Sam Darnold
-
Darnold at #1, Allen at #4, Mason Rudolph in the 2nd round
just keep throwing QBs in there and see who can survive Hue Jackson
-
Darnold at #1, Allen at #4, Mason Rudolph in the 2nd round
just keep throwing QBs in there and see who can survive Hue Jackson
Darnold at #1, Allen at #4, Mason Rudolph in the 2nd round
just keep throwing QBs in there and see who can survive Hue Jackson
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
-
Darnold at #1, Allen at #4, Mason Rudolph in the 2nd round
just keep throwing QBs in there and see who can survive Hue Jackson
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
Taking 2 quarterbacks is nuts.
The Cleveland Browns have the hardest hit players in the NFL -
Darnold at #1, Allen at #4, Mason Rudolph in the 2nd round
just keep throwing QBs in there and see who can survive Hue Jackson
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
I am trying to imagine any QB pick at #1 overall where I'd sleep better with Allen as insurance...
-
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
Taking 2 quarterbacks is nuts.
-
redskins thing was... took RG3 at #2.Cousins in 4th.Had Rex Grossman & vet QB John Beck,which Beck was soon released..If we draft a QB at #1 & #4? Moving one or both to PS can't happen. So your eating 2 inactive spots of 7, weekly. Game week practice reps seem tough to get for 2 getting paid rookie QB's. Taylor starts, Stanton active back-up, a Rookie QB needs to sit inactive. not seeing the value here when the goal stated was to sit a QB for a while.(not saying that happens either) we need starter talent at pick 4 on the field. now, Benkert or Lauletta to PS..is a very likeable plan..(Kevin White or Kyle Lauletta seem very much like a Belicheck pick
)
-
Agree with Darnold at #1 and Allen at #4. Bust insurance. Take the safe bet and the project.
Taking 2 quarterbacks is nuts.
-
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
-
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd
-
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd
We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd
Drafting two quarterbacks would be the dumbest move in the NFL draft history, what a way to miss on #1 and 4.
I'd rather see them draft -0- and look at it next year......but I doubt that will happen.
-
We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd
Drafting two quarterbacks would be the dumbest move in the NFL draft history, what a way to miss on #1 and 4.
I'd rather see them draft -0- and look at it next year......but I doubt that will happen.
Drafting two quarterbacks would be the dumbest move in the NFL draft history, what a way to miss on #1 and 4.
I'd rather see them draft -0- and look at it next year......but I doubt that will happen.
It's like you want this team to average .5 wins a season forever, mjp.
-
It's like you want this team to average .5 wins a season forever, mjp.
Dag nabbit you youngsters don't know crap about football. (too ghool?) Hey I've waited 54 years since I saw the last championship.
Actually I don't see any near franchise quarterback material in this draft I'd go any number of other combinations and trade up for a late R1 or use the R2 picks for a project quarterback and go with the two recent adds. But that's just me.
They aren't a quarterback away from competitive football......yet. GO BROWNS 2019.
-
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis.
Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously).
i like the way you think: trade down and nab another QB with the #22 pick! drafting QBs at #22 is a Browns tradition, and Lamar at #22 would fit perfectly.
-
I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.
The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.
And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?
"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 -
I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.
The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.
And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?
I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.
The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.
And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?
I agree that a possible franchise quarterback would be fantastic especially with the #1 and/or #4 picks which they may not have in 2019 I just don't see any of the top 4 or 5 as worthy of a top pick -but- since the BROWNS can not get a true blue chip FA quarterback they must go ahead and pick one and hope he develops into a starter in the coming year(s).
And yes they definitely have holes but also have some near unprecedented draft pick positions to get some starters in the coming year.
So far their offseason moves have been very encouraging.
-
I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.
The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.
And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?
I agree that a possible franchise quarterback would be fantastic especially with the #1 and/or #4 picks which they may not have in 2019 I just don't see any of the top 4 or 5 as worthy of a top pick -but- since the BROWNS can not get a true blue chip FA quarterback they must go ahead and pick one and hope he develops into a starter in the coming year(s).
And yes they definitely have holes but also have some near unprecedented draft pick positions to get some starters in the coming year.
So far their offseason moves have been very encouraging.
but- since the BROWNS can not get a true blue chip FA quarterback they must go ahead and pick one and hope he develops into a starter in the coming year(s).
Not hard to read that as a two-pick endorsement.
"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 hard to read that as a two-pick endorsement.
Tim Couch was a blue chip Prospect.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
With a team thrown together of hasbeens and reprobates.
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