North Carolina QB Mitch Trubisky headed to NFL draft
-
I think when it comes down to it, if we take Trubisky #1, then fine. That means he is their guy, for better or worse. If you believe in him take him. However it also sucks because we will then miss out on one of the true #1 players in the draft (Garrett/Allen) and they will then likely fall to teams to finished somewhere between 2-5.
Also with the QB's being rated so close together I wouldn't be surprised if he did fall to us at #12 if we didn't take him.
No....silliness.
While I don't believe so much in Watson or Kizer,...and I don't believe in what I am saying here should happen, I should make another bet that both Watson and Kizer would also be drafted in the Top Ten. Something to eat to go along with the margaritas.
No....silliness.
While I don't believe so much in Watson or Kizer,...and I don't believe in what I am saying here should happen, I should make another bet that both Watson and Kizer would also be drafted in the Top Ten. Something to eat to go along with the margaritas.
The thing is, if you go look at, lets say the top 10, top 20 mock drafts, you will see that at the very least they have all the QB's going in different orders. At this point I have seen Watson, Kizer, Allen, Trubisky and Mahomes going anywhere from the top 5 to the 3rd round. That isn't to say most mocks don't have 2 or 3 going in the top half of the draft, but most are not in agreement who is the #1 guy is. Normally you might see people talking about 2 QB's who might be #1, but this year it seems that there is 4 or 5 guys.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
AJ McCarryOnsMyWaywardSoldiers? Too long? To Boomer-ish? Not R-rated enough?
Its "Carry on my Wayward Son". Sam and Dean Winchester would not appreciate you messing that up.
-
FYI, see a lot of the mocks. They universally have him going to the 49ers or Bears
... and therefore since the Mocks know best...
Zombo said:
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
AJ McCarryOnsMyWaywardSoldiers? Too long? To Boomer-ish? Not R-rated enough?
Zombo said:
We have a couple empty warehouses to rent out to Kizer's Kunts and Wussies for Watson if those clubs form.
I may be a Kunt, but I'm no Wussie...
If you were to file me into a camp, it would be "Camp Best Value", which I don't think Trubisky at #1 would fall into. I'm looking at the first three picks together and Garrett/BPA/Kizer is more enticing to me than Trubisky/BPA/BPA.
And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."
Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.
... and therefore since the Mocks know best...
And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."
And that point is in no different place for Trubisky than it is for Garrett or Allen.
The ONLY difference is that he is a QB......and all the risks and rewards are admittedly greater for a QB than they are for DEs/OLBs.
I mean, look at the Browns history.
Most see the failure of Tim Couch to be a greater failure than that of Courtney Brown. Yet they were both #1 overall picks.
We just think that a failed high pick DE/OLB is much easier to replace, and much less devastating to the team than is a failed QB.
Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.
And here you have mentioned a couple of underachieving high QB picks. Is a failed Bortles more devastating than a failed Dante Fowler?
Was a failed Jamarcus Russell more devastating than a failed Aaron Curry?
I think the answer is Yes....by virtue of the nature of the position.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
-
No....silliness.
While I don't believe so much in Watson or Kizer,...and I don't believe in what I am saying here should happen, I should make another bet that both Watson and Kizer would also be drafted in the Top Ten. Something to eat to go along with the margaritas.
The thing is, if you go look at, lets say the top 10, top 20 mock drafts, you will see that at the very least they have all the QB's going in different orders. At this point I have seen Watson, Kizer, Allen, Trubisky and Mahomes going anywhere from the top 5 to the 3rd round. That isn't to say most mocks don't have 2 or 3 going in the top half of the draft, but most are not in agreement who is the #1 guy is. Normally you might see people talking about 2 QB's who might be #1, but this year it seems that there is 4 or 5 guys.
The thing is, if you go look at, lets say the top 10, top 20 mock drafts, you will see that at the very least they have all the QB's going in different orders. At this point I have seen Watson, Kizer, Allen, Trubisky and Mahomes going anywhere from the top 5 to the 3rd round. That isn't to say most mocks don't have 2 or 3 going in the top half of the draft, but most are not in agreement who is the #1 guy is. Normally you might see people talking about 2 QB's who might be #1, but this year it seems that there is 4 or 5 guys.
I have seen almost none that do not have MT in the Top 5. I was on the Walterfootball draft database, which has like 100 mocks on it. and like 90-95% had him in Top 5.
-
Here's a thought:
It's clear that Cody Kessler was an analytics pick, and Hue said 'trust me' to take some heat off the FO..
I don't see how analytics would point remotely towards a QB who has only played 13 games in college (Trubisky)
The only 'top' QB analytics would really point to is Watson
Mitch2Pryor said:
Here's a thought:
It's clear that Cody Kessler was an analytics pick, and Hue said 'trust me' to take some heat off the FO..
I don't see how analytics would point remotely towards a QB who has only played 13 games in college (Trubisky)
The only 'top' QB analytics would really point to is Watson
Speculation at best. We don't know what metrics our analytics department deems as monikers of NFL success.
There's a whole heap of metrics that Kessler bested Wentz in, starting experience is simply one of them. Completion percentage, TD:INT ratio, QB rating - Kessler surpassed Wentz in all three. And those are simply base level stats, we have no idea what our analytics dept. is looking at.
Analytics could very well point to starting experience being a relatively low indicator of NFL success across the board.
Further, our FO didn't choose Kessler over Wentz. They chose Corey Coleman, Cody Kessler, Ricardo Louis, Derrick Kindred, Spencer Drango, Jordan Payton, a 2018 first round pick and a 2018 second round pick over Wentz.
Every single one of those players and picks was netted from the Philly trade in some fashion.
Analytics likely points to 8 players > 1 player for a team in the first stage of their reboot. It has nothing to do with what they'll do this year.
-
Mitch2Pryor said:
Here's a thought:
It's clear that Cody Kessler was an analytics pick, and Hue said 'trust me' to take some heat off the FO..
I don't see how analytics would point remotely towards a QB who has only played 13 games in college (Trubisky)
The only 'top' QB analytics would really point to is Watson
Speculation at best. We don't know what metrics our analytics department deems as monikers of NFL success.
There's a whole heap of metrics that Kessler bested Wentz in, starting experience is simply one of them. Completion percentage, TD:INT ratio, QB rating - Kessler surpassed Wentz in all three. And those are simply base level stats, we have no idea what our analytics dept. is looking at.
Analytics could very well point to starting experience being a relatively low indicator of NFL success across the board.
Further, our FO didn't choose Kessler over Wentz. They chose Corey Coleman, Cody Kessler, Ricardo Louis, Derrick Kindred, Spencer Drango, Jordan Payton, a 2018 first round pick and a 2018 second round pick over Wentz.
Every single one of those players and picks was netted from the Philly trade in some fashion.
Analytics likely points to 8 players > 1 player for a team in the first stage of their reboot. It has nothing to do with what they'll do this year.
Further, our FO didn't choose Kessler over Wentz. They chose Corey Coleman, Cody Kessler, Ricardo Louis, Derrick Kindred, Spencer Drango, Jordan Payton, a 2018 first round pick and a 2018 second round pick over Wentz.
Every single one of those players and picks was netted from the Philly trade in some fashion.
Analytics likely points to 8 players > 1 player for a team in the first stage of their reboot. It has nothing to do with what they'll do this year.
I think that's exactly how it was looked at. 8 players > 1 player on what is going to be a shitty rebuilding team anyways. Wentz isn't Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. The jury is still out if hes even Oliver Luck or Cooper Manning.
-
... and therefore since the Mocks know best...
And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."
And that point is in no different place for Trubisky than it is for Garrett or Allen.
The ONLY difference is that he is a QB......and all the risks and rewards are admittedly greater for a QB than they are for DEs/OLBs.
I mean, look at the Browns history.
Most see the failure of Tim Couch to be a greater failure than that of Courtney Brown. Yet they were both #1 overall picks.
We just think that a failed high pick DE/OLB is much easier to replace, and much less devastating to the team than is a failed QB.
Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.
And here you have mentioned a couple of underachieving high QB picks. Is a failed Bortles more devastating than a failed Dante Fowler?
Was a failed Jamarcus Russell more devastating than a failed Aaron Curry?
I think the answer is Yes....by virtue of the nature of the position.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
Only because, as usual, you are not listening...
"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 -
... and therefore since the Mocks know best...
And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."
And that point is in no different place for Trubisky than it is for Garrett or Allen.
The ONLY difference is that he is a QB......and all the risks and rewards are admittedly greater for a QB than they are for DEs/OLBs.
I mean, look at the Browns history.
Most see the failure of Tim Couch to be a greater failure than that of Courtney Brown. Yet they were both #1 overall picks.
We just think that a failed high pick DE/OLB is much easier to replace, and much less devastating to the team than is a failed QB.
Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.
And here you have mentioned a couple of underachieving high QB picks. Is a failed Bortles more devastating than a failed Dante Fowler?
Was a failed Jamarcus Russell more devastating than a failed Aaron Curry?
I think the answer is Yes....by virtue of the nature of the position.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
#8 overall... a little surprising, but nothing compared to JAX reach for Bortles at #3.
"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 -
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
Tannahil isn't going anywhere.Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
Ya lets get a qb! I just hope he's not another Tim Couch.
-
Yeah Z, like that old Prince song "Party like it's 1999". This is exactly the same vibe from back then, except we had a couple of years to scout the college talent pool. I was mostly wrong about Couch- but I pretty much haven't missed since. The Camps are heating up, the Trubisky Train officially entered the station, and is taking on passengers. It's gonna get pretty heated before April 27th rolls around.
The same could be said about Wentz this time last year, and damn few had watched any tape on Goff either. Different story this year considering RG IIIs suckage. BTW, MHO is Trubisky is at least as good a prospect as Wentz.
Then SI's opinion is full of it. I've watched all of the above, and I'll rank Mitch ahead of any of the others. Mahomes may not even get drafted in the first round- Some franchises are on record Watson is a third round prospect. BTW, there were questions about Carr in the 2014 draft too. Here's a re-do. Think the Texans just might trade Javedon Clowney for Carr right now straight up?
You're wimping out Stan. The Browns situation 2017 is not going to be remotely comparable to 1999 when we drafted Couch. I will be pissed as hell if the Browns pass on Mitch, and he goes on to have a stellar career with another team. It might be the final straw that will cause me to turn in my fan card. I watched the entire Packers- Giants game, and Gipper is dead on with his assessment. Not saying he IS, but- Mitch has a ton of traits similar to Rodgers. The pocket mobility- accuracy, arm strength. Sure he needs to sit and learn the Pro Game ,but who's to say the Browns won't give him that opportunity? Remember this quote from our new management team? "This team is being built for long term future success." The only way that has happened in recent NFL history is with a top level franchise qb. Take a look at the teams left in the playoffs- the Texans are the only outlier without a stud QB- and it could be argued they'd be sitting on the sidelines too, if Carr hadn't busted his leg.
Sure, as Brian Billick said it's dangerous to draft need over value. But, you hit on your franchise qb, you can draft for need for the next 12 or so years. Sure, guys like Garrett or Allen would have an immediate impact- but what happens when their rookie contracts are up and they pull a Ndamukong Suh on the Browns? For sure, we draft Mitch, he's not going anywhere else. Job #1 for the Browns is to have stability at the qb position, everything else is background noise. Want the dumpster fire song to keep rolling on? Love the idea of going into 2017 with Garrett and RG III @ qb? And up the win total to 4? I sure as hell don't want that scenario without a way better Plan B.
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
Zombo
Zombo said:
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
Zombo
Hooker's Hookers?
-
Tannahil isn't going anywhere.Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
Ya lets get a qb! I just hope he's not another Tim Couch.
"One said:
Tannahil isn't going anywhere.
Ya lets get a qb! I just hope he's not another Tim Couch.
Well what I'm saying is a Tannehill type. Average to above average starter. Honestly I would take someone with a similar level of play at #12.
-
I won't comment on whether or not Trubisky is worth a first or 12th pick because the Browns are going to trade their #1 pick for a bunch of projects again. If that's their intention than I would rather have a QB.
DAMN THE TORPEDOES! FULL SPEED AHEAD! -
I won't comment on whether or not Trubisky is worth a first or 12th pick because the Browns are going to trade their #1 pick for a bunch of projects again. If that's their intention than I would rather have a QB.
I won't comment on whether or not Trubisky is worth a first or 12th pick because the Browns are going to trade their #1 pick for a bunch of projects again. If that's their intention than I would rather have a QB.
If the Browns trade out of the #1 spot and load up on a dozen practice squad players, I'm going to go ballistic.
-
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
Only because, as usual, you are not listening...
Only because, as usual, you are not listening...
Right, I am reading, not listening.
I get it, you have YOUR sights set on some guy, just like I have my sights set on some guy. You think your guy is the next coming of Bruce Smith perhaps.....he may be the shit, but I think my guy is the equal shit...the next coming of Aaron Rodgers. And Its just that my guy does fit a more vital and needed role on this team.
And what I AM hearing is fear. Fear that if we take a QB, he may fail that he is the next Joey Harrington, not the next Aaron Rodgers.
Well, that fear goes both ways. My evaluation of your guy isn't any better than your evaluation of my guy. I fear that he is the next Aaron Curry or Aundray Bruce, and those fears are just as valid...and just as plausible as your fears.
But I say: take the risk on the more vital role/need.
-
Where was Tannehill drafted? Something like 10 overall? At this point in his career, I would take a Tannahill.
#8 overall... a little surprising, but nothing compared to JAX reach for Bortles at #3.
-
Zombo said:
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
Zombo
Hooker's Hookers?
-
I won't comment on whether or not Trubisky is worth a first or 12th pick because the Browns are going to trade their #1 pick for a bunch of projects again. If that's their intention than I would rather have a QB.
-
... and therefore since the Mocks know best...
And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."
And that point is in no different place for Trubisky than it is for Garrett or Allen.
The ONLY difference is that he is a QB......and all the risks and rewards are admittedly greater for a QB than they are for DEs/OLBs.
I mean, look at the Browns history.
Most see the failure of Tim Couch to be a greater failure than that of Courtney Brown. Yet they were both #1 overall picks.
We just think that a failed high pick DE/OLB is much easier to replace, and much less devastating to the team than is a failed QB.
Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.
And here you have mentioned a couple of underachieving high QB picks. Is a failed Bortles more devastating than a failed Dante Fowler?
Was a failed Jamarcus Russell more devastating than a failed Aaron Curry?
I think the answer is Yes....by virtue of the nature of the position.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.
Chicken Shit.
As was mentioned- just taking a defensive player at #1 is no guarantee his going to live up to that lofty draft spot either. Here's a refresher from Wiki about a guy who got as much hype as Garrett is getting.
"Dan Wilkinson was regarded as "one of the four players who rank well above the others in this draft". In workouts prior to the draft, Wilkinson weighed in at 315 pounds, bench-pressed 225 pounds 34 times and ran a remarkably fast 40 in 4.72 seconds. "Wilkinson could be a once-in-10-years player," said Billy Devaney then the Chargers director of player personnel. Also described as "maybe the best defensive-line prospect since Reggie White (1985 draft)," Wilkinson drew a lot of interest from around the league. Several teams were willing to trade with the Bengals for the No. 1 draft pick, including the Patriots, who reportedly offered their first-round pick (4th overall), plus several players including offensive guard Eugene Chung (their first-round choice in 1992), and the Cardinals, who offered their pick plus running back Garrison Hearst (their 1993 first-rounder). Eventually, the Bengals decided to keep the pick,"
Really, if you have a qb bust at #12, is that any worse than having one bust at #1? We've had that cursed #22 "value" qb pick X3 put us in the dumpster for over 10 years. The Browns are in a different situation in that they have TWO first round picks this year. Just don't mess up on both of them. I disagree with you Gip in that I feel having Courtney "sure thing" Brown flop hurt just as badly as Couch not living up to his potential. BTW beat you to the chickenshit term in this thread.
Another Devil's advocate thing to think about- let's say Garrett or Allen do live up to JJ Watt standards. When they come off their rookie deals they're going to want cap busting Ndamukong Suh money. I'd rather see that $25 million a year go to our franchise qb.
Well what I'm saying is a Tannehill type. Average to above average starter. Honestly I would take someone with a similar level of play at #12.
LOL, when's the last time the Browns had a Tannehill level starter for multiple years? Bernie? Before that, Sipe? Remember DePodesta's ill advised comment? "We passed on Wentz because we didn't think he had top 15 qb potential." Tannehill was around 12th this year- depending on how you want to crunch the stats. He got the Fish to the playoffs- it's been so long, I have trouble remembering the details the last time the Browns got there. If you're convinced the guy is the QBOTF- you don't hesitate, you walk up to the podium and hand in the card #1 overall. Yeah- even with Garrett and Allen on the board.
-
Yeah Z, like that old Prince song "Party like it's 1999". This is exactly the same vibe from back then, except we had a couple of years to scout the college talent pool. I was mostly wrong about Couch- but I pretty much haven't missed since. The Camps are heating up, the Trubisky Train officially entered the station, and is taking on passengers. It's gonna get pretty heated before April 27th rolls around.
The same could be said about Wentz this time last year, and damn few had watched any tape on Goff either. Different story this year considering RG IIIs suckage. BTW, MHO is Trubisky is at least as good a prospect as Wentz.
Then SI's opinion is full of it. I've watched all of the above, and I'll rank Mitch ahead of any of the others. Mahomes may not even get drafted in the first round- Some franchises are on record Watson is a third round prospect. BTW, there were questions about Carr in the 2014 draft too. Here's a re-do. Think the Texans just might trade Javedon Clowney for Carr right now straight up?
You're wimping out Stan. The Browns situation 2017 is not going to be remotely comparable to 1999 when we drafted Couch. I will be pissed as hell if the Browns pass on Mitch, and he goes on to have a stellar career with another team. It might be the final straw that will cause me to turn in my fan card. I watched the entire Packers- Giants game, and Gipper is dead on with his assessment. Not saying he IS, but- Mitch has a ton of traits similar to Rodgers. The pocket mobility- accuracy, arm strength. Sure he needs to sit and learn the Pro Game ,but who's to say the Browns won't give him that opportunity? Remember this quote from our new management team? "This team is being built for long term future success." The only way that has happened in recent NFL history is with a top level franchise qb. Take a look at the teams left in the playoffs- the Texans are the only outlier without a stud QB- and it could be argued they'd be sitting on the sidelines too, if Carr hadn't busted his leg.
Sure, as Brian Billick said it's dangerous to draft need over value. But, you hit on your franchise qb, you can draft for need for the next 12 or so years. Sure, guys like Garrett or Allen would have an immediate impact- but what happens when their rookie contracts are up and they pull a Ndamukong Suh on the Browns? For sure, we draft Mitch, he's not going anywhere else. Job #1 for the Browns is to have stability at the qb position, everything else is background noise. Want the dumpster fire song to keep rolling on? Love the idea of going into 2017 with Garrett and RG III @ qb? And up the win total to 4? I sure as hell don't want that scenario without a way better Plan B.
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
Zombo
Zombo said:
Mitch's Bitches
Gays for Garrett
Allen's Assholes
Debbie (Trade) Downers
Garappahomos
Are we missing anybody so far?
Zombo
I think I'm a Debbie Downer (again) this 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