Trubisky
-
This idea that Cleveland needs to give up #12, #33, #52 in this draft plus something up high the next draft was only1 guy's opinion...
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
Exactly......all this talk of the Browns spending multiple high picks on a quarterback is crazy.....(insane)
Why would we burn multiple picks...(which we know this FO covet over just about anything)....when we could use just one to draft the guy of our choice....??????......coulda done it last year too.....
So, we go 2 drafts in a row.....owning pick #1 and pick #2 and dont take a QB.....yet we are gonna give up 2 #1" and multiple #2's to grab one???
I wanna smoke some of that.....
Makes ZERO sense.....
-
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
Exactly......all this talk of the Browns spending multiple high picks on a quarterback is crazy.....(insane)
Why would we burn multiple picks...(which we know this FO covet over just about anything)....when we could use just one to draft the guy of our choice....??????......coulda done it last year too.....
So, we go 2 drafts in a row.....owning pick #1 and pick #2 and dont take a QB.....yet we are gonna give up 2 #1" and multiple #2's to grab one???
I wanna smoke some of that.....
Makes ZERO sense.....
Exactly......all this talk of the Browns spending multiple high picks on a quarterback is crazy.....(insane)
Why would we burn multiple picks...(which we know this FO covet over just about anything)....when we could use just one to draft the guy of our choice....??????......coulda done it last year too.....
So, we go 2 drafts in a row.....owning pick #1 and pick #2 and dont take a QB.....yet we are gonna give up 2 #1" and multiple #2's to grab one???
I wanna smoke some of that.....
Makes ZERO sense.....
You & tour have put it well.
We've got the #1 pick in the draft. If we wanted a QB THAT bad, we could just draft one....and STILL have the #12 pick to draft someone who can tackle people.
-
Not true Woody. Gip and me both see franchise material in Mitch. That he's from Ohio is a bonus, but it's really not coloring my judgement. Detested the Brady Quinn pick, and I have zero interest in Toledo guy Deshone Kizer.
Right now my biggest Maalox Moment is thinking about the Browns possibly trading the ranch for Jimmy Garropolo. I almost barfed when they drafted Manziel, and Jimmy just might push my stomach over the edge.
BTW, if we go all D in the first round, it won't upset me much.
You just threatened 1 week ago if we drafted Garrett 1st and Mitch L was a great QB - you would go off in here. Do you want me to pretend this talking out both sides of your mouth is brand new? You were the first member of Camp Couch to disown him for Kelly Holcomb. Did you or did you not argue with Mark O in the Tavern on game day about how much you felt Johnny Manziel was the answer to our situation in 2015? Really Larry?
Excuse me for remembering your inventory of all your Coyote Ugly QBs you pretended to disown in public.
You just threatened 1 week ago if we drafted Garrett 1st and Mitch L was a great QB - you would go off in here. Do you want me to pretend this talking out both sides of your mouth is brand new? You were the first member of Camp Couch to disown him for Kelly Holcomb. Did you or did you not argue with Mark O in the Tavern on game day about how much you felt Johnny Manziel was the answer to our situation in 2015? Really Larry?
Excuse me for remembering your inventory of all your Coyote Ugly QBs you pretended to disown in public.
I'm allowed to change my mind Tom.
I wouldn't be upset if we took Trubs #1 overall either. The Draft can't get here fast enough. -
This idea that Cleveland needs to give up #12, #33, #52 in this draft plus something up high the next draft was only1 guy's opinion...
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
Tour, if it's inevitable we're going to draft a QB in round 1 - I'd rather have us pick Trubisky. He's the only guy our fan base would give a chance if the threads are any indication. I've never had him that much ahead of Watson as far back as my post stating I would keep an open mind if we drafted Watson in round 2. I join you, Mud and countless others hoping we don't go QB in round 1 but I wouldn't picket the choice of Trubisky either.
Camp Trubisky hasn't always been easy to talk with about the legit concerns people have for him in early round 1 so you can imagine the Colt McCoyesque welcome they'd treat Watson to with Hatfield etiquette if we ever got him a little bit later - especially when the weak arm bullets are already flying.
Pre-draft is always poker season and it's very rare that anyone announces their draft strategy for all to read way ahead of time. That said, I read that Hue wants a QB in this draft that he made it a point to say probably won't still be available at #12 meaning there still might be some parting with draft picks that aren't going to get a 2 thumbs up from people in here. Okay, so it was important for him to put that out there whether it's true or not so I'll play for the sake of conversation here:
- What team did we trade with last year that also has 2 first round picks this year with 1 as high as #5 and the next at #18? The Tennessee Titans we have developed a comfort trading with via their General Manager John Robinson (who used to work for the NE Patriots back in 2015). I'm hearing they'd love a WR in round 1 but not as high as #5. I've also heard their beat writer say on the sports radio show that Robinson seems more impressed with the 6-3 218 lb Corey Davis than he is with the 6-3 212 lb Mike Williams especially in terms of route precision,reliable hands and consistency. Keep in mind, last year he was more impressed with a Right Tackle Jack Conklin (who made 1st Team All Pro as a rookie) than other OTs hyped up higher.
- This has to cost us more than a swap of pick #12 for #5, so would Josh Gordon not only give them a #1 WR with experience but make them realize they could use the #12 on something else? It isn't like he ever suits up for us so you can't really miss what you never have right?
- SF at #2 and Chicago at #3 also need to draft a QB so the top 2 rated QBs could already be off the board before we get to #5 so if we do that swap with TN - is it conceivable we're drafting Trubisky at #1 and going for the best Safety at #5 or the second highest rated edge rusher there?
- It seems like far less trading than the Jimmy Garoppolo scenario.
Stay tuned...
I welcome the only Defensive Coordinator to earn a Superbowl Ring in New Orleans while understanding Revenge of the Nerds is a sequel. "Come get some!" -
If we pass on Garrett I'll be very annoyed
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Is there a single person that would be upset with Garrett 1 and Trubisky at 12?
-
I would be. I don't want us taking any of the QBs this high.
-
Is there a single person that would be upset with Garrett 1 and Trubisky at 12?
Here's my answer to that....cause, in a way, I would.....please understand the premise....
If he's "the one" and you think he's your next franchise QB.....then you take him first......if he's not "the one" and just a project/hope/the best we got kinda guy, then lets not burn a first.....on a project....we have too many needs. If we were just a QB away, then Id say do it.....but we're much further....
and we've done it thrice recently...
picked Thomas....then burned a first for Quinn....( a guy we chose a tackle over))
picked Richardson, ....then burned a first for Weeden...(a guy we chose a RB over)
picked Gilbert......then burned a first for JFF....(a uy we chose a CB over)
So...this year....lets not repeat history and burn our second first on a QB we dont have enough faith in to burn the first one on...
Id refer they love him enough to go all in......or pick a blue chip player and get your QB hope in a later round...
-
If we pass on Garrett I'll be very annoyed
...and there is that.
What if....the Geek Squad was very high on Trubisky? And after selecting Garrett #1 overall they wanted to do what needed to be done to be in position to take him.
Aside from trading up with the Bears or 9'ers, where would you need to be drafting in order to get him?
The Jets draft 6th.
Would you trade with Tennessee at #5?
Draft value chart says, our Rd one #12 and Rd two #33. (or #12, #52 & #108)
....obviously, Mudfly would not make any trade.
-
Is there a single person that would be upset with Garrett 1 and Trubisky at 12?
If it will shut Gip up, I'd be elated.
:lol: -
Is there a single person that would be upset with Garrett 1 and Trubisky at 12?
Here's my answer to that....cause, in a way, I would.....please understand the premise....
If he's "the one" and you think he's your next franchise QB.....then you take him first......if he's not "the one" and just a project/hope/the best we got kinda guy, then lets not burn a first.....on a project....we have too many needs. If we were just a QB away, then Id say do it.....but we're much further....
and we've done it thrice recently...
picked Thomas....then burned a first for Quinn....( a guy we chose a tackle over))
picked Richardson, ....then burned a first for Weeden...(a guy we chose a RB over)
picked Gilbert......then burned a first for JFF....(a uy we chose a CB over)
So...this year....lets not repeat history and burn our second first on a QB we dont have enough faith in to burn the first one on...
Id refer they love him enough to go all in......or pick a blue chip player and get your QB hope in a later round...
Here's my answer to that....cause, in a way, I would.....please understand the premise....
If he's "the one" and you think he's your next franchise QB.....then you take him first......if he's not "the one" and just a project/hope/the best we got kinda guy, then lets not burn a first.....on a project....we have too many needs. If we were just a QB away, then Id say do it.....but we're much further....
and we've done it thrice recently...
picked Thomas....then burned a first for Quinn....( a guy we chose a tackle over))
picked Richardson, ....then burned a first for Weeden...(a guy we chose a RB over)
picked Gilbert......then burned a first for JFF....(a uy we chose a CB over)
So...this year....lets not repeat history and burn our second first on a QB we dont have enough faith in to burn the first one on...
Id refer they love him enough to go all in......or pick a blue chip player and get your QB hope in a later round...
Ok. What if they had to trade up to 9 to get him? And the draft unfolded in such a way that they knew they didn't have to take him #1?
-
Shit, I say we trade out of 12 for the 22nd pick plus a few more high picks, and then just take our franchise QB there........ what could go wrong?
-
Is there a single person that would be upset with Garrett 1 and Trubisky at 12?
I could tolerate it but I would probably be a little more pumped about getting some more defensive help at 12.
-
Shit, I say we trade out of 12 for the 22nd pick plus a few more high picks, and then just take our franchise QB there........ what could go wrong?
Shit, I say we trade out of 12 for the 22nd pick plus a few more high picks, and then just take our franchise QB there........ what could go wrong?
-
One effect such ridiculous trade talk had on me tho is it's made the thought of spending a single pick early on a QB more palatable. And if it's going to be a QB early, who better than Trubs?
Not my heart's desire.... but not living in fear of it either.
Tour, if it's inevitable we're going to draft a QB in round 1 - I'd rather have us pick Trubisky. He's the only guy our fan base would give a chance if the threads are any indication. I've never had him that much ahead of Watson as far back as my post stating I would keep an open mind if we drafted Watson in round 2. I join you, Mud and countless others hoping we don't go QB in round 1 but I wouldn't picket the choice of Trubisky either.
Camp Trubisky hasn't always been easy to talk with about the legit concerns people have for him in early round 1 so you can imagine the Colt McCoyesque welcome they'd treat Watson to with Hatfield etiquette if we ever got him a little bit later - especially when the weak arm bullets are already flying.
Pre-draft is always poker season and it's very rare that anyone announces their draft strategy for all to read way ahead of time. That said, I read that Hue wants a QB in this draft that he made it a point to say probably won't still be available at #12 meaning there still might be some parting with draft picks that aren't going to get a 2 thumbs up from people in here. Okay, so it was important for him to put that out there whether it's true or not so I'll play for the sake of conversation here:
- What team did we trade with last year that also has 2 first round picks this year with 1 as high as #5 and the next at #18? The Tennessee Titans we have developed a comfort trading with via their General Manager John Robinson (who used to work for the NE Patriots back in 2015). I'm hearing they'd love a WR in round 1 but not as high as #5. I've also heard their beat writer say on the sports radio show that Robinson seems more impressed with the 6-3 218 lb Corey Davis than he is with the 6-3 212 lb Mike Williams especially in terms of route precision,reliable hands and consistency. Keep in mind, last year he was more impressed with a Right Tackle Jack Conklin (who made 1st Team All Pro as a rookie) than other OTs hyped up higher.
- This has to cost us more than a swap of pick #12 for #5, so would Josh Gordon not only give them a #1 WR with experience but make them realize they could use the #12 on something else? It isn't like he ever suits up for us so you can't really miss what you never have right?
- SF at #2 and Chicago at #3 also need to draft a QB so the top 2 rated QBs could already be off the board before we get to #5 so if we do that swap with TN - is it conceivable we're drafting Trubisky at #1 and going for the best Safety at #5 or the second highest rated edge rusher there?
- It seems like far less trading than the Jimmy Garoppolo scenario.
Stay tuned...
Tour, if it's inevitable we're going to draft a QB in round 1 - I'd rather have us pick Trubisky.
And via very convoluted route, that's where I have ended up as well... Of the top three QB prospect in the draft: Trubs, Watson, Kizer, I have the fewest problems with Trubs at #12. I don't want him at 12, but I could live with him at 12.
But NFW can I live with a QB at #1.
Here's my answer to that....cause, in a way, I would.....please understand the premise....
If he's "the one" and you think he's your next franchise QB.....then you take him first......if he's not "the one" and just a project/hope/the best we got kinda guy, then lets not burn a first.....on a project....we have too many needs. If we were just a QB away, then Id say do it.....but we're much further....
I respectfully disagree. Nothing wrong with Garrett at 1 and a QB at 12. Probability plays a role... the confidence you have in a prospect enjoying success at the NFL level plays a role.
"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 -
Not true Woody. Gip and me both see franchise material in Mitch. That he's from Ohio is a bonus, but it's really not coloring my judgement. Detested the Brady Quinn pick, and I have zero interest in Toledo guy Deshone Kizer.
Right now my biggest Maalox Moment is thinking about the Browns possibly trading the ranch for Jimmy Garropolo. I almost barfed when they drafted Manziel, and Jimmy just might push my stomach over the edge.
BTW, if we go all D in the first round, it won't upset me much.
Toledo is barely Ohio.
My statement on Gip comes from more than just his thoughts on Trubisky. I'm talking about conversations from the college thread
Toledo is barely Ohio.
Michigan should just annex Toledo tbh
-
Toledo is barely Ohio.
Michigan should just annex Toledo tbh
-
If we're trading back into the top 10, I'd rather get one of the elite DBs like Hooker
-
If we're trading back into the top 10, I'd rather get one of the elite DBs like Hooker
Happy Birthday!!State of Michigan wants their License Plate back(but your coming around
) Browns & Buffett: Got to go fishin, Down to rock bottom again, with just a few Friends -
Toledo is barely Ohio.
Michigan should just annex Toledo tbh
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