Browns to make pitch for Jimmy G // Trubisky #1 QB on their board
-
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
-
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Mitch2Pryor said:
Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
2015. And that was a pick by the owner himself.
-
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
From a pure PR perspective taking Mitch #1 overall is a better move than Garrett. Most fans will give the hometown kid some time. There will always be a few idiots screaming he isn't playing like Elway or Manning right out of the gate.Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Isn't this supposed to be a deep defensive draft? Better odds of getting a defensive stud than a great QB there @ #12.
-
From a pure PR perspective taking Mitch #1 overall is a better move than Garrett. Most fans will give the hometown kid some time. There will always be a few idiots screaming he isn't playing like Elway or Manning right out of the gate.Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Isn't this supposed to be a deep defensive draft? Better odds of getting a defensive stud than a great QB there @ #12.
From a pure PR perspective taking Mitch #1 overall is a better move than Garrett. Most fans will give the hometown kid some time. There will always be a few idiots screaming he isn't playing like Elway or Manning right out of the gate.
Isn't this supposed to be a deep defensive draft? Better odds of getting a defensive stud than a great QB there @ #12.
Did you see how Elway and Manning played right out of the gate? Not all that well. Their rookie seasons were by no means indicative of what they would become. So, yes, there would have to be a couple of "chill out" years.
-
Let's get Trubisky.
-
Mitch2Pryor said:
Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
2015. And that was a pick by the owner himself.
2015. And that was a pick by the owner himself.
Farmer and Pettine got 2 years with Manziel.
-
Mitch2Pryor said:
Farmer and Pettine got 2 years with Manziel.
If we're going the 'year after' then it was 2015 seeing as how Johnny was teh chosen one and we let Hoyer walk.
-
Mitch2Pryor said:
Farmer and Pettine got 2 years with Manziel.
If we're going the 'year after' then it was 2015 seeing as how Johnny was teh chosen one and we let Hoyer walk.
If we're going the 'year after' then it was 2015 seeing as how Johnny was teh chosen one and we let Hoyer walk.
No. Johnny was drafted in 2014 and Farmer and Pettine got 2 seasons with "their" QB on the roster.
I don't think there has ever been a time where a regime is fired one season after they drafted their guy at QB. Which would mean in all likely good if they go QB #1 we will have at least 2 more years of Hue and Sashi.
-
Tim Couch ......... 6'-4", 220 lbMitch Trubisky ... 6'-3", 209 lbsPlayer ........... Year ... CMP ... ATT ... YRDS ... PCT ... TDS ... INTS ... Rush ... YRDS ... TDSTim Couch ... 1998 ... 430 ... 601 .... 4,611 .... 71.5 .... 38 ..... 17 ........ 74 ....... 116 ........ 1Mitch Trubisky 2016 ...304 ....446 .... 3,748 .... 68.2 .... 30 ....... 6 ........ 93 ....... 308 ........ 5
I see that Aaron Rodgers is only 6'3" 225 lbs. At 6'3" Trubisky could probably put on a good 10-15 lbs. Someone said he was a weight room freak.
Here were Rodgers college stats:
YearSchoolConfClassPos G CmpAtt Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate*
2003CaliforniaPac-10SOQB 13 215/349 61.6 2903 8.3 8.8 19 5 146.6*
2004CaliforniaPac-10JRQB 12 209/316 66.1 2566 8.1 8.5 24 8 154.3
CareerCalifornia42466563.854698.28.64313150.3
CareerCalifornia42466563.854698.28.64313150.3
Wow...
-
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Assumes a lot...
Say Mitch sits the first 12 games, then wins one of 4 and looks like a raw rookie doing it?
Say Garrett starts 16, hits double digit sacks, hurries and knock-downs on his way to DROY?
"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 -
Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Assumes a lot...
Say Mitch sits the first 12 games, then wins one of 4 and looks like a raw rookie doing it?
Say Garrett starts 16, hits double digit sacks, hurries and knock-downs on his way to DROY?
Assumes a lot...
Say Mitch sits the first 12 games, then wins one of 4 and looks like a raw rookie doing it?
Say Garrett starts 16, hits double digit sacks, hurries and knock-downs on his way to DROY?
Yes, you are assuming a lot, both ways.
Maybe Garrett is the second coming of Aaron Curry or Aundray Bruce. Just because he went to A&M people are ASSuming that he will be Von Miller. That is like assuming that Tee Martin was going to be as good as Peyton Manning just because they were both Tennesse QBs (and, after all Tee Martin took UT to a national title where Peyton didn't).
I am not convinced that Barnett or Williams are not better prospects.
-
Obvious that Barnett and Williams are as good as Garrett...yep.
-
I prefer that Myles makes them eat those words, but hopefully on our team.
-
I prefer that Myles makes them eat those words, but hopefully on our team.
I prefer that Myles makes them eat those words, but hopefully on our team.
Hey if we draft Garrett @ #1, I want to see a disruptive force. Von Miller good- that's the standard he's going to be held to. I won't have any problems with that.
-
Here's their plan (that I thunk up).
They're making people think that they like the QB for the #1 pick in the draft. (they really don't)
They don't trade for JG, to reinforce this theory.
Some team trades up with them for the #1 pick to take the QB.
We traded back just far enough so that all of the elite players are picked off the board.
...sound like us?
Sounds like the hillbilly way to me...Here's their plan (that I thunk up).
They're making people think that they like the QB for the #1 pick in the draft. (they really don't)
They don't trade for JG, to reinforce this theory.
Some team trades up with them for the #1 pick to take the QB.
We traded back just far enough so that all of the elite players are picked off the board.
...sound like us?
-
Sounds like the hillbilly way to me...Here's their plan (that I thunk up).
They're making people think that they like the QB for the #1 pick in the draft. (they really don't)
They don't trade for JG, to reinforce this theory.
Some team trades up with them for the #1 pick to take the QB.
We traded back just far enough so that all of the elite players are picked off the board.
...sound like us?
Sounds like the hillbilly way to me...
Uh, or maybe 2016? I swear if we trade down below Garrett/Allen then fire the whole damn analytic group of baseball pickers.
-
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Well Jeff Fisher was fired less than 16 games after drafting Goff, if that counts.
-
From a pure PR perspective taking Mitch #1 overall is a better move than Garrett. Most fans will give the hometown kid some time. There will always be a few idiots screaming he isn't playing like Elway or Manning right out of the gate.Mitch2Pryor said:
If Sashi and Company want job security, they will draft a QB #1. It will give them an automatic 3 years.. You can't fire a regime and coaching staff when they have a developing QB. Maybe I'm wrong, but when was the last time a regime got fired the year after they drafted their "franchise" guy?
If we take Mitch #1 and he plays all season and we go 3-13, I don't think anyone is getting fired because we have a franchise QB who is growing who needs continuity around him.
If we take Garrett #1 and go 3-13, more than likely heads will roll.
Isn't this supposed to be a deep defensive draft? Better odds of getting a defensive stud than a great QB there @ #12.
From a pure PR perspective taking Mitch #1 overall is a better move than Garrett. Most fans will give the hometown kid some time. There will always be a few idiots screaming he isn't playing like Elway or Manning right out of the gate.
Isn't this supposed to be a deep defensive draft? Better odds of getting a defensive stud than a great QB there @ #12.
Silly season is here. I would take Mitch at #33. I don't give a shit if he is from Cleveland. The team can't make stupid decisions based on that.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
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