What would you think of our top 3-4 picks going D
-
war has repeatedly said he's been a Browns fan since childhood...
He simply did not become active here until the Johnny saga began.
"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 -
war has repeatedly said he's been a Browns fan since childhood...
He simply did not become active here until the Johnny saga began.
-
Crusty old man lol
-
war has repeatedly said he's been a Browns fan since childhood...
He simply did not become active here until the Johnny saga began.
-
That's harsh. I think RG3 has potential
I don't normally do this but you are right Frenchie. That was too harsh on my part. It isn't like the guy WANTS to struggle with the time constraints our line and 1st years starters at WR give him or lack a pocket presence in the process. That doesn't make him stupid as much as it reminds me he's as in over his head as Brady Quinn was.
Herein lies the problem with QBs coming out of college for such a culture shock of the NFL. Quinn was frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in hind sight 20/20.
RG3 just isn't durable enough for the style of offense he was a rookie of the year in. Then again, he took a beating in our pocket just like Kessler and McCown. He also tried to play through some pain in the process.
Quinn was frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in hind sight 20/20.Let me fix/update that for ya
:lol:Trubisky is frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in FORE sight 20/20.
-
Quinn was frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in hind sight 20/20.
Let me fix/update that for ya
:lol:Trubisky is frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in FORE sight 20/20.
Let me fix/update that for ya
:lol:Trubisky is frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in FORE sight 20/20.
You may be biased. You want to see the Browns take another A&M asshole.
What makes you think we want any more part of the A&M curse?
Except for one guy, all the players the Browns have ever taken from A&M have been shite.
-
Let me fix/update that for ya
:lol:Trubisky is frequently hailed as "the most pro ready" QB of his class, which isn't saying much especially in FORE sight 20/20.
You may be biased. You want to see the Browns take another A&M asshole.
What makes you think we want any more part of the A&M curse?
Except for one guy, all the players the Browns have ever taken from A&M have been shite.
You may be biased.
Mirror meet Gip. Gip loves QB's.
-
Garrett's an asshole?
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
"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 -
Garrett's an asshole?
Probably not....its just that you don't think that a guy whose screen name if TexasAg may have an A&M bias.
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
-
Garrett's an asshole?
Probably not....its just that you don't think that a guy whose screen name if TexasAg may have an A&M bias.
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
Garrett's an asshole?
Probably not....its just that you don't think that a guy whose screen name if TexasAg may have an A&M bias.
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
My greatest bias is towards defense. No problem admitting that. But if you have paid attention to other posts I have made, I have clearly stated I would not be averse to taking Allen @ #1 as long as we addressed our very clear problem of edge rusher @#12. I don't see Allen as an edge rusher, so my "biased" view is to address the edge rush rush deficit @ 12 unless we take Garrett @ #1. Would I like to see a Clowney in Cleveland? Sure. But I can live with other alternatives.
So my "bias" is we have a major edge rush problem that must be addressed early in this draft which is far greater in terms generating the wins that will keep this franchise above water. A QB #1 will not do that due to the very long learning curve involved. We will be firing another whole crew before that pick generates any dividends for the Browns.
-
Garrett's an asshole?
Probably not....its just that you don't think that a guy whose screen name if TexasAg may have an A&M bias.
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
My greatest bias is towards defense. No problem admitting that. But if you have paid attention to other posts I have made, I have clearly stated I would not be averse to taking Allen @ #1 as long as we addressed our very clear problem of edge rusher @#12. I don't see Allen as an edge rusher, so my "biased" view is to address the edge rush rush deficit @ 12 unless we take Garrett @ #1. Would I like to see a Clowney in Cleveland? Sure. But I can live with other alternatives.
So my "bias" is we have a major edge rush problem that must be addressed early in this draft which is far greater in terms generating the wins that will keep this franchise above water. A QB #1 will not do that due to the very long learning curve involved. We will be firing another whole crew before that pick generates any dividends for the Browns.
My greatest bias is towards defense. No problem admitting that. But if you have paid attention to other posts I have made, I have clearly stated I would not be averse to taking Allen @ #1 as long as we addressed our very clear problem of edge rusher @#12. I don't see Allen as an edge rusher, so my "biased" view is to address the edge rush rush deficit @ 12 unless we take Garrett @ #1. Would I like to see a Clowney in Cleveland? Sure. But I can live with other alternatives.
So my "bias" is we have a major edge rush problem that must be addressed early in this draft which is far greater in terms generating the wins that will keep this franchise above water. A QB #1 will not do that due to the very long learning curve involved. We will be firing another whole crew before that pick generates any dividends for the Browns.
Well, my bias is toward winning. And the Browns have not been doing any winning. And a lot of that can be attributed to a lack of a quality quarterback.
Defense IS absolutely a priorty...but it isn't the highest one imo, We need a talent infusion in so many areas. A franchise QB. A couple of OL, and, yes, defenders at all levels, DL, DB, LBs.
But I don't think the Browns should concentrate on one area at the expense of the others. (though, of course, they must make hard choices)
-
Garrett's an asshole?
Probably not....its just that you don't think that a guy whose screen name if TexasAg may have an A&M bias.
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
Browns drafted Craig Powell in the first round at one point. [A very low point]
Should we be scared away from Ohio State defensive players?
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
My greatest bias is towards defense. No problem admitting that. But if you have paid attention to other posts I have made, I have clearly stated I would not be averse to taking Allen @ #1 as long as we addressed our very clear problem of edge rusher @#12. I don't see Allen as an edge rusher, so my "biased" view is to address the edge rush rush deficit @ 12 unless we take Garrett @ #1. Would I like to see a Clowney in Cleveland? Sure. But I can live with other alternatives.
So my "bias" is we have a major edge rush problem that must be addressed early in this draft which is far greater in terms generating the wins that will keep this franchise above water. A QB #1 will not do that due to the very long learning curve involved. We will be firing another whole crew before that pick generates any dividends for the Browns.
Well, my bias is toward winning. And the Browns have not been doing any winning. And a lot of that can be attributed to a lack of a quality quarterback.
Defense IS absolutely a priorty...but it isn't the highest one imo, We need a talent infusion in so many areas. A franchise QB. A couple of OL, and, yes, defenders at all levels, DL, DB, LBs.
But I don't think the Browns should concentrate on one area at the expense of the others. (though, of course, they must make hard choices)
Well, my bias is toward winning. And the Browns have not been doing any winning. And a lot of that can be attributed to a lack of a quality quarterback.
Defense IS absolutely a priorty...but it isn't the highest one imo,
And mine is towards a defense that, imo, will get us those wins far quicker than a new, untested QB.
We both see the problem, winning. We both have different ways of insuring that happen next year. I just think my way is on more solid ground than yours, which I see as a longshot for immediate success. I'm going for the layup two pointer while your shooting for the half-court 3.
-
There's an A&M curse? Does Denver know?
There is one when it comes to the Browns.
In checking....since 1950 the Browns have taken just one single good player out of A&M: Cody Risien.
All others turned out not so good
Browns drafted Craig Powell in the first round at one point. [A very low point]
Should we be scared away from Ohio State defensive players?
Browns drafted Craig Powell in the first round at one point. [A very low point]
Should we be scared away from Ohio State defensive players?
Probably not.....but.....apparently they think they must!
The Browns have not drafted an Ohio State defensive player since then.
In fact, the only two OSU players taken by the Browns since then were TE Darnell Sanders, and WR Brian Robiskie.
They would have been better off taking a few more imo.
Many of you are clamoring for that edge rusher......I wanted the Browns to get one last year that is better than any coming out this year.....Bosa, OSU.
-
Well, my bias is toward winning. And the Browns have not been doing any winning. And a lot of that can be attributed to a lack of a quality quarterback.
Defense IS absolutely a priorty...but it isn't the highest one imo,
And mine is towards a defense that, imo, will get us those wins far quicker than a new, untested QB.
We both see the problem, winning. We both have different ways of insuring that happen next year. I just think my way is on more solid ground than yours, which I see as a longshot for immediate success. I'm going for the layup two pointer while your shooting for the half-court 3.
And mine is towards a defense that, imo, will get us those wins far quicker than a new, untested QB.
We both see the problem, winning. We both have different ways of insuring that happen next year. I just think my way is on more solid ground than yours, which I see as a longshot for immediate success. I'm going for the layup two pointer while your shooting for the half-court 3.
Well, I think my way is on more solid ground than yours.
For a simple reason: It takes ONE person to make a big difference on offense.
It takes far more to make a big difference on defense.
Ghoolie is right in this respect: far more championships have been won by teams with top franchise QBs than have been won by team with top notch defenses (an mediocre QBs)
Fact is, imo....yes we need both. But I think you are wrong. A top QB WILL get you there faster than a defense....but both are absolutely needed in the end.
And, also, imo, an untested defender is no different than an untested QB. Both are untested....and every rookie is untested.
-
And mine is towards a defense that, imo, will get us those wins far quicker than a new, untested QB.
We both see the problem, winning. We both have different ways of insuring that happen next year. I just think my way is on more solid ground than yours, which I see as a longshot for immediate success. I'm going for the layup two pointer while your shooting for the half-court 3.
Well, I think my way is on more solid ground than yours.
For a simple reason: It takes ONE person to make a big difference on offense.
It takes far more to make a big difference on defense.
Ghoolie is right in this respect: far more championships have been won by teams with top franchise QBs than have been won by team with top notch defenses (an mediocre QBs)
Fact is, imo....yes we need both. But I think you are wrong. A top QB WILL get you there faster than a defense....but both are absolutely needed in the end.
And, also, imo, an untested defender is no different than an untested QB. Both are untested....and every rookie is untested.
Well, I think my way is on more solid ground than yours.
For a simple reason: It takes ONE person to make a big difference on offense.
It takes far more to make a big difference on defense.
Ghoolie is right in this respect: far more championships have been won by teams with top franchise QBs than have been won by team with top notch defenses (an mediocre QBs)
Fact is, imo....yes we need both. But I think you are wrong. A top QB WILL get you there faster than a defense....but both are absolutely needed in the end.
And, also, imo, an untested defender is no different than an untested QB. Both are untested....and every rookie is untested.
Oh, now you are in big trouble, actually agreeing with goulie, an act of desperation.
:lol: -
Well, I think my way is on more solid ground than yours.
For a simple reason: It takes ONE person to make a big difference on offense.
It takes far more to make a big difference on defense.
Ghoolie is right in this respect: far more championships have been won by teams with top franchise QBs than have been won by team with top notch defenses (an mediocre QBs)
Fact is, imo....yes we need both. But I think you are wrong. A top QB WILL get you there faster than a defense....but both are absolutely needed in the end.
And, also, imo, an untested defender is no different than an untested QB. Both are untested....and every rookie is untested.
Oh, now you are in big trouble, actually agreeing with goulie, an act of desperation.
:lol:Oh, now you are in big trouble, actually agreeing with goulie, an act of desperation.
:lol:But consistent with backing a Class of 2017 QB #1 overall...
-
My greatest bias is towards defense. No problem admitting that. But if you have paid attention to other posts I have made, I have clearly stated I would not be averse to taking Allen @ #1 as long as we addressed our very clear problem of edge rusher @#12. I don't see Allen as an edge rusher, so my "biased" view is to address the edge rush rush deficit @ 12 unless we take Garrett @ #1. Would I like to see a Clowney in Cleveland? Sure. But I can live with other alternatives.
So my "bias" is we have a major edge rush problem that must be addressed early in this draft which is far greater in terms generating the wins that will keep this franchise above water. A QB #1 will not do that due to the very long learning curve involved. We will be firing another whole crew before that pick generates any dividends for the Browns.
Well, my bias is toward winning. And the Browns have not been doing any winning. And a lot of that can be attributed to a lack of a quality quarterback.
Defense IS absolutely a priorty...but it isn't the highest one imo, We need a talent infusion in so many areas. A franchise QB. A couple of OL, and, yes, defenders at all levels, DL, DB, LBs.
But I don't think the Browns should concentrate on one area at the expense of the others. (though, of course, they must make hard choices)
But I don't think the Browns should concentrate on one area at the expense of the others. (though, of course, they must make hard choices)
Unless it means drafting a lower rated QB over higher rated defensive players....correct?
Just concentrate on drafting a suspect QB, when there are elite defensive talents sitting there for the taking....
-
Well, I think my way is on more solid ground than yours.
For a simple reason: It takes ONE person to make a big difference on offense.
It takes far more to make a big difference on defense.
Ghoolie is right in this respect: far more championships have been won by teams with top franchise QBs than have been won by team with top notch defenses (an mediocre QBs)
Fact is, imo....yes we need both. But I think you are wrong. A top QB WILL get you there faster than a defense....but both are absolutely needed in the end.
And, also, imo, an untested defender is no different than an untested QB. Both are untested....and every rookie is untested.
Oh, now you are in big trouble, actually agreeing with goulie, an act of desperation.
:lol:Oh, now you are in big trouble, actually agreeing with goulie, an act of desperation.
:lol:No, I have been about 50/50 with Ghoolie for many years. I just don't get all bombastic if I disagree with him. I simply say: I disagree with you....just like I did with you above.
-
But I don't think the Browns should concentrate on one area at the expense of the others. (though, of course, they must make hard choices)
Unless it means drafting a lower rated QB over higher rated defensive players....correct?
Just concentrate on drafting a suspect QB, when there are elite defensive talents sitting there for the taking....
Unless it means drafting a lower rated QB over higher rated defensive players....correct?
Yes, if that one QB were Watson or Kizer....
Just concentrate on drafting a suspect QB, when there are elite defensive talents sitting there for the taking....
Or, how about concentrating on drafting a top notch QB prospect....that every national writer out there says will be a top QB draft choice.
And from my point of view, I see no "elite" defensive talent out there. There is promising talent, but nothing mind boggling elite.
If we had wanted elite defensive talent....then we should have taken Bosa at #2 last year.
Face it, Nate Orchard had almost double the number of sacks in college than the guy you all seem to be touting. ...in the Pac 12.
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