Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation
-
choco---You're making a semantic argument while grown ups are sharing opinions. Props for knowing your limitations.
-
I saw an article written yesterday by an ESPN analyst which stated the two front runners for Garoppolo are the Browns and the Bears. The article insinuated the Bears will go "all in", and while nobody quite knows what that means, one has to wonder if they'd be craziest enough to offer their #3 overall pick. Most people, including myself, think that's absolutely nutso, but when I look at it like, "Well, the Bears need a QB, and nobody would skewer them for DRAFTING one at #3, so why is it different to TRADE #3 for a QB?"
Silly season tells us we don't know anything, and whatever the analysts write about will most certainly be either conjecture or directly stem from misleading information. Why would an NFL leak real information right now? Still, it's all we got right now, so might as well talk about it.
-
I saw an article written yesterday by an ESPN analyst which stated the two front runners for Garoppolo are the Browns and the Bears. The article insinuated the Bears will go "all in", and while nobody quite knows what that means, one has to wonder if they'd be craziest enough to offer their #3 overall pick. Most people, including myself, think that's absolutely nutso, but when I look at it like, "Well, the Bears need a QB, and nobody would skewer them for DRAFTING one at #3, so why is it different to TRADE #3 for a QB?"
Silly season tells us we don't know anything, and whatever the analysts write about will most certainly be either conjecture or directly stem from misleading information. Why would an NFL leak real information right now? Still, it's all we got right now, so might as well talk about it.
Still, it's all we got right now, so might as well talk about it.
Thank God the combine starts next week. Just in time to save us from more retreads.
-
uh huh
That's what you call your shitposting?
By all means, carry on then
What has this board become where we have a Pats fag calling out a Bengals fag?
(don't take the term "fag" personally...it is what we call all fans of other teams...or all people that are just on here because of one player...like Johnny fags. If you want you can replace the g with an n...if it makes you feel better)
-
Just to show how deep into silly season we are...
'Madden 17' sim: Browns, 49ers, Texans, Bears shouldn't trade for Jimmy Garoppolo
Then again the sim did nail the Falcons' 2016 SB appearance...
-
Gipper---I see no reason to be upset about being called a fag on the Browns Board. When in Rome, right?
choco---That's two posts in a row where you've written nothing worth reading. What's your record?
-
Gipper---I see no reason to be upset about being called a fag on the Browns Board. When in Rome, right?
choco---That's two posts in a row where you've written nothing worth reading. What's your record?
Gipper---I see no reason to be upset about being called a fag on the Browns Board. When in Rome, right?
choco---That's two posts in a row where you've written nothing worth reading. What's your record?
The thing is, coming onto the Browns board is the least gay thing you do in you life likely.
"Not that there's anything wrong with that".
-
@boo-fagley said:
"ESPN's Mike Sando spoke with 5 NFL suits to try & get a feel" on JG trade..in short this bitch had a wet dream..ask Belicheck,the guy not in a suit
-
@boo-fagley said:
"ESPN's Mike Sando spoke with 5 NFL suits to try & get a feel" on JG trade..in short this bitch had a wet dream..ask Belicheck,the guy not in a suit
"ESPN's Mike Sando spoke with 5 NFL suits to try & get a feel" on JG trade..in short this bitch had a wet dream..ask Belicheck,the guy not in a suit
I can hear the voice of Keith Jackson concluding this with "And there you have it."
-
I can hear the voice of Keith Jackson concluding this with "And there you have it."
"Whoa Nelly, there you have it"...you mean.
-
@boo-fagley said:
Its going to be the Bears.
Cant see Chicago drafting a QB when they have to start winning now.
Why do they have to start winning now more than any other team? The Browns/49ers/Jets etc. all the team looking for a QB. The Browns need to start winning long before the Bears. Why? Because I am a Browns fan, not a Bears fan.
-
@boo-fagley said:
Did not see a lot of #1's flying to Foxboro... Bad link?
-
"Whoa Nelly, there you have it"...you mean.
HA! Yes, thanks!
-
The way I read the article those were outliers.
"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 -
The way I read the article those were outliers.
Going price seems to be a couple seconds. Also liked the comment that the Bradford trade was the all time desperation move- something I said from the get-go. Somebody wasn't listening when I said that haul the Eagles got wasn't likely to be repeated.
-
The way I read the article those were outliers.
Going price seems to be a couple seconds. Also liked the comment that the Bradford trade was the all time desperation move- something I said from the get-go. Somebody wasn't listening when I said that haul the Eagles got wasn't likely to be repeated.
Going price seems to be a couple seconds. Also liked the comment that the Bradford trade was the all time desperation move- something I said from the get-go. Somebody wasn't listening when I said that haul the Eagles got wasn't likely to be repeated.
No less listening than to any other opinion posts around here...
I can see the Pats hanging on to Jimmy in hopes of a Bradford-like scenario developing.
-
@boo-fagley said:
A 2018 1st is still a 1st.
Not in trade equity calcs...
-
@boo-fagley said:
Expound?
Picks are discounted one round per year that they are in the future.
-
@boo-fagley said:
Really?
So the Eagles 2017 1st from the Vikes is really a 2nd.
Interesting.
In terms of trade points, yes....it was....last year....
simple logic.....would you trade this years #1 for next years #1...straight up?.....
answer =.....of course not.....
Why?.....because "right now" next years pick is less valuable......(and will stay that way till next year)(which is when it becomes this years pick, which is where the greater value is).....get it?
-
@boo-fagley said:
Nobody is talking about trading a 1st for a 1st.
Next years pick is relative to the talent in the 2018 draft. If the 2018 draft is ranked like the 1983 draft for QBs, picks in the 1st round of that draft are absolutely worth more than the 2017 1st round pick. Therefore, next years 1st is just as valuable if not more valuable..
Comprende?
That's all conjecture. There was a time that Matt Barkley was considered the next big thing. Grading a draft class a year away is a fool's errand. I believe the analogy is "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."
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