@clevelandwantsplayoffs said:

Is that.... a fellow Finn Browns fan? ?

Wife is half Finn.  Had a family reunion in Finland last summer, fabulous.

@hoorta said:

And you have an incessant need to be right 100-% of the time, but you just got called out- so own it, and move on....  

Just like you count the Browns AAFC Championships. Technically they are "championships" but they're not recognized by the NFL. And don't start crap that it was all a conspiracy back then to disallow them. It is what it is...   

No more valid than Steelers fans saying the history of the NFL started in the Super Bowl era.  I'm counting XFL and USFL Championships... sorry about that ....  

 I did own it. I said about Rudolph but I did say that he might be the best guy in this draft. And you know ultimately 1012 years from now he might be. hopefully not but I also said that I hope I’m dead wrong about any Steelers drafty. And about the championships I count Browns championships I count NFL championships and I can’t any leagues that merged with the NFL which would include AAFC and AFL but not XFL or USFL. 

@the-gipper said:

Apparently you have the incessant need to memorize every word I say   how about remembering this word : you’re a fucking idiot. Remember that Every day for the next year. 

And you have an incessant need to be right 100-% of the time, but you just got called out- so own it, and move on....  

Just like you count the Browns AAFC Championships. Technically they are "championships" but they're not recognized by the NFL. And don't start crap that it was all a conspiracy back then to disallow them. It is what it is...   

No more valid than Steelers fans saying the history of the NFL started in the Super Bowl era.  I'm counting XFL and USFL Championships... sorry about that ....  

@the-gipper said:

Apparently you have the incessant need to memorize every word I say   how about remembering this word : you’re a fucking idiot. Remember that Every day for the next year. 

First off I don't have to memorize every word you say to realize you have an incessant need to be right and to argue. Not even the only one to point it out in this thread. 

Secondly to quote "Bad Words" (just a bad movie) that's a sentence not a word.

@bjh2130 said:

Incessant need

Apparently you have the incessant need to memorize every word I say   how about remembering this word : you’re a fucking idiot. Remember that Every day for the next year. 

@the-gipper said:

Yes I am sure I said to take him in the 20s not at the top of the draft where I knew the other guys would be going. I thought that he would be the best quarterback available in the 20s.

Incessant need

@gunz41 said:

Na, wasnt dwelling on it. Just remember you were so high on Rudolph, I remember the argument back and forth with someone. So when saying that they would fall off a cliff or whatever it is, just didn't make sense.

Had the reply had been I was off on him, would have never heard a word back. But when its said you didn't say that, well I went back. Had your reply been, like you just said, forgot I said that, then cool, but with that quote directly in front of you, you then tried to twist it.

But wait, I just remembered. You can't be blamed for occasionally twisting an argument to give your own answer. You are a lawyer. And that isnt saying that in a bad way, but you have to do that at times. So I apologize, carry on

What is twisting is me in your head like one of those things from the Star Trek movie that went in your ear. 

@the-gipper said:

  Never thought I was that important but you were the one that was dwelling on every post I make even from one from like a year ago. 

Na, wasnt dwelling on it. Just remember you were so high on Rudolph, I remember the argument back and forth with someone. So when saying that they would fall off a cliff or whatever it is, just didn't make sense.

Had the reply had been I was off on him, would have never heard a word back. But when its said you didn't say that, well I went back. Had your reply been, like you just said, forgot I said that, then cool, but with that quote directly in front of you, you then tried to twist it.

But wait, I just remembered. You can't be blamed for occasionally twisting an argument to give your own answer. You are a lawyer. And that isnt saying that in a bad way, but you have to do that at times. So I apologize, carry on

@gunz41 said:

See that wasn't but so painful was it?

It wasn't the fact you forgot it, its when your exact post is in front of you and you say something different. Obviously you don't have the wrong spirit like Ghoolie, but you know how bad he would have been crushed for that.

And nope, you certainly aren't that important, sorry to tell you. 

  Never thought I was that important but you were the one that was dwelling on every post I make even from one from like a year ago. 

@the-gipper said:

You worry an awful lot  about what I say. I must be in your head like an earworm. It’s OK maybe I said something and I forgot that I said. I know I liked Rudolph but just put it this way I hope I was wrong. if I am wrong about a Steeler playing good it’s just all fine fucking well and good with me. so can you live with that schmuck. 

See that wasn't but so painful was it?

It wasn't the fact you forgot it, its when your exact post is in front of you and you say something different. Obviously you don't have the wrong spirit like Ghoolie, but you know how bad he would have been crushed for that.

And nope, you certainly aren't that important, sorry to tell you. 

@gunz41 said:

Its obvious now that you won't admit to anything you ever say is wrong.

Nothing but proof in just that 1 post. "And they select the QB that is going to prove to be the best QB of the bunch anyway: Mason Rudolph."

So tell us again how he wasn't your top QB? 

Just be consistent. None of us could count the times that you, as well as others, called out Ghoolie for not taking responsibility for past speak. You are doing the same thing here.

There is a difference between having new data and changing your opinion. There is a difference in not wanting someone to succeed now. 

But to flat out deny it, when its right in front of you is ingenious. Cant have it both ways. 

NOWHERE in that message does it say best QB in the area he is drafted. In fact, it says the opposite, you said he will end up the BEST pro QB. You also come across as thinking you know more than the FO, or anyone on here.

This is 3rd time recently that you have been called out on something and each time refused to budge. "How is it Clemson and Alabama played an extra game?" Because of NC. The reply, well I know how they played an extra game obviously, I was talking about their schedule. "You can make more money playing football than baseball." The average player makes more in baseball. The reply, "The rosters are bigger so they are making more % wise for the budget." Well that doesn't mean anything to this conversation. The reply, "Of course it does, anyone would know that baseball players makes more than football players, but that isnt the point. I just wanted to educate you and others on a broader level'

But I guess in summary, I did get what I was asking for. You are consistent. You consistently change the narrative to try and be correct. That way you never have to admit you were wrong on anything 

You worry an awful lot  about what I say. I must be in your head like an earworm. It’s OK maybe I said something and I forgot that I said. I know I liked Rudolph but just put it this way I hope I was wrong. if I am wrong about a Steeler playing good it’s just all fine fucking well and good with me. so can you live with that schmuck. 

@the-gipper said:

Yes I am sure I said to take him in the 20s not at the top of the draft where I knew the other guys would be going. I thought that he would be the best quarterback available in the 20s.

Its obvious now that you won't admit to anything you ever say is wrong.

Nothing but proof in just that 1 post. "And they select the QB that is going to prove to be the best QB of the bunch anyway: Mason Rudolph."

So tell us again how he wasn't your top QB? 

Just be consistent. None of us could count the times that you, as well as others, called out Ghoolie for not taking responsibility for past speak. You are doing the same thing here.

There is a difference between having new data and changing your opinion. There is a difference in not wanting someone to succeed now. 

But to flat out deny it, when its right in front of you is ingenious. Cant have it both ways. 

NOWHERE in that message does it say best QB in the area he is drafted. In fact, it says the opposite, you said he will end up the BEST pro QB. You also come across as thinking you know more than the FO, or anyone on here.

This is 3rd time recently that you have been called out on something and each time refused to budge. "How is it Clemson and Alabama played an extra game?" Because of NC. The reply, well I know how they played an extra game obviously, I was talking about their schedule. "You can make more money playing football than baseball." The average player makes more in baseball. The reply, "The rosters are bigger so they are making more % wise for the budget." Well that doesn't mean anything to this conversation. The reply, "Of course it does, anyone would know that baseball players makes more than football players, but that isnt the point. I just wanted to educate you and others on a broader level'

But I guess in summary, I did get what I was asking for. You are consistent. You consistently change the narrative to try and be correct. That way you never have to admit you were wrong on anything 

@gunz41 said:

Hmm. You sure about that?

"Here is a Prudent Solution to the Browns draft Quandary over who to draft:

Since most draft pundits think that Barkley and Chubb are actually the two best players out there, then they should take them.  Take one at 1 and the other at 4.  The only concern would be if another team picking at 2 or 3 grabs one of them....and that team would be the Giants, not the Jets who did not trade up to 3 to draft anything but a QB.   So, we would have to hope that the Giants either pick what they believe to be their QBOTF....or that they trade out to a team that does want one of the QBs.    So, assuming that happens, then the Browns get both of the best players that are thought to be the best available.

Then, they trade back into the later first round....perhaps to the mid 20s, and they select the QB that is going to prove to be the best pro QB of the bunch anyway:  Mason Rudolph.  

So then, the Browns will then have the best of all three worlds....the two best players and the best QB.

Now, the Browns are not always known to be the most prudent team when it comes to drafting......and a few of you may not think this would be the most prudent move for the Browns....but it is."

Yes I am sure I said to take him in the 20s not at the top of the draft where I knew the other guys would be going. I thought that he would be the best quarterback available in the 20s.

@hoorta said:

Thank goodness the Browns weren't listening to Gipper...  Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer lasted until the third round, and he couldn't even beat out the underwhelming Josh Dobbs for second string QB..... 

Since I had to look some of that up, more happy tidings from Steelerville.... Everything's fine here Lalalalala....     http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001011653/article/morgan-burnett-requests-his-release-from-steelers

Burnett played the same damn position in green bay, was hurt the majority of the season and lost his job to a rookie. Rudolph is a rookie, Dobbs is not. I'm not surprised Rudolph hasn't beaten him out up to this point. Teams that are forced to play rookies at qb either aren't good or have an injury.

@gunz41 said:

Hmm. You sure about that?

"Here is a Prudent Solution to the Browns draft Quandary over who to draft:

Since most draft pundits think that Barkley and Chubb are actually the two best players out there, then they should take them.  Take one at 1 and the other at 4.  The only concern would be if another team picking at 2 or 3 grabs one of them....and that team would be the Giants, not the Jets who did not trade up to 3 to draft anything but a QB.   So, we would have to hope that the Giants either pick what they believe to be their QBOTF....or that they trade out to a team that does want one of the QBs.    So, assuming that happens, then the Browns get both of the best players that are thought to be the best available.

Then, they trade back into the later first round....perhaps to the mid 20s, and they select the QB that is going to prove to be the best pro QB of the bunch anyway:  Mason Rudolph.  

So then, the Browns will then have the best of all three worlds....the two best players and the best QB.

Now, the Browns are not always known to be the most prudent team when it comes to drafting......and a few of you may not think this would be the most prudent move for the Browns....but it is."

Thank goodness the Browns weren't listening to Gipper...  Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer lasted until the third round, and he couldn't even beat out the underwhelming Josh Dobbs for second string QB..... 

Since I had to look some of that up, more happy tidings from Steelerville.... Everything's fine here Lalalalala....     http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001011653/article/morgan-burnett-requests-his-release-from-steelers

@the-gipper said:

No he wasn’t my top quarterback I said that he could be in there with the other 4 or that were considered the top quarterbacks. Of course unlike the other guys he is not sitting behind a Hall of Fame quarterback. he is doing that. 

Hmm. You sure about that?

"Here is a Prudent Solution to the Browns draft Quandary over who to draft:

Since most draft pundits think that Barkley and Chubb are actually the two best players out there, then they should take them.  Take one at 1 and the other at 4.  The only concern would be if another team picking at 2 or 3 grabs one of them....and that team would be the Giants, not the Jets who did not trade up to 3 to draft anything but a QB.   So, we would have to hope that the Giants either pick what they believe to be their QBOTF....or that they trade out to a team that does want one of the QBs.    So, assuming that happens, then the Browns get both of the best players that are thought to be the best available.

Then, they trade back into the later first round....perhaps to the mid 20s, and they select the QB that is going to prove to be the best pro QB of the bunch anyway:  Mason Rudolph.  

So then, the Browns will then have the best of all three worlds....the two best players and the best QB.

Now, the Browns are not always known to be the most prudent team when it comes to drafting......and a few of you may not think this would be the most prudent move for the Browns....but it is."

@vagitron said:

Williams isn't, Dupree hasn't lived up to his draft billing but was good enough to have his 5th year option picked up.  Bostic was a very solid free agent signing AND the steelers aren't drafting at the bottom of the first. They led the league in sacks.

Why don't you just admit you are in the yinzer pipeline where that contingent of fans talk out their ass and only get their info from kdka and wtae.

Exactly what you always say about under performing goobers you draft....  

@gunz41 said:

Weren't you hyping up Mason Rudolph before the draft? I thought he was your top QB.

Assuming the team continues to develop, they have close to same amount of talent as Stoolers. I certainly think barring catastrophe, they have a brighter future with the age of team. But I also don't think Pitt will fall off a mountain

No he wasn’t my top quarterback I said that he could be in there with the other 4 or that were considered the top quarterbacks. Of course unlike the other guys he is not sitting behind a Hall of Fame quarterback. he is doing that. 

@the-gipper said:

It is a roster that has some talent. A few guys. BR goes away and you are a six and 10 team maybe. 

Weren't you hyping up Mason Rudolph before the draft? I thought he was your top QB.

Assuming the team continues to develop, they have close to same amount of talent as Stoolers. I certainly think barring catastrophe, they have a brighter future with the age of team. But I also don't think Pitt will fall off a mountain

@choco said:

Linebackers besides watt are underwhelming. 

Williams isn't, Dupree hasn't lived up to his draft billing but was good enough to have his 5th year option picked up.  Bostic was a very solid free agent signing AND the steelers aren't drafting at the bottom of the first. They led the league in sacks.

Why don't you just admit you are in the yinzer pipeline where that contingent of fans talk out their ass and only get their info from kdka and wtae.

@vagitron said:

Where is the defense pathetic? We need another corner and maybe a outside linebacker. Don't say "that's the argument in town" like you are actually talking to level headed people. You are knee deep in spoiled yinzer. The defense is far from pathetic. They had a ton of sacks, they just didn't have a bunch of turnovers. Baker already lost to the steelers. I swear you guys are all on drugs. 

I would not say that the Steeler's defense is pathetic.  The do have  a good front 7.  As I noted...they invested a lot of high draft picks in that area.

And they hit  mostly on their front 7.  They didn't have the likes of Barkevious Mingo and Danny Shelton....failed first round picks, that the Browns have had on their DL. (Well...they did have Jarvis Jones).

Their defensive backfield on the other hand, may have been pathetic, but not their overall defense.

@choco said:

That's the argument in town...Colbert's getting a pass atm, but talents lacking across the board, actually. That defense is pathetic. So you're not gonna win anything of consequence, but it's basically the last hoorah of the black and piss. And that's only if baker doesn't embarrass you at home. ?

Where is the defense pathetic? We need another corner and maybe a outside linebacker. Don't say "that's the argument in town" like you are actually talking to level headed people. You are knee deep in spoiled yinzer. The defense is far from pathetic. They had a ton of sacks, they just didn't have a bunch of turnovers. Baker already lost to the steelers. I swear you guys are all on drugs. 

@the-gipper said:

It is a roster that has some talent. A few guys. BR goes away and you are a six and 10 team maybe. 

Not in Vag's mind... they have Pro Bowl talent at every position. It's why their sucky 2018 draft almost didn't get on the field...