@tour2ma said:

Don't do it, h. It wouldn't stop Po from preaching his gospel and it would spread to other threads.

My $0.02...

He's going to get warned, I hope he takes it to heart... If the Gospel according to St Saquon shows up in other threads before the combine, it will disappear as soon as I see it...  

@hoorta said:

Yes I can close, move, and merge threads. I could even delete most, or all of this thread if I had a mind to. Not from the tablet I'm currently on though. I just needed a second opinion to get me to do so. I'll leave it up as a monument to the biggest man- crush we've seen on this board in years.

It ends later today. Repeating the same stuff over and over is not going to change anyone's mind. Not only that, it's starting to get people po'ed. The horse died a week or so ago. I'll Pm him, no more Saquon threads until after his combine performance.

Don't do it, h. It wouldn't stop Po from preaching his gospel and it would spread to other threads.

My $0.02...

@mjp28 said:

Well if you absolutely wanted a RB and can still get a QB at #4........oh no......AAAAAHHHHHH! IT'S BACK!!!

Somebody can't figure out if we really think one of the QBs is "the guy" he may not be there at #4.   And Superman Saquon is gonna be better than any of them. 

@syd said:

so i take it no one want's barkley at #1 ? 

We could indeed take Barkley #1 overall. As I kept telling PO, a RB @ #1 overall hasn't happened in over 20 years, and some of the greatest running backs of all time weren't drafted that high. MHO, bad idea. It only happens is if we have Darnold, Rosen, and Mayfield rated exactly the same. Um, the odds of that being the case are remote. Or even more remote, we convince Cousins Cleveland is Nirvana.

@hoorta said:

Yes I can close, move, and merge threads. I could even delete most, or all of this thread if I had a mind to. Not from the tablet I'm currently on though. I just needed a second opinion to get me to do so. I'll leave it up as a monument to the biggest man- crush we've seen on this board in years.

Works for me if you want to close it or delete it.   

@syd said:

so i take it no one want's barkley at #1 ? 

Well if you absolutely wanted a RB and can still get a QB at #4........oh no......AAAAAHHHHHH! IT'S BACK!!!

@the-gipper said:

Larry...do you have the power to close this thread?   If so...please do...or convince Z to do so.

Yes I can close, move, and merge threads. I could even delete most, or all of this thread if I had a mind to. Not from the tablet I'm currently on though. I just needed a second opinion to get me to do so. I'll leave it up as a monument to the biggest man- crush we've seen on this board in years.

@mjp28 said:

The thread that wouldn't end. 

It ends later today. Repeating the same stuff over and over is not going to change anyone's mind. Not only that, it's starting to get people po'ed. The horse died a week or so ago. I'll Pm him, no more Saquon threads until after his combine performance.

@the-gipper said:

Larry...do you have the power to close this thread?   If so...please do...or convince Z to do so.

The thread that wouldn't end. 

@hoorta said:

This is why this thread has stretched to 22 pages. Repeat yourself much, or chose to ignore there are other possibilities, that some of us are trying to get through your thick head for um- the 10th time? 

1) NY EASILY could decide to draft their QBOTF to sit a year or two behind Manning- who's 37 years old as of this past January. 

2) The Colts will CERTAINLY  listen to offers to trade down and swap places with the QB needy Broncos or Jets (there's only one Kirk Cousins). DUH- Indy will as easily be able to get a stud OT (Browns sure aren't drafting one) at #5-#6 as at #3, and pickup an nice bonus selection. 

SO FOR ABOUT THE 10TH AND LAST TIME, SHOULD THE BROWNS DRAFT THEIR QB #1 OVERALL, IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THE FIRST THREE PICKS COULD BE QUARTERBACKS- LEAVING BARKLEY THERE FOR US AT #4. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY IT? Dorsey (unlike you) realizes we take Barkley #1, we could be looking at our third choice QB. Love you some Paxton Lynch? Didn't think so. Only way we get Barkley and the pick of the litter QB is (as Ghoolie suggested) to trade up from #4 to the Giants #2, and if they have the same QB they've fallen in love with as the Browns- it ain't happening. 

Larry...do you have the power to close this thread?   If so...please do...or convince Z to do so.

@hoorta said:

  I hate to put on my Moderator Hat, but I'd suggest you listen up. 

 Worse than Ghoolie  

^^Please quit letting this Board Whore make repeated topics so he can pound his chest on views.we had several SB topics..

       thanks, you guys do a good job..shame One needs Special Ed.. 

Plus historically most teams don't like to tip their hands on what they intend to do. 

@poeticg said:

Look, give me Barkley #1 and you can have your pick of QB at #4. 

Who do you want at QB?

Pick one, anyone you want- I'll guarantee you that you get him at #4.

Can you guys even agree on who you want at QB? Because I don't think you can. 

NY and INDY don't need QBs, they won't be taking one this high and they aren't trading the pick. That leaves us the pick of the litter at 4. 

However, both teams will be looking to take Barkley if he's there. If we don't let them off the hook we'll force them to support their QBs in other ways. They both struggled last year but expect to ascend back to the playoffs next year. They will most likely look at protecting the QB with an OL pick OR drafting the best Defensive Player available. 

This is why this thread has stretched to 22 pages. Repeat yourself much, or chose to ignore there are other possibilities, that some of us are trying to get through your thick head for um- the 10th time? 

1) NY EASILY could decide to draft their QBOTF to sit a year or two behind Manning- who's 37 years old as of this past January. 

2) The Colts will CERTAINLY  listen to offers to trade down and swap places with the QB needy Broncos or Jets (there's only one Kirk Cousins). DUH- Indy will as easily be able to get a stud OT (Browns sure aren't drafting one) at #5-#6 as at #3, and pickup an nice bonus selection. 

SO FOR ABOUT THE 10TH AND LAST TIME, SHOULD THE BROWNS DRAFT THEIR QB #1 OVERALL, IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THE FIRST THREE PICKS COULD BE QUARTERBACKS- LEAVING BARKLEY THERE FOR US AT #4. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY IT? Dorsey (unlike you) realizes we take Barkley #1, we could be looking at our third choice QB. Love you some Paxton Lynch? Didn't think so. Only way we get Barkley and the pick of the litter QB is (as Ghoolie suggested) to trade up from #4 to the Giants #2, and if they have the same QB they've fallen in love with as the Browns- it ain't happening. 

Who do you want at QB?

Pick one, anyone you want- I'll guarantee you that you get him at #4.

Can you guys even agree on who you want at QB? Because I don't think you can. 

NY and INDY don't need QBs, they won't be taking one this high and they aren't trading the pick. That leaves us the pick of the litter at 4. 

However, both teams will be looking to take Barkley if he's there. If we don't let them off the hook we'll force them to support their QBs in other ways. They both struggled last year but expect to ascend back to the playoffs next year. They will most likely look at protecting the QB with an OL pick OR drafting the best Defensive Player available. 

Derek Carr and the Mathieu pick, I'd add in Burfict as well, as I was super adamant on picking him up, actually I don't think you've given me the benefit of the doubt ever. Give me this one- give me Barkley #1 and you can have whoever you want at 4.

Here's the deal- If it doesn't work out, if Barkley isn't a gamechanger and we don't finish over .500 next year, I'll never post another thing about a potential draft pick, ever. 

Do we have a deal?

@poeticg said:

• ive thousand, six hundred views and 528 replies would seem to disagree with you. Seems to me "the people" know what they want What does it mean? I don't know, but it gets the people going!

If a whiney handful on nonbelievers don't want to hear about the phenom Barkley, don't click. It's really that simple.

People stop and gawk at car wrecks too....  

@poeticg said:

I was right about Trent Richardson. We actually traded UP to draft him. My evaluation of him was spot on. He contributed mightily as a rookie, enough so that the Colts parted ways with a first rounder for his contract. Sooo I don't see how I was wrong here. 

Now for Kevin Hogan- Kizer went 0-15 as a starter last year. Hogan only got to start one game, one game against a hot texas team- with NO RECEIVERS and Crowfell as his runningback, our defense didn't do him any favors early either. Either way, he still won the backup job out the gate, he beat out Kessler and Osweiler- you've got to at least give me that. So projecting our 4th string QB to earn his shot at his only start was something I called in OTAs was damn near prophetic. 

...and you think I don't got no crystal ball, huh? 

You're delusional. Richardson was a one year flash in the pan that turned into a humongous bust. That pick we got from the Colts turned into Johnny Football, so we got nothing for our troubles. 

@hoorta said:

Damn, you have a crystal ball?   Can't hardly believe it.  I hate to put on my Moderator Hat, but I'd suggest you listen up. 

Nope, regarding your talent evaluation skills you're being unrealistic. You've had some hits- and some horrible misses. Your problems are you won't let it go when you're dead wrong, and are clueless as to when enough is enough to stop pumping up a player. Worse than Ghoolie with Paxton Lynch. Totally blew it on Trent Richardson- he was out of football and you think he's got talent? Hogan is third string for a reason. He's not even going to be on the team this fall. So plan on following his backup career with another franchise. 

It's annoying as hell to get fed a nonstop stream of Barkley info, and has been for weeks. Gipper's dog slobbering analogy is spot on. Most of us who have two communicating neurons are smart enough to get as much info on Saquon as we deem necessary to form an opinion. Here's a reality check. Yes, some mocks have him going #1, a few don't even have him in the top 5. To say we're going to draft a qb in the top four, and then draft Lamar Jackson in the second round on top of it? Plain flat out crazy and will never happen. I could go on, but I won't. 

I was right about Trent Richardson. We actually traded UP to draft him. My evaluation of him was spot on. He contributed mightily as a rookie, enough so that the Colts parted ways with a first rounder for his contract. Sooo I don't see how I was wrong here. 

Now for Kevin Hogan- Kizer went 0-15 as a starter last year. Hogan only got to start one game, one game against a hot texas team- with NO RECEIVERS and Crowfell as his runningback, our defense didn't do him any favors early either. Either way, he still won the backup job out the gate, he beat out Kessler and Osweiler- you've got to at least give me that. So projecting our 4th string QB to earn his shot at his only start was something I called in OTAs was damn near prophetic. 

...and you think I don't got no crystal ball, huh? 

• 
• hoorta
• 3 minutes ago

Five thousand, six hundred views and 528 replies would seem to disagree with you. 

Seems to me "the people" know what they want What does it mean? I don't know, but it gets the people going!

If a whiney handful on nonbelievers don't want to hear about the phenom Barkley, don't click. It's really that simple.

@poeticg said:

I am a "pretty good" talent evaluator.

The "best" ever? For "ever-ever"?

I don't know about all that homey- I just "know" that what I "know". What I do is, I "extrapolate the information available" and "project"- I call this "visualizing".  

I actually "go into the future" and "see" it, then "come back" and tell you what I "saw" homey. That's all. 

Damn, you have a crystal ball?   Can't hardly believe it.  I hate to put on my Moderator Hat, but I'd suggest you listen up. 

Nope, regarding your talent evaluation skills you're being unrealistic. You've had some hits- and some horrible misses. Your problems are you won't let it go when you're dead wrong, and are clueless as to when enough is enough to stop pumping up a player. Worse than Ghoolie with Paxton Lynch. Totally blew it on Trent Richardson- he was out of football and you think he's got talent? Hogan is third string for a reason. He's not even going to be on the team this fall. So plan on following his backup career with another franchise. 

It's annoying as hell to get fed a nonstop stream of Barkley info, and has been for weeks. Gipper's dog slobbering analogy is spot on. Most of us who have two communicating neurons are smart enough to get as much info on Saquon as we deem necessary to form an opinion. Here's a reality check. Yes, some mocks have him going #1, a few don't even have him in the top 5. To say we're going to draft a qb in the top four, and then draft Lamar Jackson in the second round on top of it? Plain flat out crazy and will never happen. I could go on, but I won't. 

@poeticg said:

I am a "pretty good" talent evaluator.

The "best" ever? For "ever-ever"?

I don't know about all that homey- I just "know" that what I "know". What I do is, I "extrapolate the information available" and "project"- I call this "visualizing".  

I actually "go into the future" and "see" it, then "come back" and tell you what I "saw" homey. That's all. 

Pass me some of that stuff you're smoking, please.