QB is the TOP Pick. What Happens if the Hoyer Experiment Fails?
-
I would be happy with Watkins or Evans as well, I just think Evans is a reach at 4. Watkins is an absolute game changer, not taking anything away from Evans. I've made the Marshall/Jeffrey comparison before, but I think TCPO hit it better with Gordon/Evans due to size. Either way I think it's a grand slam, especially if we got Evans in a slight trade down
-
Drafting based on 'need' is such an antiquated thought process.
At the top of the draft, you always grab 'the' player with game changing abilities and a star in the league.
Never ever draft 'projects' early.....
-
Ive been saying this! Maybe not for Ebron or Evans though. Id like to get up to around 20-22 with our 35th pick though. What do you think itll cost? A third and 5th maybe?@mike-h said:
A scenario I would love is trading down to 6 with Atlanta so they can draft Mack or Clowney, taking a QB at 6, then trading up from 26 to get Evans or Eric Ebron.
Ebron is 2 LEGIT
This is now my new thing for Mock 2.0. It's so brilliant, I can't believe I thought of it, because I'm an average writer/thinker/human at best.
-
Mike H I assume you want Bilgewater at 6? Or just anybody at 6?
IOW Would you take Johnny football Blake Bortles or Derrick Carr at 6?
WSS
-
I don't think there's anyone who would disagree with the opinion that you need a less-than-garbage QB to win in the NFL.
Personally, I would love anybody in the top 10 that we pick, even Sammy Watkins (as much as I've said otherwise recently).
There's no single way to build a championship caliber team. Some teams make it there by pounding the rock, others by passing. Some teams get there by playing smart football, other teams get there by luck and hot streaks. So, with that said, I can entertain the possibility of drafting any of the top guys.
What I'm most concerned with is maximizing the talents of whatever player we do get. Don't take a player and try to fit him into your system. That's not how it works.
If we get Sammy, I'll be happy. But use him where he's most talented. I'd hate to see him paired opposite Gordon and run to death on 9's and bang-8's. Don't just throw him backshoulder fades when we get in the redzone. Watkins can outjump most corners, but that doesn't mean he should. Watkins is a bigger and equally as dynamic Harvin. His first step is quicker than nearly all in the NFL. Get him the ball in space as well as down the field.
If we get Bortles, I'll be happy. But don't just drop him back in the pocket and let him rip it. Just because he is 6'5 and looks the part of a prototypical NFL QB doesn't mean that he is one. Bortles is one of the better QB's in this draft throwing out of motion. Bortles is actually mechanically more sound throwing on the run than he is throwing from the pocket. Get Bortles on the move with play and boot action, keep him in shotgun and give him a moving pocket.
If we get Manziel, I'll be happy. But don't just run spread, read-option plays with him simply because he's mobile. Manziel is an improviser with natural athletic ability. Just because he can run doesn't mean he should run. Keep him protected, keep him in the pocket. When things break down, then let him do what he does. Don't take him solely to run.
If we get Mack, I'll be happy. But don't just take him to pair next to Dansby inside because there's a presumed hole at ILB. Mack is a downhill player and his size and skill set would have him best suited as a 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are deepest. Mack can be an everydown OLB in the NFL, and would be great opposite Mingo. Either try and move Sheard or Kruger inside (which I would seriously not recommend) or use that surplus at a certain position to address a hole at another position. However, with this hybrid system we're assumedly running, you can never have too many utility players and that's exactly what Sheard, Kruger and Dansby are. Kruger and Sheard can play standing up or with their hands in the dirt, and Dansby is solid and experienced in both the 4-3 and the 3-4.
This is the way to build a championship caliber team. The skill differential between players at this level is so razor-thin. These players are (normally) still the best of the best of the best. It's not like some teams are putting out some random schlub with greasy fingers who can't throw a spiral. Even Blaine Gabbert was a talented college quarterback, as some like to forget. It comes down to getting the most out of your players and developing the right game plan.
It's highly unlikely that we've just had a string of shitty players for the past 15 years. It's much more likely that we've had shitty coaching. Mangini is unarguably the best coach the Browns have seen since Belichick himself, and even he isn't employed as a head coach in the NFL. Same goes for GM's. Not one of the former Browns GM's from this millennium currently holds the same title anywhere in the league.
Excellent post TCPO, great analysis. IMO it's your best post on here I have read so far (i usually disagree with the majority of your opinions, nothing personal, we just think differently). I can say I hundred and ten percent agree with your post. Look guys we are used to 15 years (read that again FIFTEEN FUCKING YEARS) of a straight clusterfuck mish mash of GMs and coaches, many of them a grade below their league counterparts, that is constantly being blown up and replaced with more incompetents every two or three years (this year it was one year!). Incredibly, being the diehard, masochistic fans we are, we manage to convince ourselves every fucking year is going to be different. It sucks. Our mentality as fans, much like that of our team lockeroom and staff, has been warped by constant upheaval. With that being said, I think we have for the first time seen our team owner grab the situation by the fucking nutsack and castrate the motherfucker once and for all. That gives me confidence, more so than the usual this year will be different. You hit it on the head TCPO: it really doesn't matter who we want them to pick and who they pick period. We have to trust Pettine and Farmer, who have played the game and worked their way up the chain of command through hard work and balls, to pick the players who are a) going to bring the greatest positive impact to the Browns on the field and b ) exude a winning attitude backed up by hardwork and a never say die mentality. I honestly believe Pettine and Farmer value outstanding work ethic and character as much as pure athletic talent and potential (and I think that's much more than can be said about the previous fuckstick Brown's regimes were all to familiar with). Anyways, great post TCPO, and apologies for all the profanity as I just got home from my twelve day hitch on a drilling rig in the oilfield where every other word uttered is fuck......I don't think there's anyone who would disagree with the opinion that you need a less-than-garbage QB to win in the NFL.
Personally, I would love anybody in the top 10 that we pick, even Sammy Watkins (as much as I've said otherwise recently).
There's no single way to build a championship caliber team. Some teams make it there by pounding the rock, others by passing. Some teams get there by playing smart football, other teams get there by luck and hot streaks. So, with that said, I can entertain the possibility of drafting any of the top guys.
What I'm most concerned with is maximizing the talents of whatever player we do get. Don't take a player and try to fit him into your system. That's not how it works.
If we get Sammy, I'll be happy. But use him where he's most talented. I'd hate to see him paired opposite Gordon and run to death on 9's and bang-8's. Don't just throw him backshoulder fades when we get in the redzone. Watkins can outjump most corners, but that doesn't mean he should. Watkins is a bigger and equally as dynamic Harvin. His first step is quicker than nearly all in the NFL. Get him the ball in space as well as down the field.
If we get Bortles, I'll be happy. But don't just drop him back in the pocket and let him rip it. Just because he is 6'5 and looks the part of a prototypical NFL QB doesn't mean that he is one. Bortles is one of the better QB's in this draft throwing out of motion. Bortles is actually mechanically more sound throwing on the run than he is throwing from the pocket. Get Bortles on the move with play and boot action, keep him in shotgun and give him a moving pocket.
If we get Manziel, I'll be happy. But don't just run spread, read-option plays with him simply because he's mobile. Manziel is an improviser with natural athletic ability. Just because he can run doesn't mean he should run. Keep him protected, keep him in the pocket. When things break down, then let him do what he does. Don't take him solely to run.
If we get Mack, I'll be happy. But don't just take him to pair next to Dansby inside because there's a presumed hole at ILB. Mack is a downhill player and his size and skill set would have him best suited as a 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are deepest. Mack can be an everydown OLB in the NFL, and would be great opposite Mingo. Either try and move Sheard or Kruger inside (which I would seriously not recommend) or use that surplus at a certain position to address a hole at another position. However, with this hybrid system we're assumedly running, you can never have too many utility players and that's exactly what Sheard, Kruger and Dansby are. Kruger and Sheard can play standing up or with their hands in the dirt, and Dansby is solid and experienced in both the 4-3 and the 3-4.
This is the way to build a championship caliber team. The skill differential between players at this level is so razor-thin. These players are (normally) still the best of the best of the best. It's not like some teams are putting out some random schlub with greasy fingers who can't throw a spiral. Even Blaine Gabbert was a talented college quarterback, as some like to forget. It comes down to getting the most out of your players and developing the right game plan.
It's highly unlikely that we've just had a string of shitty players for the past 15 years. It's much more likely that we've had shitty coaching. Mangini is unarguably the best coach the Browns have seen since Belichick himself, and even he isn't employed as a head coach in the NFL. Same goes for GM's. Not one of the former Browns GM's from this millennium currently holds the same title anywhere in the league.
-
Ive been saying this! Maybe not for Ebron or Evans though. Id like to get up to around 20-22 with our 35th pick though. What do you think itll cost? A third and 5th maybe?@mike-h said:
A scenario I would love is trading down to 6 with Atlanta so they can draft Mack or Clowney, taking a QB at 6, then trading up from 26 to get Evans or Eric Ebron.
Ebron is 2 LEGIT
This is now my new thing for Mock 2.0. It's so brilliant, I can't believe I thought of it, because I'm an average writer/thinker/human at best.
@mike-h said:
This is now my new thing for Mock 2.0. It's so brilliant, I can't believe I thought of it...
Thank goodness for FirstPick...
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Ive been saying this! Maybe not for Ebron or Evans though. Id like to get up to around 20-22 with our 35th pick though. What do you think itll cost? A third and 5th maybe?
More than that... you're trying to move up 13 - 15 spot in the lower 1st rnd.
GuNNerGatSKy said:
Excellent post TCPO, great analysis.
I'm pretty sure he heard you the first time...
"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 -
It really bothers me that I said unarguably rather than inarguably.
-
@mike-h said:
This is now my new thing for Mock 2.0. It's so brilliant, I can't believe I thought of it...
Thank goodness for FirstPick...
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Ive been saying this! Maybe not for Ebron or Evans though. Id like to get up to around 20-22 with our 35th pick though. What do you think itll cost? A third and 5th maybe?
More than that... you're trying to move up 13 - 15 spot in the lower 1st rnd.
GuNNerGatSKy said:
Excellent post TCPO, great analysis.
I'm pretty sure he heard you the first time...
-
-
AJ McCarron got engaged to this:
I don't see him as an NFL starter, but I'd throw a fourth rounder at him just to get him under contract so we could get her in Brown and Orange on Sundays for 3 or 4 years.
Zombo
Zombo said:
AJ McCarron got engaged to this:
I don't see him as an NFL starter, but I'd throw a fourth rounder at him just to get him under contract so we could get her in Brown and Orange on Sundays for 3 or 4 years.
Zombo
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
I don't think there's anyone who would disagree with the opinion that you need a less-than-garbage QB to win in the NFL.
Personally, I would love anybody in the top 10 that we pick, even Sammy Watkins (as much as I've said otherwise recently).
There's no single way to build a championship caliber team. Some teams make it there by pounding the rock, others by passing. Some teams get there by playing smart football, other teams get there by luck and hot streaks. So, with that said, I can entertain the possibility of drafting any of the top guys.
What I'm most concerned with is maximizing the talents of whatever player we do get. Don't take a player and try to fit him into your system. That's not how it works.
If we get Sammy, I'll be happy. But use him where he's most talented. I'd hate to see him paired opposite Gordon and run to death on 9's and bang-8's. Don't just throw him backshoulder fades when we get in the redzone. Watkins can outjump most corners, but that doesn't mean he should. Watkins is a bigger and equally as dynamic Harvin. His first step is quicker than nearly all in the NFL. Get him the ball in space as well as down the field.
If we get Bortles, I'll be happy. But don't just drop him back in the pocket and let him rip it. Just because he is 6'5 and looks the part of a prototypical NFL QB doesn't mean that he is one. Bortles is one of the better QB's in this draft throwing out of motion. Bortles is actually mechanically more sound throwing on the run than he is throwing from the pocket. Get Bortles on the move with play and boot action, keep him in shotgun and give him a moving pocket.
If we get Manziel, I'll be happy. But don't just run spread, read-option plays with him simply because he's mobile. Manziel is an improviser with natural athletic ability. Just because he can run doesn't mean he should run. Keep him protected, keep him in the pocket. When things break down, then let him do what he does. Don't take him solely to run.
If we get Mack, I'll be happy. But don't just take him to pair next to Dansby inside because there's a presumed hole at ILB. Mack is a downhill player and his size and skill set would have him best suited as a 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are deepest. Mack can be an everydown OLB in the NFL, and would be great opposite Mingo. Either try and move Sheard or Kruger inside (which I would seriously not recommend) or use that surplus at a certain position to address a hole at another position. However, with this hybrid system we're assumedly running, you can never have too many utility players and that's exactly what Sheard, Kruger and Dansby are. Kruger and Sheard can play standing up or with their hands in the dirt, and Dansby is solid and experienced in both the 4-3 and the 3-4.
This is the way to build a championship caliber team. The skill differential between players at this level is so razor-thin. These players are (normally) still the best of the best of the best. It's not like some teams are putting out some random schlub with greasy fingers who can't throw a spiral. Even Blaine Gabbert was a talented college quarterback, as some like to forget. It comes down to getting the most out of your players and developing the right game plan.
It's highly unlikely that we've just had a string of shitty players for the past 15 years. It's much more likely that we've had shitty coaching. Mangini is unarguably the best coach the Browns have seen since Belichick himself, and even he isn't employed as a head coach in the NFL. Same goes for GM's. Not one of the former Browns GM's from this millennium currently holds the same title anywhere in the league.
I don't think there's anyone who would disagree with the opinion that you need a less-than-garbage QB to win in the NFL.
Personally, I would love anybody in the top 10 that we pick, even Sammy Watkins (as much as I've said otherwise recently).
There's no single way to build a championship caliber team. Some teams make it there by pounding the rock, others by passing. Some teams get there by playing smart football, other teams get there by luck and hot streaks. So, with that said, I can entertain the possibility of drafting any of the top guys.
What I'm most concerned with is maximizing the talents of whatever player we do get. Don't take a player and try to fit him into your system. That's not how it works.
If we get Sammy, I'll be happy. But use him where he's most talented. I'd hate to see him paired opposite Gordon and run to death on 9's and bang-8's. Don't just throw him backshoulder fades when we get in the redzone. Watkins can outjump most corners, but that doesn't mean he should. Watkins is a bigger and equally as dynamic Harvin. His first step is quicker than nearly all in the NFL. Get him the ball in space as well as down the field.
If we get Bortles, I'll be happy. But don't just drop him back in the pocket and let him rip it. Just because he is 6'5 and looks the part of a prototypical NFL QB doesn't mean that he is one. Bortles is one of the better QB's in this draft throwing out of motion. Bortles is actually mechanically more sound throwing on the run than he is throwing from the pocket. Get Bortles on the move with play and boot action, keep him in shotgun and give him a moving pocket.
If we get Manziel, I'll be happy. But don't just run spread, read-option plays with him simply because he's mobile. Manziel is an improviser with natural athletic ability. Just because he can run doesn't mean he should run. Keep him protected, keep him in the pocket. When things break down, then let him do what he does. Don't take him solely to run.
If we get Mack, I'll be happy. But don't just take him to pair next to Dansby inside because there's a presumed hole at ILB. Mack is a downhill player and his size and skill set would have him best suited as a 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are deepest. Mack can be an everydown OLB in the NFL, and would be great opposite Mingo. Either try and move Sheard or Kruger inside (which I would seriously not recommend) or use that surplus at a certain position to address a hole at another position. However, with this hybrid system we're assumedly running, you can never have too many utility players and that's exactly what Sheard, Kruger and Dansby are. Kruger and Sheard can play standing up or with their hands in the dirt, and Dansby is solid and experienced in both the 4-3 and the 3-4.
This is the way to build a championship caliber team. The skill differential between players at this level is so razor-thin. These players are (normally) still the best of the best of the best. It's not like some teams are putting out some random schlub with greasy fingers who can't throw a spiral. Even Blaine Gabbert was a talented college quarterback, as some like to forget. It comes down to getting the most out of your players and developing the right game plan.
It's highly unlikely that we've just had a string of shitty players for the past 15 years. It's much more likely that we've had shitty coaching. Mangini is unarguably the best coach the Browns have seen since Belichick himself, and even he isn't employed as a head coach in the NFL. Same goes for GM's. Not one of the former Browns GM's from this millennium currently holds the same title anywhere in the league.
Count me as another who agrees with the above. Well presented opinion & I like it.
Just an "out of the box" thought (it'll probably never happen), but would there be a shred of possibility of the Browns trading the 4, 26, & 2015 #1 (& maybe even another lower 2014 pick) for the Rams 2 & 13 this year? Just a crazy thought from an old man. That being said, I am also totally on board with whatever Farmer & Pettine choose to do.
I'm tellin' you, the NFL BETTER move the draft back up in the calendar next year or we'll all go nuts!
Mike
IN DORSEY I TRUST -
Zombo said:
AJ McCarron got engaged to this:
I don't see him as an NFL starter, but I'd throw a fourth rounder at him just to get him under contract so we could get her in Brown and Orange on Sundays for 3 or 4 years.
Zombo
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
Racist with big tatas.
-
I don't think there's anyone who would disagree with the opinion that you need a less-than-garbage QB to win in the NFL.
Personally, I would love anybody in the top 10 that we pick, even Sammy Watkins (as much as I've said otherwise recently).
There's no single way to build a championship caliber team. Some teams make it there by pounding the rock, others by passing. Some teams get there by playing smart football, other teams get there by luck and hot streaks. So, with that said, I can entertain the possibility of drafting any of the top guys.
What I'm most concerned with is maximizing the talents of whatever player we do get. Don't take a player and try to fit him into your system. That's not how it works.
If we get Sammy, I'll be happy. But use him where he's most talented. I'd hate to see him paired opposite Gordon and run to death on 9's and bang-8's. Don't just throw him backshoulder fades when we get in the redzone. Watkins can outjump most corners, but that doesn't mean he should. Watkins is a bigger and equally as dynamic Harvin. His first step is quicker than nearly all in the NFL. Get him the ball in space as well as down the field.
If we get Bortles, I'll be happy. But don't just drop him back in the pocket and let him rip it. Just because he is 6'5 and looks the part of a prototypical NFL QB doesn't mean that he is one. Bortles is one of the better QB's in this draft throwing out of motion. Bortles is actually mechanically more sound throwing on the run than he is throwing from the pocket. Get Bortles on the move with play and boot action, keep him in shotgun and give him a moving pocket.
If we get Manziel, I'll be happy. But don't just run spread, read-option plays with him simply because he's mobile. Manziel is an improviser with natural athletic ability. Just because he can run doesn't mean he should run. Keep him protected, keep him in the pocket. When things break down, then let him do what he does. Don't take him solely to run.
If we get Mack, I'll be happy. But don't just take him to pair next to Dansby inside because there's a presumed hole at ILB. Mack is a downhill player and his size and skill set would have him best suited as a 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are deepest. Mack can be an everydown OLB in the NFL, and would be great opposite Mingo. Either try and move Sheard or Kruger inside (which I would seriously not recommend) or use that surplus at a certain position to address a hole at another position. However, with this hybrid system we're assumedly running, you can never have too many utility players and that's exactly what Sheard, Kruger and Dansby are. Kruger and Sheard can play standing up or with their hands in the dirt, and Dansby is solid and experienced in both the 4-3 and the 3-4.
This is the way to build a championship caliber team. The skill differential between players at this level is so razor-thin. These players are (normally) still the best of the best of the best. It's not like some teams are putting out some random schlub with greasy fingers who can't throw a spiral. Even Blaine Gabbert was a talented college quarterback, as some like to forget. It comes down to getting the most out of your players and developing the right game plan.
It's highly unlikely that we've just had a string of shitty players for the past 15 years. It's much more likely that we've had shitty coaching. Mangini is unarguably the best coach the Browns have seen since Belichick himself, and even he isn't employed as a head coach in the NFL. Same goes for GM's. Not one of the former Browns GM's from this millennium currently holds the same title anywhere in the league.
Count me as another who agrees with the above. Well presented opinion & I like it.
Just an "out of the box" thought (it'll probably never happen), but would there be a shred of possibility of the Browns trading the 4, 26, & 2015 #1 (& maybe even another lower 2014 pick) for the Rams 2 & 13 this year? Just a crazy thought from an old man. That being said, I am also totally on board with whatever Farmer & Pettine choose to do.
I'm tellin' you, the NFL BETTER move the draft back up in the calendar next year or we'll all go nuts!
Mike
Count me as another who agrees with the above. Well presented opinion & I like it.
Just an "out of the box" thought (it'll probably never happen), but would there be a shred of possibility of the Browns trading the 4, 26, & 2015 #1 (& maybe even another lower 2014 pick) for the Rams 2 & 13 this year? Just a crazy thought from an old man. That being said, I am also totally on board with whatever Farmer & Pettine choose to do.
I'm tellin' you, the NFL BETTER move the draft back up in the calendar next year or we'll all go nuts!
Mike
Mike, we don't need to move up to #2, we're going to get a stud at #4 regardless. Wonder why the Texans and Rams want to trade out of #1, #2? I smell danger there. Now if the Rams were willing to part with their #13, for our #26, our top third rounder, and next year's second rounder, it would interest me.
IMO they moved the draft back for the exact reason we're bitching- it keeps the Hot Stove League burning for a couple more weeks.
It does the teams and rookies no favors, as mini camps start almost immediately after the draft. I'd say right after the private workouts Farmer and Pettine will have their draft board set, weeks ahead of time. -
Zombo said:
AJ McCarron got engaged to this:
I don't see him as an NFL starter, but I'd throw a fourth rounder at him just to get him under contract so we could get her in Brown and Orange on Sundays for 3 or 4 years.
Zombo
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
in the toolcarton.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!
i hope you mis-typed that on purpose.
ever change a light bulb?
-
in the toolcarton.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!
i hope you mis-typed that on purpose.
ever change a light bulb?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!
i hope you mis-typed that on purpose.
ever change a light bulb?
Nope, didn't know they were replaceable. Whenever a bulb goes out, I just buy a new house.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
Zombo said:
AJ McCarron got engaged to this:
I don't see him as an NFL starter, but I'd throw a fourth rounder at him just to get him under contract so we could get her in Brown and Orange on Sundays for 3 or 4 years.
Zombo
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
No thanks.
His mom is a racist and his fiancé is not the sharpest egg in the toolcarton.
Usually the dumb ones are best in the sack.
-
Nope, didn't know they were replaceable. Whenever a bulb goes out, I just buy a new house.
LMFAO!!
you and zombo should talk. he's up for realtor of the year.
-
At least in this post game interview the guy sounds like a shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. Had he been white and someone asked if he was speaking English do you think anybody would flip out?
WSS
-
At least in this post game interview the guy sounds like a shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. Had he been white and someone asked if he was speaking English do you think anybody would flip out?
WSS
At least in this post game interview the guy sounds like a shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. Had he been white and someone asked if he was speaking English do you think anybody would flip out?
WSS
That's why we are calling her a racist, because she asked if Winston was speaking English?
Lighten up, people.
She has big tits.
-
At least in this post game interview the guy sounds like a shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. Had he been white and someone asked if he was speaking English do you think anybody would flip out?
WSS
That's why we are calling her a racist, because she asked if Winston was speaking English?
Lighten up, people.
She has big tits.
Zombo said:
That's why we are calling her a racist, because she asked if Winston was speaking English?
Lighten up, people.
She has big tits.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
yummy.
i'll leave the one on the right to my wing man.
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