Skip to content

Be honest, How does everybody feel about Brock as a starter

The Browns Board
120 37 3.9k
  • Mr. Make-BelieveM Mr. Make-Believe wrote on last edited by
    #96

    You know what I notice?

    Nobody is saying "I'm so fucking excited for Brock Osweiler to be our starting QB!"

  • You know what I notice?

    Nobody is saying "I'm so fucking excited for Brock Osweiler to be our starting QB!"

    miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by
    #97

    @mr.-make-believe said:

    You know what I notice?

    Nobody is saying "I'm so fucking excited for Brock Osweiler to be our starting QB!"

    'better than the KKH'!

  • address him or challenge him to a boxing match?

    i ain't getting in the way of a 300lber with a right hook.

    W wargograw wrote on last edited by
    #98

    @miktoxic said:

    address him or challenge him to a boxing match?

    i ain't getting in the way of a 300lber with a right hook.

    Highly conservative estimate right there.

  • W wargograw wrote on last edited by
    #99

    "But I have big shoulders you ******** ********!!!!"

  • B BaconHound wrote on last edited by

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

  • Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    OrionO Orion wrote on last edited by

    @baconhound said:

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    Is your first name Scott?

    ...anyway, I disagree. 1st and foremost = QB. And immediately solidify the offensive line to protect him. (hand in hand is the QB & OL)

    Then you get him skill players...WR's, RB(s), TE(s).

    And THEN you can concentrate on the guys required to tackle people (and cover WR's).

    First and foremost I want my team to be competitive and entertaining. (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    Other benefits of being entertaining with a good offense:

    1) It sells more tickets. More Browns fans will attend the games, even if the team's record is below 500. We've been, quite frankly, the hardest fuggin' football team to watch. One can't help but feel that ya just plain wasted a good day off watchin' the most boring fuggin' football.

    2) More free agents would be attracted to your team.

    That's always been my opinion(s) and I'm sticking to them.

  • @baconhound said:

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    Is your first name Scott?

    ...anyway, I disagree. 1st and foremost = QB. And immediately solidify the offensive line to protect him. (hand in hand is the QB & OL)

    Then you get him skill players...WR's, RB(s), TE(s).

    And THEN you can concentrate on the guys required to tackle people (and cover WR's).

    First and foremost I want my team to be competitive and entertaining. (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    Other benefits of being entertaining with a good offense:

    1) It sells more tickets. More Browns fans will attend the games, even if the team's record is below 500. We've been, quite frankly, the hardest fuggin' football team to watch. One can't help but feel that ya just plain wasted a good day off watchin' the most boring fuggin' football.

    2) More free agents would be attracted to your team.

    That's always been my opinion(s) and I'm sticking to them.

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by

    @orion said:

    First and foremost I want my team to be competitive and entertaining. (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    And I have always believed for the purist, there is nothing more entertaining than watching a great defense take over a game. Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

  • @baconhound said:

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    Is your first name Scott?

    ...anyway, I disagree. 1st and foremost = QB. And immediately solidify the offensive line to protect him. (hand in hand is the QB & OL)

    Then you get him skill players...WR's, RB(s), TE(s).

    And THEN you can concentrate on the guys required to tackle people (and cover WR's).

    First and foremost I want my team to be competitive and entertaining. (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    Other benefits of being entertaining with a good offense:

    1) It sells more tickets. More Browns fans will attend the games, even if the team's record is below 500. We've been, quite frankly, the hardest fuggin' football team to watch. One can't help but feel that ya just plain wasted a good day off watchin' the most boring fuggin' football.

    2) More free agents would be attracted to your team.

    That's always been my opinion(s) and I'm sticking to them.

    D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by

    @orion said:

    (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    @texasag1969 said:

    Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

  • @orion said:

    (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    @texasag1969 said:

    Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by TexasAg1969

    @d-bone said:

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

    And I'm watching the Broncos do the same to SF tonight with 4 takeaways in the first half (poor Brian) with a 20-0 lead going into the half. Funny how much better an O can be when a great D just sets them up constantly. 😁

    PS-and six starters from Denver's D including Von did not even play the 1st half. Would love to have that kind of depth.

  • @orion said:

    First and foremost I want my team to be competitive and entertaining. (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    And I have always believed for the purist, there is nothing more entertaining than watching a great defense take over a game. Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    gumby73G gumby73 wrote on last edited by gumby73

    @texasag1969 said:

    And I have always believed for the purist, there is nothing more entertaining than watching a great defense take over a game. Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    That game was not even fair.Denver's front end was just as good as their back-end..Denver may still have the best secondary in football with Vikings/Zona?...Browns may have found that front 4? but DB & LB still got to come..(Hey Shanny---Hoyer is still Brian Hoyer but Farmer lost your digits)

  • Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by

    @baconhound said:

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    Then ur gonna be highly disappointed.

  • @texasag1969 said:

    And I have always believed for the purist, there is nothing more entertaining than watching a great defense take over a game. Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    That game was not even fair.Denver's front end was just as good as their back-end..Denver may still have the best secondary in football with Vikings/Zona?...Browns may have found that front 4? but DB & LB still got to come..(Hey Shanny---Hoyer is still Brian Hoyer but Farmer lost your digits)

    D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by

    @gumby73 said:

    Denver's front end was just as good as their back-end

    You just described my wife 😎

  • @baconhound said:

    Don't really care about Brock being the starter. My concern as always will be the defense first, offensive line second and receivers third.

    Then ur gonna be highly disappointed.

    jcam222J jcam222 wrote on last edited by

    @miktoxic said:

    Then ur gonna be highly disappointed.

    Mik I am hoping soon they surprise you and turn that frown upside down 🙁. ----------> 🙂
  • @orion said:

    (If you have a good offense, you're always IN the game)

    @texasag1969 said:

    Denver's dismantling of Cam and the Panthers was a thing of beauty and I want the Browns to become that kind of team.

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @d-bone said:

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

    Picky? No. Greedy? Why the hell not?

    You have to be solid in every aspect of the game to be competitive. Greatness is the elusive quality, but you can build it everywhere except at QB. There you have to find it.

    @d-bone said:

    You just described my wife 😎

    Even I am not touching that one... or should I say those?

  • @d-bone said:

    I'm not picky.... I'll take both.

    Picky? No. Greedy? Why the hell not?

    You have to be solid in every aspect of the game to be competitive. Greatness is the elusive quality, but you can build it everywhere except at QB. There you have to find it.

    @d-bone said:

    You just described my wife 😎

    Even I am not touching that one... or should I say those?

    gumby73G gumby73 wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    Even I am not touching that one... or should I say those?

    You know I'll take a shot 😉. Somewhere in that 8 track player was some Bob Seger A).Night Moves B.)Get out of Denver Baby or C.) Betty Lou getting out tonight 😎

  • F FALCON7 wrote on last edited by

    He's awesome 6-8 last night...

  • D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by

    After watching Brock last night, I have one word regarding him starting  -   NOPE 

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    yeah he's not gonna be the starter next year. But Kizer isn't ready either. So for now, it's Osweiller. I'm hoping we have the draft stock to move up for Darnold next year. 

  • yeah he's not gonna be the starter next year. But Kizer isn't ready either. So for now, it's Osweiller. I'm hoping we have the draft stock to move up for Darnold next year. 

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    yeah he's not gonna be the starter next year. But Kizer isn't ready either. So for now, it's Osweiller. I'm hoping we have the draft stock to move up for Darnold next year. 

    Said elsewhere... I'm thinking Kess is back.

    As for Darnold... I've no idea if he's the one... or if there is "the one" in the 2018 draft, but if there is a consensus great one, then he's going to be a Jet. If on the other hand there's two or more in the top prospect mix, then we have a shot so long as we don't prefer the same one the Jets do.

  • yeah he's not gonna be the starter next year. But Kizer isn't ready either. So for now, it's Osweiller. I'm hoping we have the draft stock to move up for Darnold next year. 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    yeah he's not gonna be the starter next year. But Kizer isn't ready either. So for now, it's Osweiller. I'm hoping we have the draft stock to move up for Darnold next year. 

    Unless, of course, its Kessler, which it still could be.   He was, after all, perfect last night. (in that every pass he attempted was completed...even if they were mostly dinks and dunks)