Terry Pluto Speaks for Me... Again...
-
The man consistently brings sanity... and levity... to Browns coverage.
If I were into plagiarizing, then I could save a lot of time just cutting and pasting most of his stuff as my own. But since he says it better (or at least more concisely) than I do, it'd show...
Besides he doesn't use enough "dot-dot-dots" for my taste... and that'd be a surefire giveaway...
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Cleveland Browns have Terry Talkin' front office, drafts, quarterbacks -- Terry PlutoBy Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on January 07, 2017 at 7:19 AM, updated January 07, 2017 at 10:32 AMCLEVELAND, Ohio -- When the Cleveland Browns launched their new way of doing business with the Sashi Brown front office, I promised myself that I'd be patient.
Here's why: The idea of piling up draft choices and taking a long-term approach is the only real chance this franchise has to become relevant.
I really mean that. It will mean some mistakes, and it will take time.
That's not to say I liked every move. The Browns have twice explained to me why they didn't push harder to keep Mitchell Schwartz. Basically, they wanted to open a spot for some younger players they hoped to draft.
They later drafted two tackles -- Shon Coleman and Spencer Drango. Maybe they both will work out, or at least one becomes a viable lineman. Drango showed some potential at guard. But I would have kept Schwartz, who doesn't miss a snap, does a solid job and was open to staying with the Browns.
It was a bad move back then, and I wrote it was a bad move when they allowed him to leave.
I was very lukewarm to the signing of Robert Griffin III. I viewed it as Hue Jackson's Powerball ticket. It could pay off big, but the odds were overwhelmingly against it.
So this is not to say everything is wonderful with the front office.
Cleveland Browns making painful roster moves that are the right thing to do, other than losing Mitchell Schwartz.
REALITY CHECK
Consider what the management team of Brown/Jackson/Paul DePodesta took over 12 months ago, inheriting a team that was 3-13 with the NFL's highest-paid defense. The Browns had not had a winning record since 2007. The various short-term fixes generally had been a disaster.
Alex Mack, Travis Benjamin and Tashaun Gipson wanted out because previous front offices failed to offer them reasonable contract extensions. I say front OFFICES ... as in more than one ... because three different ones had a chance to sign Mack before 2016.
The Browns are a joke because they lose so much and fire so many people. Now, they are the egg-head team because of all the Harvard guys in the front office and the reliance on analytics. They are easy targets for their critics. The current front office also has inherited the sins of front offices past.
I'm reading a book called Belichick and Brady, by Michael Holley. He is an Akron native, an excellent author who has authored several books on the Patriots.
The basic approach the Browns are taking to the draft is what Belichick has been doing since he took over the New England Patriots in 2000. What has helped Belichick is having Brady, so he's not been on a perpetual search for a quarterback.
Belichick consistently trades back in the draft, adding future picks. He can seem ruthless by cutting and/or trading players considered to too expensive. That's why he shipped linebacker Jamie Collins to the Browns in midseason. He doesn't want to pay Collins big money because he has other free agents coming up who need to be paid. He prefers them over Collins.
The Browns are willing to take the 27-year-old Collins because of their lack of talent and extensive salary cap room.
Cleveland Browns have to look at keeping players away from free agency. They also need to take a real hard look at their quarterback situation.
THE QUARTERBACK QUESTION
Obviously, the Browns need a quarterback. They know that. Hue Jackson isn't a fool. His future hangs on finding a quarterback, at least a competent one such as Andy Dalton.
The Browns will never say this, but I believe they made the decision not to address the quarterback question at the top of the 2016 draft. It didn't matter who was available in terms of Jared Goff or Carson Wentz. There were a lot of reports of the Browns loving Goff. I believe they liked him. I also believe they wanted that word out to build up interest in trading what was the No. 2 pick.
The Rams traded for the No. 1 pick, and took Goff. Then the Browns traded the No. 2 pick and kept trading down to add more picks.
I'm just guessing, but here's how I believe they viewed the situation:
1. They knew this was going to be a hard year. Maybe not 1-15, but a very, very difficult season. No rookie quarterback was a franchise-changer, so the decision was to add other players and picks.
2. They already had Josh McCown on the roster and resisted the temptation to trade him for a pick. He was supposed to be the fallback option if Griffin failed. They didn't realize he couldn't stay healthy for even a few games.
3. They'd add a quarterback in the middle rounds. That was third-rounder Cody Kessler.
That was the plan for Year 1. I can't imagine they will take the same approach again.
Nor can I believe they will draft another quarterback in the middle rounds, keep Griffin and then say, "We have RG3, Kessler and Mr. X. We're set."
WHAT ABOUT DAK PRESCOTT?
ESPN did a story detailing the quarterbacks that Dallas tried to obtain before taking Dak Prescott with the 135th pick. They tried to trade up to draft Paxton Lynch and Connor Cook -- both went before Prescott.
After taking Prescott, they tried to sign Nick Foles. The veteran went to Kansas City instead. They tried to trade for McCown, the Browns turned them down.
Prescott was the EIGHTH quarterback taken in the draft. Here's who went ahead of him and where they were drafted:
- 1. Goff (Rams)
- 2. Wentz (Eagles)
- 26. Lynch (Broncos)
- 51. Christian Hackenberg (Jets)
- 91. Jacoby Brissett (Patriots)
- 93. Kessler (Browns)
- 100. Cook (Raiders)
- 135. Prescott (Cowboys)
I have a hard time hammering the Browns about Prescott. A lot of teams didn't see the Mississippi State product as a viable NFL starter. That includes Belichick, who picked Brissett instead. It includes all the QB-desperate teams.
It even includes Dallas, which waited until the fourth round to make him the team's fifth player picked.
Sometimes, NFL teams just get it wrong when it comes to a quarterback. The classic draft was 2000, when six quarterbacks were picked in front of Brady: Chad Pennington, Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Tee Martin, Marc Brugler, Spergon Wynn and then Brady in the sixth round.
Yes, the Browns took Wynn. I do wonder if Brady would have been so revered if he ended up on the 2000 Browns. The Patriots were 8-8 the season before Brady was drafted with Belichick coming on board.
The Cleveland Browns have the first pick in the 2017 NFL Draft and are in need of a quarterback. But is there a quarterback worthy of the top pick?
IT'S A TOUGH CALL
Many draft experts have Mentor's Mitch Trubisky as the best quarterback in the draft. But most don't have the North Carolina quarterback as a top 10 player on their Big Boards. Here's a sample of where they rate him:
- No. 14: CBS Sports
- No. 16: Mel Kiper, ESPN
- No. 21: Scouts Inc.
- No. 30: Todd McShay, ESPN
No one has Clemson's Deshaun Watson in the first round.
Remember, we are talking about the "Big Boards," meaning the pure talent rating system. It's not the mock drafts. Some of those have three quarterbacks picked in the top 15: Trubisky, Watson and Notre Dame's DeShone Kizer.
The Browns have the No. 1 and 12 picks in the first round.
Trubisky has 13 career starts. He hasn't even declared for the draft. Watching his bowl game against Stanford, it's obvious he needs more experience. But it's also clear he will probably be a top 10 pick ... and an instant millionaire ... and that's why I'd advise him to turn pro.
Ready or not.
I love how Trubisky pulled himself together after throwing two interceptions in the Stanford game to play a terrific fourth quarter. He didn't lose his cool when teammates dropped passes. He has poise.
But as of right now, there is not a quarterback in this draft that I'd take at No. 1.
That said, the Browns still must find a way to address their quarterback question.
"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 -
I'm with him. trade for garrapolo or mccarron and take the best player available
-
I've been a fan of Pluto since his days of writing for the Akron Beacon Journal.
-
I'm right there with him on the QB eval for the 2017 draft. Just not one worth taking that high.
-
he sucked back in those days, after replacing tom melody, who was even worse.
bluto gradually started to somehow start writing some good stuff once in a while.
-
With this front office, I don't see them trading draft picks for a QB. They don't seem to part with those picks. I also don't see them taking a QB very high in the draft. They could've and should've done it last year.
I've been saying this since this regime got here. They won't draft a QB high or trade for one because that puts them on the clock of being fired. Once they go down that road, there job timetable gets shorter, unless the guy they get turns out to be good. As long as they keep trotting out guys like RG3 and middle to low round draft picks, they can justify to Jimmy that they don't have their man yet.
"And they don't really know even what they're talkin' about And I can't imagine what empty heads can achieve." -
I like Pluto too. Didn't notice much feedback when he called Jimmy Haslam the Dollar general store version of Jerry Jones.
-
With this front office, I don't see them trading draft picks for a QB. They don't seem to part with those picks. I also don't see them taking a QB very high in the draft. They could've and should've done it last year.
I've been saying this since this regime got here. They won't draft a QB high or trade for one because that puts them on the clock of being fired. Once they go down that road, there job timetable gets shorter, unless the guy they get turns out to be good. As long as they keep trotting out guys like RG3 and middle to low round draft picks, they can justify to Jimmy that they don't have their man yet.
With this front office, I don't see them trading draft picks for a QB. They don't seem to part with those picks. I also don't see them taking a QB very high in the draft. They could've and should've done it last year.
I've been saying this since this regime got here. They won't draft a QB high or trade for one because that puts them on the clock of being fired. Once they go down that road, there job timetable gets shorter, unless the guy they get turns out to be good. As long as they keep trotting out guys like RG3 and middle to low round draft picks, they can justify to Jimmy that they don't have their man yet.
well it's this year or next they have to make a move for a viable starter, either through the draft or FA. you can't have a dynasty or a continuous winning team year in and out if the guy at the helm keeps getting changed out. RG3 isn't that guy. mccown is as good as done (even though i like his guile). kessler might be the guy, but i don't know if the coaching staff and FO are ready to go all-in on him. i like what he's shown but just don't know if he can take the beating playing in the AFCN.
i'm not a huge hue jackson fan but i think he knows QBs. it's up to these guys to figure it out. hopefully they will show us why they are worthy of their paychecks this coming year. but to be scared of making a move because you might get fired spells pussy every way til sunday.
-
The man consistently brings sanity... and levity... to Browns coverage.
If I were into plagiarizing, then I could save a lot of time just cutting and pasting most of his stuff as my own. But since he says it better (or at least more concisely) than I do, it'd show...
Besides he doesn't use enough "dot-dot-dots" for my taste... and that'd be a surefire giveaway...
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Cleveland Browns have Terry Talkin' front office, drafts, quarterbacks -- Terry PlutoBy Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on January 07, 2017 at 7:19 AM, updated January 07, 2017 at 10:32 AMCLEVELAND, Ohio -- When the Cleveland Browns launched their new way of doing business with the Sashi Brown front office, I promised myself that I'd be patient.
Here's why: The idea of piling up draft choices and taking a long-term approach is the only real chance this franchise has to become relevant.
I really mean that. It will mean some mistakes, and it will take time.
That's not to say I liked every move. The Browns have twice explained to me why they didn't push harder to keep Mitchell Schwartz. Basically, they wanted to open a spot for some younger players they hoped to draft.
They later drafted two tackles -- Shon Coleman and Spencer Drango. Maybe they both will work out, or at least one becomes a viable lineman. Drango showed some potential at guard. But I would have kept Schwartz, who doesn't miss a snap, does a solid job and was open to staying with the Browns.
It was a bad move back then, and I wrote it was a bad move when they allowed him to leave.
I was very lukewarm to the signing of Robert Griffin III. I viewed it as Hue Jackson's Powerball ticket. It could pay off big, but the odds were overwhelmingly against it.
So this is not to say everything is wonderful with the front office.
Cleveland Browns making painful roster moves that are the right thing to do, other than losing Mitchell Schwartz.
REALITY CHECK
Consider what the management team of Brown/Jackson/Paul DePodesta took over 12 months ago, inheriting a team that was 3-13 with the NFL's highest-paid defense. The Browns had not had a winning record since 2007. The various short-term fixes generally had been a disaster.
Alex Mack, Travis Benjamin and Tashaun Gipson wanted out because previous front offices failed to offer them reasonable contract extensions. I say front OFFICES ... as in more than one ... because three different ones had a chance to sign Mack before 2016.
The Browns are a joke because they lose so much and fire so many people. Now, they are the egg-head team because of all the Harvard guys in the front office and the reliance on analytics. They are easy targets for their critics. The current front office also has inherited the sins of front offices past.
I'm reading a book called Belichick and Brady, by Michael Holley. He is an Akron native, an excellent author who has authored several books on the Patriots.
The basic approach the Browns are taking to the draft is what Belichick has been doing since he took over the New England Patriots in 2000. What has helped Belichick is having Brady, so he's not been on a perpetual search for a quarterback.
Belichick consistently trades back in the draft, adding future picks. He can seem ruthless by cutting and/or trading players considered to too expensive. That's why he shipped linebacker Jamie Collins to the Browns in midseason. He doesn't want to pay Collins big money because he has other free agents coming up who need to be paid. He prefers them over Collins.
The Browns are willing to take the 27-year-old Collins because of their lack of talent and extensive salary cap room.
Cleveland Browns have to look at keeping players away from free agency. They also need to take a real hard look at their quarterback situation.
THE QUARTERBACK QUESTION
Obviously, the Browns need a quarterback. They know that. Hue Jackson isn't a fool. His future hangs on finding a quarterback, at least a competent one such as Andy Dalton.
The Browns will never say this, but I believe they made the decision not to address the quarterback question at the top of the 2016 draft. It didn't matter who was available in terms of Jared Goff or Carson Wentz. There were a lot of reports of the Browns loving Goff. I believe they liked him. I also believe they wanted that word out to build up interest in trading what was the No. 2 pick.
The Rams traded for the No. 1 pick, and took Goff. Then the Browns traded the No. 2 pick and kept trading down to add more picks.
I'm just guessing, but here's how I believe they viewed the situation:
1. They knew this was going to be a hard year. Maybe not 1-15, but a very, very difficult season. No rookie quarterback was a franchise-changer, so the decision was to add other players and picks.
2. They already had Josh McCown on the roster and resisted the temptation to trade him for a pick. He was supposed to be the fallback option if Griffin failed. They didn't realize he couldn't stay healthy for even a few games.
3. They'd add a quarterback in the middle rounds. That was third-rounder Cody Kessler.
That was the plan for Year 1. I can't imagine they will take the same approach again.
Nor can I believe they will draft another quarterback in the middle rounds, keep Griffin and then say, "We have RG3, Kessler and Mr. X. We're set."
WHAT ABOUT DAK PRESCOTT?
ESPN did a story detailing the quarterbacks that Dallas tried to obtain before taking Dak Prescott with the 135th pick. They tried to trade up to draft Paxton Lynch and Connor Cook -- both went before Prescott.
After taking Prescott, they tried to sign Nick Foles. The veteran went to Kansas City instead. They tried to trade for McCown, the Browns turned them down.
Prescott was the EIGHTH quarterback taken in the draft. Here's who went ahead of him and where they were drafted:
- 1. Goff (Rams)
- 2. Wentz (Eagles)
- 26. Lynch (Broncos)
- 51. Christian Hackenberg (Jets)
- 91. Jacoby Brissett (Patriots)
- 93. Kessler (Browns)
- 100. Cook (Raiders)
- 135. Prescott (Cowboys)
I have a hard time hammering the Browns about Prescott. A lot of teams didn't see the Mississippi State product as a viable NFL starter. That includes Belichick, who picked Brissett instead. It includes all the QB-desperate teams.
It even includes Dallas, which waited until the fourth round to make him the team's fifth player picked.
Sometimes, NFL teams just get it wrong when it comes to a quarterback. The classic draft was 2000, when six quarterbacks were picked in front of Brady: Chad Pennington, Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Tee Martin, Marc Brugler, Spergon Wynn and then Brady in the sixth round.
Yes, the Browns took Wynn. I do wonder if Brady would have been so revered if he ended up on the 2000 Browns. The Patriots were 8-8 the season before Brady was drafted with Belichick coming on board.
The Cleveland Browns have the first pick in the 2017 NFL Draft and are in need of a quarterback. But is there a quarterback worthy of the top pick?
IT'S A TOUGH CALL
Many draft experts have Mentor's Mitch Trubisky as the best quarterback in the draft. But most don't have the North Carolina quarterback as a top 10 player on their Big Boards. Here's a sample of where they rate him:
- No. 14: CBS Sports
- No. 16: Mel Kiper, ESPN
- No. 21: Scouts Inc.
- No. 30: Todd McShay, ESPN
No one has Clemson's Deshaun Watson in the first round.
Remember, we are talking about the "Big Boards," meaning the pure talent rating system. It's not the mock drafts. Some of those have three quarterbacks picked in the top 15: Trubisky, Watson and Notre Dame's DeShone Kizer.
The Browns have the No. 1 and 12 picks in the first round.
Trubisky has 13 career starts. He hasn't even declared for the draft. Watching his bowl game against Stanford, it's obvious he needs more experience. But it's also clear he will probably be a top 10 pick ... and an instant millionaire ... and that's why I'd advise him to turn pro.
Ready or not.
I love how Trubisky pulled himself together after throwing two interceptions in the Stanford game to play a terrific fourth quarter. He didn't lose his cool when teammates dropped passes. He has poise.
But as of right now, there is not a quarterback in this draft that I'd take at No. 1.
That said, the Browns still must find a way to address their quarterback question.
The man consistently brings sanity... and levity... to Browns coverage.
If I were into plagiarizing, then I could save a lot of time just cutting and pasting most of his stuff as my own. But since he says it better (or at least more concisely) than I do, it'd show...
Besides he doesn't use enough "dot-dot-dots" for my taste... and that'd be a surefire giveaway...
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Cleveland Browns have Terry Talkin' front office, drafts, quarterbacks -- Terry PlutoBy Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on January 07, 2017 at 7:19 AM, updated January 07, 2017 at 10:32 AM
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- When the Cleveland Browns launched their new way of doing business with the Sashi Brown front office, I promised myself that I'd be patient.
Here's why: The idea of piling up draft choices and taking a long-term approach is the only real chance this franchise has to become relevant.
I really mean that. It will mean some mistakes, and it will take time.
That's not to say I liked every move. The Browns have twice explained to me why they didn't push harder to keep Mitchell Schwartz. Basically, they wanted to open a spot for some younger players they hoped to draft.
They later drafted two tackles -- Shon Coleman and Spencer Drango. Maybe they both will work out, or at least one becomes a viable lineman. Drango showed some potential at guard. But I would have kept Schwartz, who doesn't miss a snap, does a solid job and was open to staying with the Browns.
It was a bad move back then, and I wrote it was a bad move when they allowed him to leave.
I was very lukewarm to the signing of Robert Griffin III. I viewed it as Hue Jackson's Powerball ticket. It could pay off big, but the odds were overwhelmingly against it.
So this is not to say everything is wonderful with the front office.
Cleveland Browns making painful roster moves that are the right thing to do, other than losing Mitchell Schwartz.
REALITY CHECK
Consider what the management team of Brown/Jackson/Paul DePodesta took over 12 months ago, inheriting a team that was 3-13 with the NFL's highest-paid defense. The Browns had not had a winning record since 2007. The various short-term fixes generally had been a disaster.
Alex Mack, Travis Benjamin and Tashaun Gipson wanted out because previous front offices failed to offer them reasonable contract extensions. I say front OFFICES ... as in more than one ... because three different ones had a chance to sign Mack before 2016.
The Browns are a joke because they lose so much and fire so many people. Now, they are the egg-head team because of all the Harvard guys in the front office and the reliance on analytics. They are easy targets for their critics. The current front office also has inherited the sins of front offices past.
I'm reading a book called Belichick and Brady, by Michael Holley. He is an Akron native, an excellent author who has authored several books on the Patriots.
The basic approach the Browns are taking to the draft is what Belichick has been doing since he took over the New England Patriots in 2000. What has helped Belichick is having Brady, so he's not been on a perpetual search for a quarterback.
Belichick consistently trades back in the draft, adding future picks. He can seem ruthless by cutting and/or trading players considered to too expensive. That's why he shipped linebacker Jamie Collins to the Browns in midseason. He doesn't want to pay Collins big money because he has other free agents coming up who need to be paid. He prefers them over Collins.
The Browns are willing to take the 27-year-old Collins because of their lack of talent and extensive salary cap room.
Cleveland Browns have to look at keeping players away from free agency. They also need to take a real hard look at their quarterback situation.
THE QUARTERBACK QUESTION
Obviously, the Browns need a quarterback. They know that. Hue Jackson isn't a fool. His future hangs on finding a quarterback, at least a competent one such as Andy Dalton.
The Browns will never say this, but I believe they made the decision not to address the quarterback question at the top of the 2016 draft. It didn't matter who was available in terms of Jared Goff or Carson Wentz. There were a lot of reports of the Browns loving Goff. I believe they liked him. I also believe they wanted that word out to build up interest in trading what was the No. 2 pick.
The Rams traded for the No. 1 pick, and took Goff. Then the Browns traded the No. 2 pick and kept trading down to add more picks.
I'm just guessing, but here's how I believe they viewed the situation:
1. They knew this was going to be a hard year. Maybe not 1-15, but a very, very difficult season. No rookie quarterback was a franchise-changer, so the decision was to add other players and picks.
2. They already had Josh McCown on the roster and resisted the temptation to trade him for a pick. He was supposed to be the fallback option if Griffin failed. They didn't realize he couldn't stay healthy for even a few games.
3. They'd add a quarterback in the middle rounds. That was third-rounder Cody Kessler.
That was the plan for Year 1. I can't imagine they will take the same approach again.
Nor can I believe they will draft another quarterback in the middle rounds, keep Griffin and then say, "We have RG3, Kessler and Mr. X. We're set."
WHAT ABOUT DAK PRESCOTT?
ESPN did a story detailing the quarterbacks that Dallas tried to obtain before taking Dak Prescott with the 135th pick. They tried to trade up to draft Paxton Lynch and Connor Cook -- both went before Prescott.
After taking Prescott, they tried to sign Nick Foles. The veteran went to Kansas City instead. They tried to trade for McCown, the Browns turned them down.
Prescott was the EIGHTH quarterback taken in the draft. Here's who went ahead of him and where they were drafted:
- 1. Goff (Rams)
- 2. Wentz (Eagles)
- 26. Lynch (Broncos)
- 51. Christian Hackenberg (Jets)
- 91. Jacoby Brissett (Patriots)
- 93. Kessler (Browns)
- 100. Cook (Raiders)
- 135. Prescott (Cowboys)
I have a hard time hammering the Browns about Prescott. A lot of teams didn't see the Mississippi State product as a viable NFL starter. That includes Belichick, who picked Brissett instead. It includes all the QB-desperate teams.
It even includes Dallas, which waited until the fourth round to make him the team's fifth player picked.
Sometimes, NFL teams just get it wrong when it comes to a quarterback. The classic draft was 2000, when six quarterbacks were picked in front of Brady: Chad Pennington, Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Tee Martin, Marc Brugler, Spergon Wynn and then Brady in the sixth round.
Yes, the Browns took Wynn. I do wonder if Brady would have been so revered if he ended up on the 2000 Browns. The Patriots were 8-8 the season before Brady was drafted with Belichick coming on board.
The Cleveland Browns have the first pick in the 2017 NFL Draft and are in need of a quarterback. But is there a quarterback worthy of the top pick?IT'S A TOUGH CALL
Many draft experts have Mentor's Mitch Trubisky as the best quarterback in the draft. But most don't have the North Carolina quarterback as a top 10 player on their Big Boards. Here's a sample of where they rate him:
- No. 14: CBS Sports
- No. 16: Mel Kiper, ESPN
- No. 21: Scouts Inc.
- No. 30: Todd McShay, ESPN
No one has Clemson's Deshaun Watson in the first round.
Remember, we are talking about the "Big Boards," meaning the pure talent rating system. It's not the mock drafts. Some of those have three quarterbacks picked in the top 15: Trubisky, Watson and Notre Dame's DeShone Kizer.
The Browns have the No. 1 and 12 picks in the first round.
Trubisky has 13 career starts. He hasn't even declared for the draft. Watching his bowl game against Stanford, it's obvious he needs more experience. But it's also clear he will probably be a top 10 pick ... and an instant millionaire ... and that's why I'd advise him to turn pro.
Ready or not.
I love how Trubisky pulled himself together after throwing two interceptions in the Stanford game to play a terrific fourth quarter. He didn't lose his cool when teammates dropped passes. He has poise.
But as of right now, there is not a quarterback in this draft that I'd take at No. 1.
That said, the Browns still must find a way to address their quarterback question.
Can we force Tony Grossi and Rizzo to read this article every day until next season?
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