Camp Barnett for #12
-
I don't know the breakdown on Barnett.....but it was documented and reported how Garrett had most of his sacks against the cupcakes on their schedule.
I don't know where to look for that breakdown. Has anyone done that? If so, where?
Again, even if we stipulate that that's true, what's to say Barnett wouldn't have equally little production were he playing the OT talent in the West?
Again, even if we stipulate that that's true, what's to say Barnett wouldn't have equally little production were he playing the OT talent in the West?
Nothing, but we can only go on what we know...not what we can speculate on.
Garrett MAY be better.
But our need for Garrett is NOT more than our need for a QB.
Or our needs for DBs.
Or our needs for OL.
And, in my opinion, our need for a DT.
We can load up on DEs. Who is going to stop the run up the middle? Who is going to cover WRs. Who is going to throw the ball.
-
But I thought pre draft grades don't count?
YOU seem to want it both ways. Pre draft grades count if they favor your argument...but they don't if they don't?
Pre draft grades can count. I have never said that Garrett may not be the "best prospect" out there. With his pre draft grades he very well may be. I have only said don't let the pre draft grade get you to thinking that anyone is invincible. They are not. The guy with the best pre draft grade may turn out great.
So....Garrett has the best pre draft grade in this class.
And MT has the best pre draft grade of any QB since Luck.
Both can be true.
But we need a franchise QB more than we need another DE.
And we got the guy with the best pre draft grade of a QB in 5 years there in front of us.
So...just what is it about THAT you don't get?
We need a QB...above all else.
YOU seem to want it both ways. Pre draft grades count if they favor your argument...but they don't if they don't?
Pre draft grades can count. I have never said that Garrett may not be the "best prospect" out there. With his pre draft grades he very well may be. I have only said don't let the pre draft grade get you to thinking that anyone is invincible. They are not. The guy with the best pre draft grade may turn out great.
So....Garrett has the best pre draft grade in this class.
And MT has the best pre draft grade of any QB since Luck.
Both can be true.
But we need a franchise QB more than we need another DE.
And we got the guy with the best pre draft grade of a QB in 5 years there in front of us.
So...just what is it about THAT you don't get?
We need a QB...above all else.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
If you go the predraft grade route, Garrett wins. If you go the stats route, Watson wins. You dug yourself two different holes.
Or...you can do what the rest of us do and objectively look at the whole package. Garrett is a no-brainer at one, he has the lowest bust potential of any of them. Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything.
Take the guy with the lowest bust potential. It's simple.
But now you're gonna say "these 'experts' don't really know much more than we do"...completely ignoring the fact ghat your one argument for Trubisky is that these "experts" gave him a high predraft grade.
Then someone will point that out and you'll shift to say something about how Gayrett might not be that good and we won't know for five years.
Then someone will say "but we do know Garrett has a better pre draft grade than Trubisky" and you'll say that it doesn't matter because we need a QB more.
Then someone will say that we can get a QB at 12 or later and you'll say "Trubisky won't be there at 12 and he's the best because some experts Gave him a better pre draft grade."
Then someone will say these experts gave Garrett a much higher grade than Trubisky.
Go back to step one and repeat.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
YOU seem to want it both ways. Pre draft grades count if they favor your argument...but they don't if they don't?
Pre draft grades can count. I have never said that Garrett may not be the "best prospect" out there. With his pre draft grades he very well may be. I have only said don't let the pre draft grade get you to thinking that anyone is invincible. They are not. The guy with the best pre draft grade may turn out great.
So....Garrett has the best pre draft grade in this class.
And MT has the best pre draft grade of any QB since Luck.
Both can be true.
But we need a franchise QB more than we need another DE.
And we got the guy with the best pre draft grade of a QB in 5 years there in front of us.
So...just what is it about THAT you don't get?
We need a QB...above all else.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
If you go the predraft grade route, Garrett wins. If you go the stats route, Watson wins. You dug yourself two different holes.
Or...you can do what the rest of us do and objectively look at the whole package. Garrett is a no-brainer at one, he has the lowest bust potential of any of them. Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything.
Take the guy with the lowest bust potential. It's simple.
But now you're gonna say "these 'experts' don't really know much more than we do"...completely ignoring the fact ghat your one argument for Trubisky is that these "experts" gave him a high predraft grade.
Then someone will point that out and you'll shift to say something about how Gayrett might not be that good and we won't know for five years.
Then someone will say "but we do know Garrett has a better pre draft grade than Trubisky" and you'll say that it doesn't matter because we need a QB more.
Then someone will say that we can get a QB at 12 or later and you'll say "Trubisky won't be there at 12 and he's the best because some experts Gave him a better pre draft grade."
Then someone will say these experts gave Garrett a much higher grade than Trubisky.
Go back to step one and repeat.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
If you go the predraft grade route, Garrett wins. If you go the stats route, Watson wins. You dug yourself two different holes.
Or...you can do what the rest of us do and objectively look at the whole package. Garrett is a no-brainer at one, he has the lowest bust potential of any of them. Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything.
Take the guy with the lowest bust potential. It's simple.
But now you're gonna say "these 'experts' don't really know much more than we do"...completely ignoring the fact ghat your one argument for Trubisky is that these "experts" gave him a high predraft grade.
Then someone will point that out and you'll shift to say something about how Gayrett might not be that good and we won't know for five years.
Then someone will say "but we do know Garrett has a better pre draft grade than Trubisky" and you'll say that it doesn't matter because we need a QB more.
Then someone will say that we can get a QB at 12 or later and you'll say "Trubisky won't be there at 12 and he's the best because some experts Gave him a better pre draft grade."
Then someone will say these experts gave Garrett a much higher grade than Trubisky.
Go back to step one and repeat.
Exhausting but true.
-
Again, then why are you talking about it?
Again...it is what we do on this board. Talk draft. Talk Browns. It is why it was created. Haven't you figured that out.
If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to be here.
Again...it is what we do on this board. Talk draft. Talk Browns. It is why it was created. Haven't you figured that out.
If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to be here.
Some of us with more insightful commentary than others.
-
Neither Trubisky or Garrett are the best players in the draft right now. But whichever guy would be deemed to be the best player now (probably Allen, Watson, Foster, Hooker, or Adams) has a lower ceiling than Garrett and the delta is big enough to justify passing them over for Garrett. So Trubisky is neither the best prospect nor the best player. Garrett is at least one of those.
In five years we may know if that is true.
In five years we may know if that is true.
So again, then why discuss?
-
We can discuss it without you going to the auto-answer "you don't know anything" every 3 minutes. We know we don't know anything. Like you said, it's discussion. "You don't know anything" is worthless commentary.
Every guy could make the HOF
Every guy could bust
We all get it. You don't have to remind us.
Apparently I do...because with every post you say: Garrett is the best player/prospect.
In reality, there is no such thing as a "best prospect". There are guys whom we think will do well...but as a player/prospect, we really don't know.
Browns have drafted lots and lots of best prospects who have sucked.
The point is that a lot of people think the DO know with certainty what will happen.
They do know nothing.
Apparently I do...because with every post you say: Garrett is the best player/prospect.
In reality, there is no such thing as a "best prospect". There are guys whom we think will do well...but as a player/prospect, we really don't know.
Browns have drafted lots and lots of best prospects who have sucked.
The point is that a lot of people think the DO know with certainty what will happen.
They do know nothing.
I actually just within the last hour said pretty explicitly that he was NOT the best player. Facts really are your enemy apparently.
Best prospect=highest ceiling based on what we know now.
-
YOU seem to want it both ways. Pre draft grades count if they favor your argument...but they don't if they don't?
Pre draft grades can count. I have never said that Garrett may not be the "best prospect" out there. With his pre draft grades he very well may be. I have only said don't let the pre draft grade get you to thinking that anyone is invincible. They are not. The guy with the best pre draft grade may turn out great.
So....Garrett has the best pre draft grade in this class.
And MT has the best pre draft grade of any QB since Luck.
Both can be true.
But we need a franchise QB more than we need another DE.
And we got the guy with the best pre draft grade of a QB in 5 years there in front of us.
So...just what is it about THAT you don't get?
We need a QB...above all else.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
If you go the predraft grade route, Garrett wins. If you go the stats route, Watson wins. You dug yourself two different holes.
Or...you can do what the rest of us do and objectively look at the whole package. Garrett is a no-brainer at one, he has the lowest bust potential of any of them. Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything.
Take the guy with the lowest bust potential. It's simple.
But now you're gonna say "these 'experts' don't really know much more than we do"...completely ignoring the fact ghat your one argument for Trubisky is that these "experts" gave him a high predraft grade.
Then someone will point that out and you'll shift to say something about how Gayrett might not be that good and we won't know for five years.
Then someone will say "but we do know Garrett has a better pre draft grade than Trubisky" and you'll say that it doesn't matter because we need a QB more.
Then someone will say that we can get a QB at 12 or later and you'll say "Trubisky won't be there at 12 and he's the best because some experts Gave him a better pre draft grade."
Then someone will say these experts gave Garrett a much higher grade than Trubisky.
Go back to step one and repeat.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
There is an argument either way.
And, FYI I am not so sure that Watson's stats are "better". They may me more accumulated...but that does not mean better necessarily:
Watson played 15 games......MT only 13
Watson had 132 more attempts: 388/579 MT 304/447
Watson, with his many more attempts did have more yards: 4593 vs. 3748
Watson ypa was 7.9. MTs was 8.4
Watson had a 67.0 completion pct. MT 68.0
Watson had 41 TDs. MT 30
Watson's TD pct was 7.0%. MTs was 6.7%
Watson had 17 Ints. MT had 6
Watson had a 2.9 Int. %. MT had a 1.3 int %
Watson had a 151.1 rating. MT had a 157.9 rating.
So...the stats may not be in Watson's favor necessarily . Sure "gross numbers are" not so sure about "quality numbers."
-
Go back to step one and repeat.
You have just argued with yourself in a big circle jerk.
Good luck with your Prozac.
-
Again...it is what we do on this board. Talk draft. Talk Browns. It is why it was created. Haven't you figured that out.
If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to be here.
Some of us with more insightful commentary than others.
Some of us with more insightful commentary than others.
Yes....WE do.
Sorry...you ain't included with We.
-
In five years we may know if that is true.
So again, then why discuss?
So again, then why discuss?
I agree...YOU should not participate in this discussion. You are dismissed. Run along now.
-
Again, even if we stipulate that that's true, what's to say Barnett wouldn't have equally little production were he playing the OT talent in the West?
Nothing, but we can only go on what we know...not what we can speculate on.
Garrett MAY be better.
But our need for Garrett is NOT more than our need for a QB.
Or our needs for DBs.
Or our needs for OL.
And, in my opinion, our need for a DT.
We can load up on DEs. Who is going to stop the run up the middle? Who is going to cover WRs. Who is going to throw the ball.
Nothing, but we can only go on what we know...not what we can speculate on.
Garrett MAY be better.
But our need for Garrett is NOT more than our need for a QB.
Or our needs for DBs.
Or our needs for OL.
And, in my opinion, our need for a DT.
We can load up on DEs. Who is going to stop the run up the middle? Who is going to cover WRs. Who is going to throw the ball.
Now you're shifting the argument. This isn't about Trubisky versus Garrett. It's about Barnett versus Garrett. You're saying Barnett may be better with nothing but stats against vastly different competition to back it up.
-
Apparently I do...because with every post you say: Garrett is the best player/prospect.
In reality, there is no such thing as a "best prospect". There are guys whom we think will do well...but as a player/prospect, we really don't know.
Browns have drafted lots and lots of best prospects who have sucked.
The point is that a lot of people think the DO know with certainty what will happen.
They do know nothing.
I actually just within the last hour said pretty explicitly that he was NOT the best player. Facts really are your enemy apparently.
Best prospect=highest ceiling based on what we know now.
I actually just within the last hour said pretty explicitly that he was NOT the best player. Facts really are your enemy apparently.
Best prospect=highest ceiling based on what we know now.
And I said that I heard you. Apparently THAT fact got by you.
And for me, the best prospect is: the player most likely to have the biggest impact on future success.
-
Nothing, but we can only go on what we know...not what we can speculate on.
Garrett MAY be better.
But our need for Garrett is NOT more than our need for a QB.
Or our needs for DBs.
Or our needs for OL.
And, in my opinion, our need for a DT.
We can load up on DEs. Who is going to stop the run up the middle? Who is going to cover WRs. Who is going to throw the ball.
Now you're shifting the argument. This isn't about Trubisky versus Garrett. It's about Barnett versus Garrett. You're saying Barnett may be better with nothing but stats against vastly different competition to back it up.
Now you're shifting the argument. This isn't about Trubisky versus Garrett. It's about Barnett versus Garrett. You're saying Barnett may be better with nothing but stats against vastly different competition to back it up.
I didn't shift. I just took one segment of the argument that warranted it and gave it some in depth analysis. Do you want 5 more posts of me trying to refute TCs bogus BS....or do you want something you can look at manageably?
I am not obligated to go tit for tat against everything anyone says....meritless or not. Right?
If you wanted a counter argument to every sentence that TC says, you have my permission to go ahead and take on that mantle.
-
YOU seem to want it both ways. Pre draft grades count if they favor your argument...but they don't if they don't?
Pre draft grades can count. I have never said that Garrett may not be the "best prospect" out there. With his pre draft grades he very well may be. I have only said don't let the pre draft grade get you to thinking that anyone is invincible. They are not. The guy with the best pre draft grade may turn out great.
So....Garrett has the best pre draft grade in this class.
And MT has the best pre draft grade of any QB since Luck.
Both can be true.
But we need a franchise QB more than we need another DE.
And we got the guy with the best pre draft grade of a QB in 5 years there in front of us.
So...just what is it about THAT you don't get?
We need a QB...above all else.
Gee, shucks. I was actually baiting YOU into getting to have it both ways. You caught on...though just barely. You're slipping a bit.
You can't claim Barnett to be a superior prospect to Garrett because "his stats are better" and then turn around and say Trubisky is better because "some people gave him a good pre draft grade".
If you go the predraft grade route, Garrett wins. If you go the stats route, Watson wins. You dug yourself two different holes.
Or...you can do what the rest of us do and objectively look at the whole package. Garrett is a no-brainer at one, he has the lowest bust potential of any of them. Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything.
Take the guy with the lowest bust potential. It's simple.
But now you're gonna say "these 'experts' don't really know much more than we do"...completely ignoring the fact ghat your one argument for Trubisky is that these "experts" gave him a high predraft grade.
Then someone will point that out and you'll shift to say something about how Gayrett might not be that good and we won't know for five years.
Then someone will say "but we do know Garrett has a better pre draft grade than Trubisky" and you'll say that it doesn't matter because we need a QB more.
Then someone will say that we can get a QB at 12 or later and you'll say "Trubisky won't be there at 12 and he's the best because some experts Gave him a better pre draft grade."
Then someone will say these experts gave Garrett a much higher grade than Trubisky.
Go back to step one and repeat.
Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything
Ok this just made my day..thanks TCPO...carry on my Gayward Sons.there'll be peace when your both done
-
Now you're shifting the argument. This isn't about Trubisky versus Garrett. It's about Barnett versus Garrett. You're saying Barnett may be better with nothing but stats against vastly different competition to back it up.
I didn't shift. I just took one segment of the argument that warranted it and gave it some in depth analysis. Do you want 5 more posts of me trying to refute TCs bogus BS....or do you want something you can look at manageably?
I am not obligated to go tit for tat against everything anyone says....meritless or not. Right?
If you wanted a counter argument to every sentence that TC says, you have my permission to go ahead and take on that mantle.
I didn't shift. I just took one segment of the argument that warranted it and gave it some in depth analysis. Do you want 5 more posts of me trying to refute TCs bogus BS....or do you want something you can look at manageably?
I am not obligated to go tit for tat against everything anyone says....meritless or not. Right?
If you wanted a counter argument to every sentence that TC says, you have my permission to go ahead and take on that mantle.
Huh? Our discussion has nothing to do with TC. Dude, did you forget your meds today or something?
-
I didn't shift. I just took one segment of the argument that warranted it and gave it some in depth analysis. Do you want 5 more posts of me trying to refute TCs bogus BS....or do you want something you can look at manageably?
I am not obligated to go tit for tat against everything anyone says....meritless or not. Right?
If you wanted a counter argument to every sentence that TC says, you have my permission to go ahead and take on that mantle.
Huh? Our discussion has nothing to do with TC. Dude, did you forget your meds today or something?
Huh? Our discussion has nothing to do with TC. Dude, did you forget your meds today or something?
Have you not been paying attention? You have mimicked anything and everything that TC has been saying. I mean. you have been on his tail like a Whale Barnacle.
So...in answering him...I have been answering you as well. And sometimes when I answered you it was also in response to him.
Do I have to repeat the same thing over for you that I just said to him? Or vice versa? You just complained about not wanting repetiveness...now you are begging for it?
-
You guys are talking about pre-draft grades from NFL experts, something I haven't mentioned at all. But I appreciate your attempt to stop the repetition anyway.
-
Trubisky, on the other hand, is one big question mark. Just because he's from podunkfuck Ohio doesn't mean anything
Ok this just made my day..thanks TCPO...carry on my Gayward Sons.there'll be peace when your both done
Ok this just made my day..thanks TCPO...carry on my Gayward Sons.there'll be peace when your both done
So you can rise above the noise and confusion, just to get a glimpse beyond the illusion?
-
I think it was Riddick that was commenting on the Hue-Dobbs connection at the Sr. Bowl and the progress Dobbs made under Hue's tutelage through the week.
I can't shake the feeling he's the guy we have our eye on.
I'm going back and watching tape on him this week when I have some time. He checks every single box as far as size, intangibles, and athletic ability. Biggest concerns for me are his footwork and his ability to process reads - both of which seem to be general-consensus knocks on him. One can be fixed...while the other could be as well.
If the guy is anything, it's smart.
If the guy is anything, it's smart.
If he's so smart, then why shave the eyebrows? I mean seriously... that look is a deal breaker. Even Shazier gave that shit up. At best he's dodging drug tests...
Hadn't really watched Dobbs except for Sr. Bowl, when I thought he looked lost, but WTF... who needs sleep. So pulled up what was statistically his best game vs. Vandy... plus I can see a little Kamara and Zack C.
Pretty well bored to tears in 1st half with a lot of predetermined, quick throws to WRs since Vandy was giving steady 10-yd cushions with some fairly uninspiring read-option keepers mixed in. Pretty soon began to realize that the throws were quick, pretty accurrate and had zip. Then late there was a nice pump fake and TD throw to a wide-open WR.
Then came...
Good bit to like in that one play... then he went kinda limp the rest of the way.
Dunno...
Saw a flash, but not enough.
Nice release... seems to "push" a lot of short to intermediate balls. I think in part that's why the above highlighted play jumped out at me... he cut one loose.
More than a few times I thought of Terrell Pryor in his Ohio State days.
"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
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