Skip to content

Jonathan Paul Manziel

The Browns Board
16.0k 396 570.4k 1
  • MasterDogM MasterDog wrote on last edited by

    Anyone seen this pic?

    Chris Paul is 6 feet tall.

    http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2013/07/29/johnny-manziel-smoking-weed.jpg

    ahhh...Doesn't look like he's even Chris Paul's height.

  • The Cysko KidT The Cysko Kid wrote on last edited by

    Yeah that Russell Wilson is too short, too. He's going to suck.

  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by

    Well, wasn't DA 6' 5? How about Weeden? What great performers..............

  • MasterDogM MasterDog wrote on last edited by

    Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

  • Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Flyin JF Flyin J wrote on last edited by

    @masterdog said:

    Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    are there, or have there been? Not many in either case, but there also havent been many if any that have had Manziels combination of good throwing ability and elite athleticism and quickness. I think he'll be much better than Wilson is now, and I think Wilson will get better also.
  • Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Z Zombo wrote on last edited by

    @masterdog said:

    Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Wow, so much wrong with this.

    Let's start by saying that Russell Wilson has been named a Pro Bowler both years he has been in the league (had other obligations this year).

    And Johnny Manziel is not under six feet.

    Other than that, I think you really drove home your point.

    Zombo

  • Hate to say it, but how many successfully NFL QB are there below 6 feet?

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Z Zombo wrote on last edited by

    @masterdog said:

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Just to be clear ... this what we Don't want at #4 from a QB, is that what you are saying?

    wilson_zps05316c45.jpg

  • hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by hoorta

    Regarding the original CBS report, Haslam pretty much debunked it at the Pettine hiring presser. Hey today, all you need is a computer and maybe a blog to start big time rumors. The only truth of the matter is the Browns have scouted Manziel extensively. Said Jimmy H, "we'll spent thousands of hours evaluating before we make a decision". I'll believe that to be true, considering the amount of time they spent looking for a new coach. Huge difference in liking what you see, and locking in on a particular player this early.

    Really guys- that rumor was so far-fetched, in my own mind I immediately discredited it. The Browns have to at least seriously evaluate (besides Johnny Football) Bridgewater, Bortles, Carr, Garrapolo, Metlenberger, and Boyd. Probably Watkins and Clowney too, or anyone who has a realistic shot of going in the first round. That means seeing what they do at the combine (f they show up) multiple private interviews, pro days, and private workouts.

    What if Johnny Football interviews as Johnny A-hole, and turns everyone off? Hmmmmm?

  • Regarding the original CBS report, Haslam pretty much debunked it at the Pettine hiring presser. Hey today, all you need is a computer and maybe a blog to start big time rumors. The only truth of the matter is the Browns have scouted Manziel extensively. Said Jimmy H, "we'll spent thousands of hours evaluating before we make a decision". I'll believe that to be true, considering the amount of time they spent looking for a new coach. Huge difference in liking what you see, and locking in on a particular player this early.

    Really guys- that rumor was so far-fetched, in my own mind I immediately discredited it. The Browns have to at least seriously evaluate (besides Johnny Football) Bridgewater, Bortles, Carr, Garrapolo, Metlenberger, and Boyd. Probably Watkins and Clowney too, or anyone who has a realistic shot of going in the first round. That means seeing what they do at the combine (f they show up) multiple private interviews, pro days, and private workouts.

    What if Johnny Football interviews as Johnny A-hole, and turns everyone off? Hmmmmm?

    Flyin JF Flyin J wrote on last edited by

    @hoorta said:

    Regarding the original CBS report, Haslam pretty much debunked it at the Pettine hiring presser. Hey today, all you need is a computer and maybe a blog to start big time rumors. The only truth of the matter is the Browns have scouted Manziel extensively. Said Jimmy H, "we'll spent thousands of hours evaluating before we make a decision". I'll believe that to be true, considering the amount of time they spent looking for a new coach. Huge difference in liking what you see, and locking in on a particular player this early.

    Really guys- that rumor was so far-fetched, in my own mind I immediately discredited it. The Browns have to at least seriously evaluate (besides Johnny Football) Bridgewater, Bortles, Carr, Garrapolo, Metlenberger, and Boyd. Probably Watkins and Clowney too, or anyone who has a realistic shot of going in the first round. That means seeing what they do at the combine (f they show up) multiple private interviews, pro days, and private workouts.

    What if Johnny Football interviews as Johnny A-hole, and turns everyone off? Hmmmmm?

    or what if he pulls a Leaf and doesnt even show up to interview with us? And if the report was true, and it came from one of the stooges, then it means we have no interest in Manziel.
  • @masterdog said:

    Russell Wilson isn't even a pro bowler. If Russell Wilson is the highest he can get, that's just a waste of a pick at 4.

    Just to be clear ... this what we Don't want at #4 from a QB, is that what you are saying?

    wilson_zps05316c45.jpg

    Browns149B Browns149 wrote on last edited by

    Zombo said:

    Just to be clear ... this what we Don't want at #4 from a QB, is that what you are saying?

    wilson_zps05316c45.jpg

    Yeah, we don't need that guy!!!!!!!!!!!!

    We have Weeden

  • Tim Couch Pulls OutT Tim Couch Pulls Out wrote on last edited by

    Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

  • Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    dude you get behind so many guys it's not funny, all lathered up and shit.

    all this homo for a QB shit will change by may, and if pettine has anything to say about our draft choices good luck in seeing anyone of your fag favorites @4. more like clowney or mathews.

  • Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by Tour2ma

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly.

    Link?

  • Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    HA!

    you're funny. like clown funny.

  • miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by miktoxic

    alright mike 'the manziel lover' unbiased reporter.

    if you want to be serious about what you want to achieve in journalism you have to let 'your' feelings stay out of your editorials.

  • Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by hoorta

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Hoorta's anti-Johnny bias is laid on so thick, that I've actually had to stop reading his posts about quarterbacks for a while.

    He's like bizarro POG when it comes to a player.

    I don't give a shit who we get as long as his talents mesh with the system in place. Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly. Whoever is available at #4, be it Bortles or Manziel, will be our next QB.

    That's something I can get behind, personally.

    Sorry if you can't stand me debunking a bullshit internet rumor. I would have done the same if (Insert Bortles or Bridgewater) in that horse crap instead of Manziel. Yup, if anyone else high on the list doesn't interview well, scratch them off too. Happy now?

    What I'm really tired of is all this premature Manziel love. There's more spew on this board about him than all the other potential qb draftees combined.

    “We’re going to spend thousands of hours researching whether to pick a quarterback in the draft or NOT,” Haslam said Clear enough? Really TC, spend more time researching other qbs than bitching about me bitching about Johnny Football. I've already seen enough of Bridgewater & Bortles to say I'd take either of them over Football in a heartbeat. Carr I'm not so certain about, so back off .

    And if they have a non-qb rated higher, you going to start whining?

  • miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on last edited by

    this is really gonna turn ugly before the combines.

    when that happens we might get some real answers, that is if everyone participates which should be mandatory by now.

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Judging by Pettine's comments, it seems likely that we'll be drafting "BPA by position" and not by scheme. Meaning we're going to take the best QB available, no matter what scheme he fits, and adjust accordingly.

    Link?

    Tim Couch Pulls OutT Tim Couch Pulls Out wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    Link?

    It's all in his introductory press conference.

    "I’ve always been of the mindset that you never fit your players to your system; you fit your system to your players. So again, once we hit the ground running and get the staff hired, the first task will be to evaluate the roster from top to bottom and see what we have here, what we do well, maybe what holes we need to fill"

    "[W]hen you prioritize the positions of the National Football League, there’s the quarterback and then there’s about 10 open spots, and then you start talking about the next open position. It would be foolish, even being a defensive guy, to ignore that issue."

    "To win in this league you have to have a great quarterback and that’s something we’re going to put our full focus and attention on.”"

    From the mouth of babes.

    @hoorta said:

    Sorry if you can't stand me debunking a bullshit internet rumor. I would have done the same if (Insert Bortles or Bridgewater) in that horse crap instead of Manziel. Yup, if anyone else high on the list doesn't interview well, scratch them off too. Happy now?

    What I'm really tired of is all this premature Manziel love. There's more spew on this board about him than all the other potential qb draftees combined.

    “We’re going to spend thousands of hours researching whether to pick a quarterback in the draft or not,” Haslam said Clear enough?

    And if they have a non-qb rated higher, you going to start whining?

    Probably, because that is a dumb decision. I trust this scouting department about as far as I can throw them, which is to say, not far.

    Clowney won't turn this four win team into an eight win team. Neither will Watkins. Teams with a glaring hole at QB like the Browns currently have don't add a positional player and magically turn things around a year later, it just doesn't happen.

    As I've been saying all year, I'm a big fan of Bortles. Moreso than Manziel. I just want to see a fair and rational argument debunking Manziel, not the same bullshit everybody throws around: "Oh, he's a dick and I don't want his weasel face on my team." You say that you're against the premature Manziel love, yet you're spewing premature Manziel hate just as often. Same story, just opposite ends of the spectrum.

    Interviews don't win football games. Players do. I couldn't care less about how Manziel or Bortles or Bridgewater interviews. I don't care if they can barely form sentences. I don't care if they grab Suzy Kolber's titties, yelp, and go climb a tree. If they can play, and win, then that should be all that matters.

    We have three different quarterbacks with three different physical attributes and three different styles of play that will probably all go in the top five. It's not going to be a brain buster pick. We need to take the one that grades out highest according to the style of play that our HC and OC envision the team running. That's it.

    If we're going to run a Pro-style, PA pass predicated system, take Bortles. If we're going to run a spread based read option, take Manziel. That's what it should come down to.

    Personally, I'd rather see us take Bortles for a multitude of a reasons, but that is neither here nor there.

  • S Spectralcow wrote on last edited by

    Well, good/bad to see all of the arguments haven't changed much in the couple of days I've been gone...

  • C calfoxwc wrote on last edited by

    It isn't hate to not jump on the media hype bandwagon this early.

    And every qb in this draft is no Luck.

    So you'd take Manziel at 4? I wouldn't.

    I'd be happier taking a blue chip difference making stud at 4, and drafting

    a Garoppolo a few? picks later. In fact, you may have to trade up to the top

    pick in the second round to get hiim, and maybe a late first round pick

    might nab him, as some team really doesn't need much, except another really

    smart, accurate, super quick release qb to their roster.

    It's early. I'll be all in on Manziel if he makes a believer out of the scouts and coaches

    at the comine.

    Showboating/improvising doesn't necessarily help a young rookie qb to be coachable

    when he steps up into the NFL. Some of us just aren't sold on Manziel. That's all.

    I wonder how many Ryan Leaf fans there were back in the day, "all in" on his talent....