Chad Kelly Vrs Mitch Trubisky
-
If you guys want to show me a list of late round QBs with off the field problems related to drugs and fighting and general douchbaggery who became franchise QBs in the last 25 years, I'll wait.
If you guys want to show me a list of late round QBs with off the field problems related to drugs and fighting and general douchbaggery who became franchise QBs in the last 25 years, I'll wait.
Instead of showing up to 1 more thread just to piss all over it, you could actually participate and give us a better alternative to Kelly after round 1 like I asked of those who disapprove of Kelly.
BTW, Irish people have a tendency to swing first and ask questions later as depicted in Notre Dame's storied football tradition. Meanwhile college QBs have a tendency to like to party after a hard week of work. This has gone on in the NFL as well dating all the way back to Norm Van Brocklin and probably much longer. Do you want an alter boy with manners or a competitive QB? It's okay to be a fiery leader with a work hard - play hard attitude. And when we read about him fighting, why are we so quick to assume he wasn't defending family or friends? This doesn't exactly make him the Pac Man Jones you want portrayed here. Having said that, I'll bet there's at least 2 females in this country that would tell me Ben Roethlisberger is just as much of a thug as Pac Man is. That hasn't stopped him from frequenting Superbowls while nice kids like Kessler in Cleveland have been getting concussions and other injuries.
Anyone remember why Dan Marino slid all the way down into the late 20s of round 1? Rumors of heavy partying and nose candy while his final matchup with Penn State showed him screaming at teammates. He also screamed at Clayton and Duper at the next level when they dropped his passes, which looked like it was an effective form of fiery leadership. Jim Kelly and Bernie Kosar came out of one of the biggest party schools in the country. You don't think they waited to take their first sip of beer until after they retired, do you? If so, I have some real estate for sale in Alligator Alley. This just in. One of those guys is Irish and he's related to Chad Kelly. There's a lot of stories about Jim's partying past 4:00 am in the Elmwood Strip on weekends of home games especially during the brief tenure of the "Bickering Bills." Once the guy wanted to take on the responsibility of the "no huddle" with him calling his own plays - he got a little smarter with when/where his partying should take place. He also became a much better guy to his girlfriend/fiance and in the community.
-
If you guys want to show me a list of late round QBs with off the field problems related to drugs and fighting and general douchbaggery who became franchise QBs in the last 25 years, I'll wait.
If you guys want to show me a list of late round QBs with off the field problems related to drugs and fighting and general douchbaggery who became franchise QBs in the last 25 years, I'll wait.
Why the "late round" proviso if your main issue is off-field concerns?
"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 -
So our list of better alternatives to Chad Kelly after round 1 from those that disapprove of him remains at 0. Apparently, they're just as impressed with this QB class as I am. I wish that pushed Trubisky into Peyton Manning range; but Manning actually felt a 4th season of starting experience was important to his readiness for the NFL. That was his response on the radio when Frank Wycheck asked him why did you risk getting hurt when you would have been the #1 overall after your junior year?
That being the case, I'll love me some Allen or Garrett 1st and the next best impact we can find defensively at #12. Allen reminds me of a more compact version of Richard Seymore in the way he can play inside or outside as well as any technique a DC will assign him so I'm leaning toward him. Furthermore, I'm not sold we need to write off Nate Orchard this quickly; especially considering he'll be a probably be a much better fit in Williams' scheme. That said, I'll keep an open mind and welcome any feedback from our 12th Man guys (War & Aggies) or others that have seen a lot more of Garrett than I have.
-
It doesn't do any good to go to extremes to make points. Aaron Rodgers is a real nice guy.
Joe Thomas is a real nice guy. Drew Brees is a very nice guy. Andrew Luck is a nice guy.
Alex Smith is a nice guy.
It's TOUGH and LOVE OF THE GAME...okay, intelligence, instinct... that is the key.
It's baloney to select a "bad guy" because you think he'll be tough on the football field.
Good luck to ya if you do, because he could be suspended, be out of football, be a complete
dud, die of a overdose, make you lose games because of stupid penaltiles at the wrong time etc,
go to jail for socking his wife, etc etc etc.
Jerry Sherk was a nice guy, Brian Brennan, Sipe, Kosar, the list is long.
I'ma callin baloniesies.
If you stick to your complete valid list of qualifiers, it's okay if you pick up/draft a guy and give him a second chance,
depending on how he screwed up in the first place. Dallas did it, turned out great.
Some scum hair ball dirtbags become star players. Like Joey Porter - he was a steriod rage kind of cheapshot
sombeitch player, in my book. Okay, I don't have book, but... Porter just got in legal trouble as a coach, fer cryin out loud,
and a very dirty player on the field. Dirty, cheap shot players can help you win...by taking out the important players on the other
team with illegal hits.
Just draft guys who love the game, have the work ethic, smarts, character, who play the game 100% because of it...with
NFL physical talent, and you have a great addition to your football team. You can give a college player
a second chance and win. or not. You can have a could-have-been great player, but he went to prison
after you drafted him in the fourth round because you are a moron, and the idiot kid never joins your team.
Enough with the "bad guy" tag.
Chuck Norris is a very, very,very, very nice guy. So? You think he isn't tough and won't kick your ass in a karate
tournament?
Football is a tough man's game, not a dirty cheapshot game - unless you play for the urine yellow stinking
squealers and got steriod rage.
You draft a real bad tough guy who is a terrific player , I'll draft a nice guy who is just as tough, and my guy will never be in legal trouble, suspended, and like Joe Thomas, your guy will vote for Joe as All-pro.
etc etc. I win.
-
Cal, your point rings true for QBs, which is what this thread is related to, so I guess I'll shut up. But that list is much harder to create with other positions, and yet you seem to have the same belief. For every one you can bring up I've got 5 bone thugs for you. It takes a little crazy to play this game.
And please don't type "I'ma callin baloniesies" again.
-
If you guys want to show me a list of late round QBs with off the field problems related to drugs and fighting and general douchbaggery who became franchise QBs in the last 25 years, I'll wait.
Why the "late round" proviso if your main issue is off-field concerns?
Why the "late round" proviso if your main issue is off-field concerns?
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
-
Why the "late round" proviso if your main issue is off-field concerns?
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Sometimes, it helps to understand the context of a discussion you're showing up to. Therefore, when the person that started the thread says it's okay if you don't like Chad Kelly and he'd be interested in hearing better alternatives - your input could either perpetuate an ongoing discussion or improve it.
Believe it or not, I like reading what you have to say about QBs most of the time since I've seen you nail some predictions about guys that weren't exactly crowd faves/popular.
So, who do you see as better alternatives to Kelly after round 1 or mid-late in this draft?
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!" -
Cal, your point rings true for QBs, which is what this thread is related to, so I guess I'll shut up. But that list is much harder to create with other positions, and yet you seem to have the same belief. For every one you can bring up I've got 5 bone thugs for you. It takes a little crazy to play this game.
And please don't type "I'ma callin baloniesies" again.
Cal, your point rings true for QBs, which is what this thread is related to, so I guess I'll shut up. But that list is much harder to create with other positions, and yet you seem to have the same belief. For every one you can bring up I've got 5 bone thugs for you. It takes a little crazy to play this game.
And please don't type "I'ma callin baloniesies" again.
to a point, maybe, but I don't see "crazy" as being a bad guy. You listen to Joe Thomas joke around, you
figure he's crazy/funny/nice guy.... But going up vs him on the football field is hell, right?
I figure Chuck Norris is crazy, his sport is nuts. Mr. Miaggi was very nice..... Dick Butkus was a nice guy.
Danny Shelton is a very, very, very nice kid - who is one of the most powerful kickass nt's in the NFL now.
and he'll be even better this coming year.
and, lol, I apologize,.... only typed that to make Flugels spit coffee on his keyboard. lol
-
It doesn't do any good to go to extremes to make points. Aaron Rodgers is a real nice guy.
Joe Thomas is a real nice guy. Drew Brees is a very nice guy. Andrew Luck is a nice guy.
Alex Smith is a nice guy.
It's TOUGH and LOVE OF THE GAME...okay, intelligence, instinct... that is the key.
It's baloney to select a "bad guy" because you think he'll be tough on the football field.
Good luck to ya if you do, because he could be suspended, be out of football, be a complete
dud, die of a overdose, make you lose games because of stupid penaltiles at the wrong time etc,
go to jail for socking his wife, etc etc etc.
Jerry Sherk was a nice guy, Brian Brennan, Sipe, Kosar, the list is long.
I'ma callin baloniesies.
If you stick to your complete valid list of qualifiers, it's okay if you pick up/draft a guy and give him a second chance,
depending on how he screwed up in the first place. Dallas did it, turned out great.
Some scum hair ball dirtbags become star players. Like Joey Porter - he was a steriod rage kind of cheapshot
sombeitch player, in my book. Okay, I don't have book, but... Porter just got in legal trouble as a coach, fer cryin out loud,
and a very dirty player on the field. Dirty, cheap shot players can help you win...by taking out the important players on the other
team with illegal hits.
Just draft guys who love the game, have the work ethic, smarts, character, who play the game 100% because of it...with
NFL physical talent, and you have a great addition to your football team. You can give a college player
a second chance and win. or not. You can have a could-have-been great player, but he went to prison
after you drafted him in the fourth round because you are a moron, and the idiot kid never joins your team.
Enough with the "bad guy" tag.
Chuck Norris is a very, very,very, very nice guy. So? You think he isn't tough and won't kick your ass in a karate
tournament?
Football is a tough man's game, not a dirty cheapshot game - unless you play for the urine yellow stinking
squealers and got steriod rage.
You draft a real bad tough guy who is a terrific player , I'll draft a nice guy who is just as tough, and my guy will never be in legal trouble, suspended, and like Joe Thomas, your guy will vote for Joe as All-pro.
etc etc. I win.
It doesn't do any good to go to extremes to make points.
Agreed, so I'll remove your countless examples of them Calsies. - Flugel
It's TOUGH and LOVE OF THE GAME...okay, intelligence, instinct... that is the key.
It's baloney to select a "bad guy" because you think he'll be tough on the football field.
While you're on the subject going to extremes, who in this thread looks like their criteria for improving the QB position starts with looking for a bad guy especially after the Johnny Manziel experience? Kelly is just an Irish kid with a swing first - ask questions later mentality; especially when it pertains to protecting family, friends or teammates. That doesn't exactly make him the next Pac Man Jones some are portraying him as. My first impression of him and his skill set was watching that leave Nick Saban not knowing whether to shit or winde his wrist watch. That's as close as it gets to seeing someone walk on water. It's okay if people don't agree with that assessment.
And, not much different than countless other previous QB prospects between the ages of 20-23 years of age - they like to exercise their work hard play hard with a little more partying than alter boys. No different than Bernie Kosar and Jim Kelly coming out of a party school like Miami. You don't really think both guys waited to take their first sip of beer until after their pro football careers ended do you? - Flugel
You draft a real bad tough guy who is a terrific player , I'll draft a nice guy who is just as tough, and my guy will never be in legal trouble, suspended, and like Joe Thomas, your guy will vote for Joe as All-pro.
You've been repeating this since 1999. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh drafted Ben Rapen who is competing for another SB visit while we've been drafting all those real nice kids you speak of. In fact, there's a t-shirt honoring all those great kids that got beaten to a pulp here playing QB behind more of those real nice guys like Garret Gilkey, Cam Erving, Jason Pinkston, Brad Bedell, Jason One-n-Dunn, Steve Zahursky, O'Neil Cousins, Joe Andruzzi and countless other rent-a-wrecks and docey doe specialists. If those guys give you chills and goose bumps my friend - then God Bless ya!
I'm a little tired of seeing this franchise competing for the Good Sportsmanship Award in a violent sport full of excessive testosterone and competitive fires in a division dominated by teams enjoying us as their version of Bingo FREE SPACE. Showing up with manners and using terms like please and thank you on game day hasn't been working - just ask Courtney Brown. Great kid though. He looked like a kite in the wind against the run especially when it came right at him while stealing a lot of TFLs on backside clampdowns when nobody on the oline reach-blocking toward the play side was assigned to touch him.The only multiple sack day he had came against a backup LT on Pittsburgh the day they had former OSU QB Graham holding onto the ball too long in the pocket. Maybe that's when Pittsburgh decided nice guys like Tommy Maddox, Mike Tomczak and Graham just weren't SB material.
I didn't mind having a Kevin Mack freight train Greg Loyd to sleep even if he encountered some trouble with cocaine during his football career. He's human and proved he deserved the second chance. I always give guys a second chance even the Josh Gordon that already exhausted his 2nd and 3rd chances in college. One guy refused to hide behind excuses and alibis while the other still can't pass a piss test for 1 full year so he's only played 5 football games since his 2013 season. It's 2017 and I'm ready for progress on this football team. If I want to see alter boys instead of football - I'll go to church. - Flugel
-
It doesn't do any good to go to extremes to make points. Aaron Rodgers is a real nice guy.
Joe Thomas is a real nice guy. Drew Brees is a very nice guy. Andrew Luck is a nice guy.
Alex Smith is a nice guy.
It's TOUGH and LOVE OF THE GAME...okay, intelligence, instinct... that is the key.
It's baloney to select a "bad guy" because you think he'll be tough on the football field.
Good luck to ya if you do, because he could be suspended, be out of football, be a complete
dud, die of a overdose, make you lose games because of stupid penaltiles at the wrong time etc,
go to jail for socking his wife, etc etc etc.
Jerry Sherk was a nice guy, Brian Brennan, Sipe, Kosar, the list is long.
I'ma callin baloniesies.
If you stick to your complete valid list of qualifiers, it's okay if you pick up/draft a guy and give him a second chance,
depending on how he screwed up in the first place. Dallas did it, turned out great.
Some scum hair ball dirtbags become star players. Like Joey Porter - he was a steriod rage kind of cheapshot
sombeitch player, in my book. Okay, I don't have book, but... Porter just got in legal trouble as a coach, fer cryin out loud,
and a very dirty player on the field. Dirty, cheap shot players can help you win...by taking out the important players on the other
team with illegal hits.
Just draft guys who love the game, have the work ethic, smarts, character, who play the game 100% because of it...with
NFL physical talent, and you have a great addition to your football team. You can give a college player
a second chance and win. or not. You can have a could-have-been great player, but he went to prison
after you drafted him in the fourth round because you are a moron, and the idiot kid never joins your team.
Enough with the "bad guy" tag.
Chuck Norris is a very, very,very, very nice guy. So? You think he isn't tough and won't kick your ass in a karate
tournament?
Football is a tough man's game, not a dirty cheapshot game - unless you play for the urine yellow stinking
squealers and got steriod rage.
You draft a real bad tough guy who is a terrific player , I'll draft a nice guy who is just as tough, and my guy will never be in legal trouble, suspended, and like Joe Thomas, your guy will vote for Joe as All-pro.
etc etc. I win.
-
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Sometimes, it helps to understand the context of a discussion you're showing up to. Therefore, when the person that started the thread says it's okay if you don't like Chad Kelly and he'd be interested in hearing better alternatives - your input could either perpetuate an ongoing discussion or improve it.
Believe it or not, I like reading what you have to say about QBs most of the time since I've seen you nail some predictions about guys that weren't exactly crowd faves/popular.
So, who do you see as better alternatives to Kelly after round 1 or mid-late in this draft?
Sometimes, it helps to understand the context of a discussion you're showing up to. Therefore, when the person that started the thread says it's okay if you don't like Chad Kelly and he'd be interested in hearing better alternatives - your input could either perpetuate an ongoing discussion or improve it.
Believe it or not, I like reading what you have to say about QBs most of the time since I've seen you nail some predictions about guys that weren't exactly crowd faves/popular.
So, who do you see as better alternatives to Kelly after round 1 or mid-late in this draft?
Mahomes is the belle of the ball when it comes to sleeper picks. Kaaya is a better project than Kelly.
My favorite unknown is Antonio Pipkin from Tiffin.
He is interesting as a very late pick but would need at least one full year of never sniffing the field. He has command of the things many top prospects don't - sensing pressure, climbing the pocket, maintaining fundamentals despite being under pressure, taking what the defense gives to him. However, his arm strength is lacking and there's questions regarding whether he can make the transition from DII to the NFL.
-
-
Just.....wow......
lmao...
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Then and only then if I am satisfied with his replies, do I "risk" a Day 3 pick, if my Med Staff green-lights it...
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
"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 -
Just.....wow......
lmao...
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Then and only then if I am satisfied with his replies, do I "risk" a Day 3 pick, if my Med Staff green-lights it...
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
lmao...
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Then and only then if I am satisfied with his replies, do I "risk" a Day 3 pick, if my Med Staff green-lights it...
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
Manziel doesn't have it too bad, he's signing autographs at the superbowl for $50-$100 a pop
-
@ghoolie said:
Flugz,
this is a "philosophy of life" matter for me. Trubisky has one quality that Kelly doesn't. He has what Terry Bradshaw had. He has the ability to charge up his team, win games regardless of what the statistics say, and he is, like the most successful QBs, able to fuck up the coverage by extending the play and ripping the defense with his arm. All this, lock-down on one reciever is bullshit. It is fodder for talking heads who need to write down content in order to fill the time in their shows, books, and tip lines.
Trubisky is a guy in the mold of Bradshw, Roethlisberger, Rogers, whoever you may liken him to. He is the best QB, the best potential leader in the draft.
The Browns don't need a fucking QB. We had a ton of QBs. We even have one who Hue sucked upp and tatooe'd 1-15 on his nutsack. The Browns need a leader. God knows there isn't one on the sideline or in the FO.
This is a no brainer. If the Browns do anything else with their #1 pick...just like with Roethlisbarfer, we will live to be sickened by it.
After reading your first two paragraphs I'd assume you'd be a bigger fan of Mayfield than Mitch.
-
lmao...
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Then and only then if I am satisfied with his replies, do I "risk" a Day 3 pick, if my Med Staff green-lights it...
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
Manziel doesn't have it too bad, he's signing autographs at the superbowl for $50-$100 a pop
Manziel doesn't have it too bad, he's signing autographs at the superbowl for $50-$100 a pop
Come on the drop in stature is astounding. Had he not fucked up his career 50 or $100 would be ass wiping money.
WSS
-
@ghoolie said:
Flugz,
this is a "philosophy of life" matter for me. Trubisky has one quality that Kelly doesn't. He has what Terry Bradshaw had. He has the ability to charge up his team, win games regardless of what the statistics say, and he is, like the most successful QBs, able to fuck up the coverage by extending the play and ripping the defense with his arm. All this, lock-down on one reciever is bullshit. It is fodder for talking heads who need to write down content in order to fill the time in their shows, books, and tip lines.
Trubisky is a guy in the mold of Bradshw, Roethlisberger, Rogers, whoever you may liken him to. He is the best QB, the best potential leader in the draft.
The Browns don't need a fucking QB. We had a ton of QBs. We even have one who Hue sucked upp and tatooe'd 1-15 on his nutsack. The Browns need a leader. God knows there isn't one on the sideline or in the FO.
This is a no brainer. If the Browns do anything else with their #1 pick...just like with Roethlisbarfer, we will live to be sickened by it.
Thanks for weighing in here Ghoolie. The thing about Bradshaw before he had a great line and running game in front of him as well as before Swann and Stallworth arrived - he had a miserable first 4 years. I think he got benched for either Joe Gilliam or Terry Hanratty before all the magic set in. It was kind of like an extended Troy Aikman experience, if you will, prior to Emmitt Smith and one of the meanest/nastiest Olines getting put into place. Aikman got about 2 or 3 concussions from Philly alone that first season when a considerable portion of Dallas fans thought he was a bust (while they wondered if JJ lost his mind not starting or committing to Steve Walsh instead). They weren't pumped about going 1-15 especially after things turned so sour that it was time to fire a legend like Tom Landry. Our downward spiral began in 1995 so I'd say our patience has been even more exhausted than what Dallas dealt with.
Bradshaw DID become the big success you speak of after all of the pieces were in place. They finally realized they needed to make it an easier place to play QB like putting a dominating defense out there as well loading up their offensive line with 3 different guys that won the NFL Strongest man competition. With a defense like they had, Bradshaw only had to score 16 points to beat a Minnesota team (they dominated upfront) by 10 points. You know as well as I do - if we drafted a QB that took that long to emerge when many seasons we wouldn't even let a QB get out of his first September here without making him feel like public enemy #1. Colt McCoy must have felt like he was playing in front of about 65,000 Hatfields with loaded rifles some 3-4 weeks after he started his first game.
I DO agree we need a QB especially when we're looking who's QBing the remaining teams in the playoffs. I wish I could feel better about the QB class we're looking at when we finally sucked enough to hold the 1st draft slot over all. I'll reiterate what I posted somewhere else the day Frank Wycheck asked Peyton Manning why he went back to UT to play his senior year when he would have been a first overall pick if he came out his Junior Year. As cognitive of a QB as we know him to be - he said he really felt 1 more year of starting experience would really be helpful to him starting right away at the next level which is not only more complicated but much faster.
My biggest worry with Trubisky in both of the losses I saw him play in was Stanford pick 6'd him locking onto his target, which gives me the impression they were waiting for a guy with that tendency they studied well on film to give them the green light and he did. That's a bad habit we've brought here before at a level that counts on QBs reading their progressions and being on time with the throws. He has too tiny of a body of work to give me any sense of comfort/confidence to be ready to play behind this line. I also don't know if he's won any more frequently than other previous North Carolina QBs in recent years that aren't starting in the NFL like TJ Yates. He is good at escaping trouble consistently but he's not always looking downfield when doing so. Roethlisberger started off that way too; but he did get better at looking to throw in lieu of running for first downs all of the time. Pittsburgh already had a really good team in place when Ben arrived so he could game manage them to a 15-1 season his rookie year. We're not even close to that set up so beware any early high expectations from any QBs in this draft. I've been wrong before though...
I wish the red shirt Freshman QB from USC (Sam Garnold?) was coming out. That kid totally morphed a program from the forgettable start they had prior to the day he took over at QB. That kid lit it up at the Rose Bowl making throws over defenders and into some pretty tight windows. Even better, he looked like he was gifted at making quick/split second decisions so all those throws were showing up on time enough to hit guys in stride or reach their tight windows. That's a huge part of being accurate. I couldn't believe he's only a freshman. He'd easily be the best QB of this draft class right now. It's typical of our luck with the QB position that he won't come out until next year.
-
Just.....wow......
lmao...
Because the argument can be made that if a guy is taken in the first round with documented issues, then his on-field talent is so astronomically high that the reward outweighs the risk.
Were Kelly a perfect off-field specimen and were he not injured, he still wouldn't be among the top QBs in this draft solely because he's kinda just not good.
Why gamble on a trashbag who isn't even that good? Just because he's distantly related to a QB who was pretty good 30 years ago? Just because he's done well in some big games?
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Then and only then if I am satisfied with his replies, do I "risk" a Day 3 pick, if my Med Staff green-lights it...
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
lmao...
Obviously anytime you pull the trigger and pick a prospect with "???" the talent exceeded the risk, but the risk is magnified by height of the pick... and exponentially.
Where Chad would rank depends on the inflation rate of the "top QBs", which is considerable this year.
Bloodlines have nothing to do with my evaluation... nor do just a couple games. Chad was one of those "distracting players" I occasionally encountered last year when I was scouting OL. I ended up watching a handful of his 2015 outings, some good, some not so good. I saw tools that improved through the season. I looked forward to seeing what 2016 would bring him. Unfortunately it was injury...
Chad has a history... no doubt. Sent packing from Clemson in early 2014 for a "pattern of behavior" seen to add up to "conduct detrimental". Late 2014 he was arrested for an altercation in Buffalo, an incident he called "his bottom" in an interview I listened to early last year. Sounded to me like a kid who heard his wake-up call.
Since then? Nothing until "the photo"... not in the same class as "his bottom"... may have been part of his Clemson "pattern".
I see talent in the kid. Fine with you not seeing it as well.
If I am the Browns, then:
- I interview the shit out of the kid.
- I gauge whether he understands that in the NFL you have to control your "urges"... that there are times to partake and times you can't and that regardless of the timing you can never, ever be in a position of being photographed indulging.
- I point to Manziel and ask if that is the route he wants to go...
- I assess whether he wants to be a pro QB bad enough to follow through...
- and I ask his Uncle as well.
Since I am not the Browns, however, I'll go with my gut and give him the benefit of the doubt unless you can offer up some additional inside dirt as you sometimes are able to do on attendees of southeastern US schools...
No dirt. I don't even care about any one thing he's done - I care about the general pattern of garbage attitude he's displayed, coupled with the fact that photo is going to put an NFL drug test target on his back if they don't already maneuver a way to enter him into stage one somehow.
Off-field flaws in the NFL are not black and white, it's a gray area full of any number of indiscretions. Marijuana use? Whatever. Look at Seantrel Henderson. Fight? Shit happens. Look at Dak Prescott. Problem with authority? Fine. Look at Brett Favre. There's always instances of players who make mistakes and come back from them, just as there are instances of the NFL enforcing shitty antiquated rules that don't stand the test of time in today's society.
However, look at Kelly as a whole.
As a general rule of thumb, any person charged with harassment and menacing tends to be an all around asshat. These misdemeanors almost always stem from an inflated ego and an inability to control one's actions. It's pretty hard to play the "oh it was a one-time mistake" card, as both of these misdemeanors aren't necessarily "cock-and-fire" infractions. Kelly was charged with both after being kicked out of a bar and then returning with friends to try and sneak in, then punching a bouncer and fighting with officers.
The fact that his Clemson dismissal stemmed from a sideline argument with coaches AND that his arrest stemmed from a refusal to leave and obey the police points to an overarching problem with authority. Not a quality you look for in your franchise quarterback.
On top of that, the high school incident points to an inability to maintain composure in situations that are out of his control.
As for the drug thing, whatever. My only problem with that is that he looks a fucking douchebag rolling a blunt with that dumbfuck hat and black longsleeve - another indicator that he's an asshole.
I rarely fault a guy for making one or two mistakes. Hell, I defended Manziel more than once after we drafted him. The thing is, I don't want to have to do that again...and I don't think Haslam does either.
Nothing about Kelly screams "franchise QB". Everything about him screams "Manziel 2.0".
-
Cal, your point rings true for QBs, which is what this thread is related to, so I guess I'll shut up. But that list is much harder to create with other positions, and yet you seem to have the same belief. For every one you can bring up I've got 5 bone thugs for you. It takes a little crazy to play this game.
And please don't type "I'ma callin baloniesies" again.
to a point, maybe, but I don't see "crazy" as being a bad guy. You listen to Joe Thomas joke around, you
figure he's crazy/funny/nice guy.... But going up vs him on the football field is hell, right?
I figure Chuck Norris is crazy, his sport is nuts. Mr. Miaggi was very nice..... Dick Butkus was a nice guy.
Danny Shelton is a very, very, very nice kid - who is one of the most powerful kickass nt's in the NFL now.
and he'll be even better this coming year.
and, lol, I apologize,.... only typed that to make Flugels spit coffee on his keyboard. lol
to a point, maybe, but I don't see "crazy" as being a bad guy. You listen to Joe Thomas joke around, you
figure he's crazy/funny/nice guy.... But going up vs him on the football field is hell, right?
I figure Chuck Norris is crazy, his sport is nuts. Mr. Miaggi was very nice..... Dick Butkus was a nice guy.
Danny Shelton is a very, very, very nice kid - who is one of the most powerful kickass nt's in the NFL now.
and he'll be even better this coming year.
and, lol, I apologize,.... only typed that to make Flugels spit coffee on his keyboard. lol
Anomalies. Why mine for diamonds, when you can just stick your hand out and grab gold?
-
fools gold?
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