@orion said:

That's a good one.  If I wasn't such a mental sloth I'd remember and use that one.  ?

??

@ballpeen said:

Mental sloth's need not apply.

That's a good one.  If I wasn't such a mental sloth I'd remember and use that one.  ?

@orion said:

It always seems that we are on the wrong side of something.  When we need to draft a QB and are actually in position to do so, there's no QB worth taking (this draft and Pickett's a few years back, which caused us to trade for Watson).  So, we had drafted Gabriel, with the intention of him being the backup for next year's draft assets QB selection.  Perfect, well set up for next year unless Gabriel turns out to be a star.  Then, in an hour or two, everything changed.  Sanders fell so far that Berry & Stef traded up and got him which changed the team dynamic.  Now these two drafted rookies are actually competing for the starting job AND the backup position.  While probably neither will win the starting job, one of them will probably be the backup and the other the 3rd stringer.  (I'm expecting Pickett or Flacco to be gone before opening day as I don't see us carrying 4 QB's)

So.....now we have two rookie draft pick QB's wanting to be the starter and we only have one season to figure out if either one is capable.  We're on the wrong side of time. 

Next April we should compare what we saw all season from Gabriel and Sanders against what they see on tape of the '26 QB class and determine if our guys, after a full season, are as good as the '26 class was in theirs. 

I agree that time is short.  I also think that Stefanski has to make his decision on who is who and stick with it to give it a chance.

I think Gabe fits Stefanski's O.  Stefanski puts more weight on the cerebral over the physical. Mental sloth's need not apply.

@dutch-oven said:

I want to see the Browns actually play people in the preseason. Give our four QBs a quarter each. No more sluggish starts of the season.

Agreed.  I think it's important they do that; especially given the reality that 30 of the 32 teams only play 3 preseason games these days.  Keep in mind, the last preseason game (or 2nd to last one?) is already supposed to be somewhat of a rehearsal for the regular season opener. ?

@orion said:

So, you want the Browns to prepare for opening day by playing the 'regulars' for 2 of the 3 preseason games.  Which makes sense.  But teams don't do that anymore.  The preseason games are almost entirely spent evaluating players for the roster cuts.  That and purposely holding starters out for fear of injury.  

I think that everybody has a week where they spend at / or hosting, joint practices with the next preseason opponent.  But a lot of the inter-squad time is also spent without many starters (fear of injury).   

And one of these years, the 3rd preseason game will become regular season opening day....leaving just 2 preseason games.  At which point I would envision that both preseason games would be preceded by joint practices with the opponent. -  It's a long season and everyone's afraid of injuries to starters before the regular season starts.

Sluggish starts until a paradigm shift.  

I wouldn't go and play the starters a ton, but they need some preseason IMO. 

@dutch-oven said:

I want to see the Browns actually play people in the preseason. Give our four QBs a quarter each. No more sluggish starts of the season.

So, you want the Browns to prepare for opening day by playing the 'regulars' for 2 of the 3 preseason games.  Which makes sense.  But teams don't do that anymore.  The preseason games are almost entirely spent evaluating players for the roster cuts.  That and purposely holding starters out for fear of injury.  

I think that everybody has a week where they spend at / or hosting, joint practices with the next preseason opponent.  But a lot of the inter-squad time is also spent without many starters (fear of injury).   

And one of these years, the 3rd preseason game will become regular season opening day....leaving just 2 preseason games.  At which point I would envision that both preseason games would be preceded by joint practices with the opponent. -  It's a long season and everyone's afraid of injuries to starters before the regular season starts.

Sluggish starts until a paradigm shift.  

@flugel said:

I never got the impression that the 3 guys sitting in the front of the Browns draft room (DePodesta, Stefanski and Berry) were celebrating the Dillon Gabriel as a "yeah. we got our backup QB to whoever we draft at QB next year!"   I saw 3 guys very excited that they got their guy.  And it wasn't like "yeah, we'll just wait until the 5th round and then draft Shedeur."  That was Jimmy lighting FO fannies to go get Shedeur; because he seemed like the 1 that wanted Sanders.  Could I be mistaking?  Absolutely!   

Gabriel is a damn good QB.  I wish he was a little taller of course but I've seen Drew Brees, Russell Wilson and Brian Sipe do just fine at their pretty similar heights.

Should be fun to see who rises to the occasion THIS YEAR.  

I want to see the Browns actually play people in the preseason. Give our four QBs a quarter each. No more sluggish starts of the season.

@orion said:

It always seems that we are on the wrong side of something.  When we need to draft a QB and are actually in position to do so, there's no QB worth taking (this draft and Pickett's a few years back, which caused us to trade for Watson).  So, we had drafted Gabriel, with the intention of him being the backup for next year's draft assets QB selection.  Perfect, well set up for next year unless Gabriel turns out to be a star.  Then, in an hour or two, everything changed.  Sanders fell so far that Berry & Stef traded up and got him which changed the team dynamic.  Now these two drafted rookies are actually competing for the starting job AND the backup position.  While probably neither will win the starting job, one of them will probably be the backup and the other the 3rd stringer.  (I'm expecting Pickett or Flacco to be gone before opening day as I don't see us carrying 4 QB's)

So.....now we have two rookie draft pick QB's wanting to be the starter and we only have one season to figure out if either one is capable.  We're on the wrong side of time. 

Next April we should compare what we saw all season from Gabriel and Sanders against what they see on tape of the '26 QB class and determine if our guys, after a full season, are as good as the '26 class was in theirs. 

I never got the impression that the 3 guys sitting in the front of the Browns draft room (DePodesta, Stefanski and Berry) were celebrating the Dillon Gabriel as a "yeah. we got our backup QB to whoever we draft at QB next year!"   I saw 3 guys very excited that they got their guy.  And it wasn't like "yeah, we'll just wait until the 5th round and then draft Shedeur."  That was Jimmy lighting FO fannies to go get Shedeur; because he seemed like the 1 that wanted Sanders.  Could I be mistaking?  Absolutely!   

Gabriel is a damn good QB.  I wish he was a little taller of course but I've seen Drew Brees, Russell Wilson and Brian Sipe do just fine at their pretty similar heights.

Should be fun to see who rises to the occasion THIS YEAR.  

@ballpeen said:

It might take this season and next season before we really know.

It always seems that we are on the wrong side of something.  When we need to draft a QB and are actually in position to do so, there's no QB worth taking (this draft and Pickett's a few years back, which caused us to trade for Watson).  So, we had drafted Gabriel, with the intention of him being the backup for next year's draft assets QB selection.  Perfect, well set up for next year unless Gabriel turns out to be a star.  Then, in an hour or two, everything changed.  Sanders fell so far that Berry & Stef traded up and got him which changed the team dynamic.  Now these two drafted rookies are actually competing for the starting job AND the backup position.  While probably neither will win the starting job, one of them will probably be the backup and the other the 3rd stringer.  (I'm expecting Pickett or Flacco to be gone before opening day as I don't see us carrying 4 QB's)

So.....now we have two rookie draft pick QB's wanting to be the starter and we only have one season to figure out if either one is capable.  We're on the wrong side of time. 

Next April we should compare what we saw all season from Gabriel and Sanders against what they see on tape of the '26 QB class and determine if our guys, after a full season, are as good as the '26 class was in theirs. 

@syd said:

If you had a promising child that was gifted, would you want him playing under hue jackson and sashi brown ? I sure as fuck would not

Excellent point!

@flugel said:

I was replying to the following statement

Yup.  I was merely pointing out that Sanders' slide was over with the next pick.  Just when Seattle was going on the clock the broadcast switch over to one of the 'Insiders' who said that he was hearing that the Eagles were going to take Sanders.  And then a few minutes later when it was noted that the Browns had traded with Seattle they switched right back to the Insider who surmised that the Browns were trading ahead of the Eagles to draft Sanders.  -  So, the Browns are credited with ending the Sanders Slide...but in reality, it was the Eagles that set things in motion.

@orion said:

The Eagles were going to take him with the next pick.  Even teams WITH quarterbacks were hitting the 'Why The Hell Not?' stage.

Berry's explanation of drafting Sanders was kinda' funny.  'We weren't expecting to draft 2 QB's, but since we believe in BPA...'   Picks 2-5 were not the BPA.  But they all filled needs.  Our last 2 picks were seen as good value (Sampson & Sanders).

Understood.  But I was replying to the following statement somebody posted:  "Anyone find the tweet from 2018 by coach prime saying Shadeur would do an eli manning and never play for the Browns."

This wasn't anything close to Shedeur being an Eli Manning value of #1 overall when the Browns didn't even consider him at #2 overall before he did the free-fall to #144 overall in the 5th round.  In fact, Eli Manning was drafted 1st overall by a team (The Chargers) in the 2004 that Eli asked/told not to draft him.  Lucky for Eli, 3 draft slots later - the Giants drafted Philip Rivers and then traded him and draft picks to SD for Eli Manning.  

I'll say this. I like Shedeur's accuracy; and I think he can develop into a good NFL QB.  That is, if his dad doesn't mess it all up first.   We shall see...

@flugel said:

This year he learned 31 other teams still weren't interested in Shedeur all the way into round 5.  Looks like it's Cleveland or Canada...

The Eagles were going to take him with the next pick.  Even teams WITH quarterbacks were hitting the 'Why The Hell Not?' stage.

Berry's explanation of drafting Sanders was kinda' funny.  'We weren't expecting to draft 2 QB's, but since we believe in BPA...'   Picks 2-5 were not the BPA.  But they all filled needs.  Our last 2 picks were seen as good value (Sampson & Sanders).

@kvoethe said:

Anyone find the tweet from 2018 by coach prime saying Shadeur would do an eli manning and never play for the Browns.

Lol.

If you had a promising child that was gifted, would you want him playing under hue jackson and sashi brown ? I sure as fuck would not

@kvoethe said:

Anyone find the tweet from 2018 by coach prime saying Shadeur would do an eli manning and never play for the Browns.

Lol.

This year he learned 31 other teams still weren't interested in Shedeur all the way into round 5.  Looks like it's Cleveland or Canada...

Lol.

 Sanders has ability and does belong. But it speaks volumes that his tape his better than Darts yet still dropped far below him.  Attitude is everything.  

@orion said:

I'm scheduled for band rehearsal on the Thursday night.  Of course that hasn't been an issue over the last few years.  ?

If I didn't think you were the smartest one in the room before reading this - that thought is now under serious cross examination...

@orion said:

You're right.  I'd be a 'gigger'  ?   50+ years ago when I played in the accordion studio's 40 pc accordion band, we played shows.  Around 1969ish  we toured Portugal for 18 days sight seeing and playing shows to packed halls.  At one venue they had speakers outside for the people that couldn't get in.  The audience dressed eloquently, every man was in a suite.  We dressed in black tux's and hot pink gowns. Audiences were very quiet and respectful and applauded in appreciation after every song.  But in a beautiful concert hall in Lisbon, at the end of Ave' Maria, you could hear a pin drop...and then the audience erupted in applause...and people were yelling something.  Our teacher/conductor seemed surprised.  Neither he nor the chaperones could interpret what they were yelling.  We found out a couple of days later that the translation was similar to Bravo!  -  was a great fun trip, 2 islands and then Lisboa.  

They were yelling “Freebird” in Portuguese.

@ballpeen said:

I don't know.  It seems to me the superstars have shows.  The others have gigs.

I am not putting you down.  Only you know which category your band belongs.

You're right.  I'd be a 'gigger'  ?   50+ years ago when I played in the accordion studio's 40 pc accordion band, we played shows.  Around 1969ish  we toured Portugal for 18 days sight seeing and playing shows to packed halls.  At one venue they had speakers outside for the people that couldn't get in.  The audience dressed eloquently, every man was in a suite.  We dressed in black tux's and hot pink gowns. Audiences were very quiet and respectful and applauded in appreciation after every song.  But in a beautiful concert hall in Lisbon, at the end of Ave' Maria, you could hear a pin drop...and then the audience erupted in applause...and people were yelling something.  Our teacher/conductor seemed surprised.  Neither he nor the chaperones could interpret what they were yelling.  We found out a couple of days later that the translation was similar to Bravo!  -  was a great fun trip, 2 islands and then Lisboa.  

@orion said:

Nah.   Mostly classic rock.  I play in two bands.  Both have shows in May. (I'm not a fan of the word 'gig'...but it's the go-to term)

I don't know.  It seems to me the superstars have shows.  The others have gigs.

I am not putting you down.  Only you know which category your band belongs.