Skip to content

Camp Cardale

The Browns Board
83 28 3.1k
  • We have to have this do we not? Again....if the Browns do what I like (taking Bosa) then they won't be getting the QBs you all think are so great that are supposed to go at the top of the draft. That means they will have to look further down in the draft for someone that they hope will develop.

    No one has more developmental potential than 12 guage.....and of course, it is also possible that no one needs more time to develop than he does (if he ever does).

    Still.....if they take Bosa as they should....and pass on the overrated QBs as they should, then they are still gonna get someone......and 12 Gauge is as interesting a speciman as they come:

    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1983783/cardale-jones

  • I'm still all for taking a mid round flier on Cardale, regardless of what we do in the first few rounds. Not as a starter, which I can't emphasize enough, but as nothing more than a project - like a Brock Osweiler or Garrett Grayson situation.

    He's probably the best mid round QB prospect we've seen in a while from an athletic/production standpoint. Regardless of how he looked this year, he at one point did produce at the highest level, which warrants a looksie.

  • yeah definitely a project. I dunno though. We would probably need to take him with that first 2nd rounder. But if there's a really good OL available or a big fast WR.....hey if he's still there in the late rounds then fuck yeah why not?

  • If there's a mlb'er still available in the 2nd round like a Borland....we can't miss on that. Before he retired obviously, Borland was a steal in that 2nd or 3rd round where he went. Yeah I know he got to play with Bowman and Willis and that for sure helped, but he produced for the 9'ers when both those guys were hurt or hobbled.

  • Not until day 3 at least.

  • Maybe as a UDFA

  • Camp Longshot?

  • Camp "I don't like QBs and I want Bosa"

  • Camp "I don't like QBs and I want Bosa"

    @gftchris said:

    Camp "I don't like QBs and I want Bosa"

    Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

    I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

  • @gftchris said:

    Camp "I don't like QBs and I want Bosa"

    Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

    I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

    I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

    I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

    @tour2ma said:

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

  • @tour2ma said:

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

    It might not be a bad strategy when you have 11 draft picks. It worked for the Redskins.

  • @tour2ma said:

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    Should Cardale be a full Combine participant, then maybe, but as of now a 3rd is too high IMO... no commensurate risk/reward. Plenty of good talent in that round including many positions of significant need. Assuming we spend our #2 on a QB, that position should no longer be one of them.

  • @tour2ma said:

    So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

    The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

    People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

    I'm with you all the way on this one, man. Great thinking.

  • What round did Cousins go in? How about drafting two QBs? Or take a QB #2 and a different edge rusher at 32 and CARDALE if he's available in 4th round. If he's such a raw prospect he should still be there in fourth round.

  • Cousins was taken in the 4th...

  • Hogan or Brandon Allen later in the draft wouldn't be bad but that is a luxury at this point. McCown/Goff/Davis is likely how it will shake out.

  • TCPO, it would undercut support for the #2 pick (if he's a QB) too much. Weren't you the one saying Tennessee should trade Mettenberger because fans' desire for him would be bad for Mariota?

    I'd take Cardale if we went D with #2.

  • Eeehhhhh

  • You get a Camp! ... You get a Camp! ... You get a Camp!

    everybody-gets-a-car.jpg