Be honest, How does everybody feel about Brock as a starter

jcam222

@ghoolie said:

Dude...................how fucking idiotic is that? Nobody wanted the fuckstick. Not then, not now. And think about it....what if what you pondered is true? What the fuck does that say about Hue? You let your better guy sit because you want to showcase the turd you picked up?

Fucking idiotic head coach. the fucking cocksucker is incapable of making a right call. RG3, and now this bullshit.

Desparation can be our friend, if Lucks out 6 games they will be desperate. If Flaccos back issue lingers and they are stuck with Mallet same deal. Mallet makes Os look like a hall of famer.

bbedward

I'm not too high on Brock Lobster but none of the QBs have emerged as the guy, lots of preseason left.

If he continues to absolutely suck then I'd like to see them go with one of the younger guys starting week 1.

The Gipper

@the-gipper said:
I mean, look at it this way: at one time you really sucked swamp water as a poster on this board, but you have improved over the last few years. So, you see, it can happen!!

And, just like most of your claims, the stats don't back that up.

No stats involved....it is the sum, substance and content that is the evidence.

The Gipper

@ghoolie said:

Right on your mother cunt. Dude, what yu mean to say is..... GHOOLIE WAS RIGHT................... HUE WAS WRONG.

Ohhh Oooohh Ooooooooooh. now Kize earned he start

WHAT KIND OF AN DUMB COCKSUCKER MORTHERFUCKER even wastes time with Ass Oiler?

Well....when you give 5 different opinions about the same subject, you may have a chance of being right on one of them.

I mean, its like laying down a 2 dollar bet on every single horse in a race and then saying: see, I was right, I won!

The Gipper

@opal312 said:
What about Doug Williams?

Doug Williams was pretty darn good his first time around with Tampa Bay. He got his team to the NFC title game...just a few years after they were 0-26.

hish747

Brock looked uncomfortable like he was struggling with decisions and plays. I'm not encouraged by what I saw of him last night. I also don't see much that a young QB should be learning from. Kizer looked like the starter to me.

Canton Dawg

None of the Brown's QB's looked impressive last night, but it IS just preseason.

At the risk of sounding like a fisherman (you know the one that got away) did anyone besides myself, keep an eye on how Mitch played last night?

Axe

Honestly, I look at Brock as a waste of time.. He's not the answer

runyon27

I thought all the QBs were OK, there were drops that muted all the QBs performances. Brock should have had a TD, I believe he also had another well thrown ball dropped. Kessler had a ball dropped by Hall at the end of half that would have put them in FG position. It was a well thrown ball too. I liked the way Kizer moved in the pocket on a couple of his throws and like the pump fakes too. Also the penalties to me killed some of the drives and forced them into some predictable pass situations.

Westside Steve

He might look better if Joe Thomas plays instead of our O line mistake Cam Erving.

Sabotage?

WSS

The Gipper

@westside-steve said:

He might look better if Joe Thomas plays instead of our O line mistake Cam Erving.

Sabotage?

WSS

Boy, that was an NSS statement out of WSS.

(Sabotage? That could make Cam Erving the star of an Alfred Hitchcock thriller, no?)

syd

@hish747 said:
Brock looked uncomfortable like he was struggling with decisions and plays. I'm not encouraged by what I saw of him last night. I also don't see much that a young QB should be learning from. Kizer looked like the starter to me.

not defending but brock only had 2 practices with the ones

miktoxic

and when person says he'll bet the farm that osweiler throws int in first drive and someone calls him on it dude is quiet a church mouse.

nobody is any good. i'm hoping they get to a 5 win season so ghoolie owes me a bottle of rum.

other than that another year of shit.

TopDawg31

@canton-dawg said:

None of the Brown's QB's looked impressive last night, but it IS just preseason.

At the risk of sounding like a fisherman (you know the one that got away) did anyone besides myself, keep an eye on how Mitch played last night?

You are not alone, I had the Chicago game on my phone while I was at the Browns game just so I could see what we will regret in not doing. Not drafting Trubisky will turn this fan base against the morons that decided to pass on him at #1. Won't take long.

LBC mike

So limp biscuit played good against 2nd d. So did Kiser. Kiserplaying more in college. Time will tell who will be better. Lets see them against starters to judge.

Tim Couch Pulls Out

@canton-dawg said:

None of the Brown's QB's looked impressive last night, but it IS just preseason.

At the risk of sounding like a fisherman (you know the one that got away) did anyone besides myself, keep an eye on how Mitch played last night?

No, because he doesn't matter.

If you don't think any QB's looked good, you mustn't have been watching.

miktoxic

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

No, because he doesn't matter.

If you don't think any QB's looked good, you mustn't have been watching.

good in preseason against bums. hell tim couch looked liked the second coming of roger staubach in the HOF game his rookie season.

then they played for real and his soul and shoulders are still being looked for somewhere around midfield.

great offensive line? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

TexasAg1969

@topdawg31 said:
You are not alone, I had the Chicago game on my phone while I was at the Browns game just so I could see what we will regret in not doing. Not drafting Trubisky will turn this fan base against the morons that decided to pass on him at #1. Won't take long.

Unless of course the improved Browns D with an all pro in MG sets up the O multiple times per game. All depends what kind of football you like best. I prefer great defenses and just better than average offenses when forced too chose.

Canton Dawg

@texasag1969 said:
Unless of course the improved Browns D with an all pro in MG sets up the O multiple times per game. All depends what kind of football you like best. I prefer great defenses and just better than average offenses when forced too chose.

It's risk vs reward.

I believe any GM would pick a franchise QB over a stud DL 10 out of 10 times.

Mudfly

@texasag1969 said:

Unless of course the improved Browns D with an all pro in MG sets up the O multiple times per game. All depends what kind of football you like best. I prefer great defenses and just better than average offenses when forced too chose.

Eggsactly.....lets be honest.....The O failed to get into the end zone on one series and ended up handing the ball over on the goal line.....THEN the D got it back at the 20, allowing us to score our first TD......cause then the O only had to go 20 to score....

Last year(and the year before) our O could not sustain drives and regularly gave the ball back, well before the D got rested. This continuously resulted in the D getting worn down and then failing....and we lost TOP every. single. game.....Which gave our D a much worse look than they deserved. Thursdays game was different....why?....because we won TOP. And the reason is NOT because our O held the ball and chewed up clock(cause they didnt)....the reason is because our D stopped the other team, got the ball back....and gave the O extra opportunities(which they needed).....

Plain and simple.....D make the O better, by giving them opportunities.....(and a shorter ladder to climb) to outscore the other team....We only scored 20 points(which is below average), but won because the other team only scored 14.....had we allowed the other team to just score the average 24 pts, then woulda lost......and probably wouldnt have even gotten 20, cause the other team woulda scored on a few drives that we had stopped.....