into the top of the draft to get him.
-
Wentz is a nice prospect, but he'll probably be gone by #22 and maybe earlier.
By all accounts, just take the #1 prospect.
-
That 10 or so other teams who DESPERATELY need a qb to build on below us looked at the options and said "eh....I'll pass on these guys as a high first rounder".
Thats 10+ groups of 'football people' who look at the qb options(well mostly Goff and Lynch) and all agree that they just aren't worth it. This in a league where getting a young franchise qb is akin to an alcoholic in withdrawl finding 3 dollars in change under the cushions for a half pint of aristocrat.
If it was one team who doesn't believe Goff or Lynch is worth trading up to take a qb in the high first round, that's one thing. Maybe their football people are just weird or whatever. But if not a single damn team says "we gotta give up some stuff to get in position to that this guy"? When they need a qb badly??!
Nevermind talking about the Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck type prospects of the world. Those sorts of #1 qb prospects are so valued that there is no combination of picks that could get them. But even guys like Robert Griffin(who coming out was about 7 levels below a prospect like Luck the same year) generate a ton of interest to jump up and grab him...for a high price. Had Tampa or Tennessee not needed a qb last year and wanted to trade out of that 1-2 spot, there would have been plenty of great offers of teams wanting to move up. And although Jameis and mariota certainly have upside and some strengths, they are far far from a sure thing to be very good nfl starters. The fact that these guys may not even be viewed in the same class as last years guys is concerning....and from the early talk they dont appear to be.
So if all these teams below us who have shit at qb aren't going to give tennessee a bunch in exchange to trade down, what does that say about the top qbs in this class? It says they don't think all that much of them.....
but it's early. Maybe there will be a lot of buzz later on about goff and a team will say "I gotta have him".....
Need? We really have folks blindly throwing darts at the QB board out of need? C'mon peeps, at least take a look at the couple top candidates.
For the first time in forever, we have a very, very good, consensus QB prospect within our 2016 reach. That we have a significant need at the position is icing on the cake.
That 10 or so other teams who DESPERATELY need a qb to build on below us looked at the options and said "eh....I'll pass on these guys as a high first rounder".
But even guys like Robert Griffin(who coming out was about 7 levels below a prospect like Luck the same year) generate a ton of interest to jump up and grab him...for a high price. Had Tampa or Tennessee not needed a qb last year and wanted to trade out of that 1-2 spot, there would have been plenty of great offers of teams wanting to move up.
First, there aren't 10 desperate teams... and that is good news. Keeps Goff's price down.
Second, RG3 was not 7 levels below Luck. He was the consensus #2 QB. I did not agree on the price WSH ultimately paid for him, but Holmgren did.
Third, Winston for TB at #1 was a lock, but not MM to TN at #2. I'm sure they had offers, but none that they could not refuse. Still TBD what TN will be offered this year... same for us at #2.
The Browns don't just need "a" quarterback, we need a quality starting QB. If none of those guys are plug and play top ten talent you don't take one in the top ten. Betting there are analytics that back that.
"Plug and play" is not THE criteria for a 1st Rnd QB prospect. It is for every other position, but not QB. And playing early cuts both ways... QBs who sat have gone on to play well and QBs who were plugged and played well are now floundering.
"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 -
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect, we're going to have to move to 1 to get him. I cant predict the future(although anyone who has followed me on this board knows Ive done a pretty damn good job of it the last year or so), but right now he's just not viewed as good enough to make us go to #1 to get him.
-
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect, we're going to have to move to 1 to get him. I cant predict the future(although anyone who has followed me on this board knows Ive done a pretty damn good job of it the last year or so), but right now he's just not viewed as good enough to make us go to #1 to get him.
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect, we're going to have to move to 1 to get him. I cant predict the future(although anyone who has followed me on this board knows Ive done a pretty damn good job of it the last year or so), but right now he's just not viewed as good enough to make us go to #1 to get him.
We are? With Tennessee being the only team that picks ahead of us...?
-
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect, we're going to have to move to 1 to get him. I cant predict the future(although anyone who has followed me on this board knows Ive done a pretty damn good job of it the last year or so), but right now he's just not viewed as good enough to make us go to #1 to get him.
We are? With Tennessee being the only team that picks ahead of us...?
-
Tennessee may look to trade down, but I'm sure they'd be pretty happy grabbing up Tunsil to sure up the LT spot for the foreseeable future.
I don't see a team that needs a QB, like SF willing to give the farm to move up to #1 (the farm is what it would cost them)
Other QB needy teams are drafting too low for Tennessee to consider it I imagine - and those teams likely also wouldn't want to give up the farm.
Lucky for us the #3-6 spots aren't really QB needy teams either
-
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect, we're going to have to move to 1 to get him. I cant predict the future(although anyone who has followed me on this board knows Ive done a pretty damn good job of it the last year or so), but right now he's just not viewed as good enough to make us go to #1 to get him.
if goff is such a consensus #1 qb prospect..
*IF* he is this superduper consensus #1...
I pray Goff is never considered any of the terms, for then he will get very expensive indeed.
As it is he's right in the Mariotta zone... a very high probability, franchise prospect with upside that is easily worth a #2 overall, but starts looking expensive when the price is a 2016 1st, a 2017 1st and change.
Anytime you want to compare predictive track records let me know. With an intro such as yours I'm sure I can afford to spot you Pettine.
Well I wasn't going to join until JF was the official starter. Now he is, so here I am.
-
Need? We really have folks blindly throwing darts at the QB board out of need? C'mon peeps, at least take a look at the couple top candidates.
For the first time in forever, we have a very, very good, consensus QB prospect within our 2016 reach. That we have a significant need at the position is icing on the cake.
That 10 or so other teams who DESPERATELY need a qb to build on below us looked at the options and said "eh....I'll pass on these guys as a high first rounder".
But even guys like Robert Griffin(who coming out was about 7 levels below a prospect like Luck the same year) generate a ton of interest to jump up and grab him...for a high price. Had Tampa or Tennessee not needed a qb last year and wanted to trade out of that 1-2 spot, there would have been plenty of great offers of teams wanting to move up.
First, there aren't 10 desperate teams... and that is good news. Keeps Goff's price down.
Second, RG3 was not 7 levels below Luck. He was the consensus #2 QB. I did not agree on the price WSH ultimately paid for him, but Holmgren did.
Third, Winston for TB at #1 was a lock, but not MM to TN at #2. I'm sure they had offers, but none that they could not refuse. Still TBD what TN will be offered this year... same for us at #2.
The Browns don't just need "a" quarterback, we need a quality starting QB. If none of those guys are plug and play top ten talent you don't take one in the top ten. Betting there are analytics that back that.
"Plug and play" is not THE criteria for a 1st Rnd QB prospect. It is for every other position, but not QB. And playing early cuts both ways... QBs who sat have gone on to play well and QBs who were plugged and played well are now floundering.
For the first time in forever, we have a very, very good, consensus QB prospect within our 2016 reach. That we have a significant need at the position is icing on the cake.
It's all about need if you take Goff at #2. You can't place potential talent over actual talent that high in the draft
Let's go back to 2010,
Bradford
Newton
Luck
Griffin
Bortles
Winston
Mariota
These are the guys taken where everyone wants to take Goff. Where do you rank Goff on that list based on what you knew about those other guys coming out of college? I rank him dead last on that list myself. And for me that begs the question 'does he belong?'. Hell, I would put him in the EJ Manuel category coming out. There is not enough there to say Goff is worthy. He lived off shit competition and was very inconsistent. All those guys on that list elevated their teams to contenders and powerhouses. Goff did not.
If Wentz has a great Senior Bowl and combine, Goff may not even be the #1 QB in the draft. It's silly to suggest we've seen enough from Goff to crown him at #2.
“It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.”
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