like_that;1143091 wrote:I would have to think about it at #2, but I probably would take Cam. I easily would trade the #22 for Josh Freeman.
I probably am (but there are people who overvalue it as well). I'm not going to get in a debate about it like I have before though. He still turned the ball over a lot in a conference that doesnt have great defenses, and he had legitimate talent around him. Has there ever been a #1 QB that has that talent around him immediately?Commander of Awesome;1143107 wrote:Seriously, I can't believe you guys. You're seriously under valuing what Cam Newton did his rookie year. It was probably the best rookie year for a QB ever outside of maybe Dan Marino.
Rapistfucker comes to mind. Eli Manning, Matt Shaub (once traded to Texans), Matt Ryan.Pick6;1143111 wrote:Has there ever been a #1 QB that has that talent around him immediately?
I dont count Schaub, he wasn't a rookie. I'll give u the rest though. I stand corrected.Commander of Awesome;1143113 wrote:Rapistfucker comes to mind. Eli Manning, Matt Shaub (once traded to Texans), Matt Ryan.
So you think an unknown such as RG3 wouldn't get "ate up" in the AFC North, but it's a forgone conclusion that the guy who posted one of the best rookie years ever would be "ate up" in the AFC North?Pick6;1143105 wrote:No thanks on Cam Newton. Teams in the AFC North actually have legable defense's, he would get ate up.
No thanks on Tannehill either. He is a project.
Most rookie QBs turn the ball over. It's all part of the learning process.Pick6;1143111 wrote:I probably am (but there are people who overvalue it as well). I'm not going to get in a debate about it like I have before though. He still turned the ball over a lot in a conference that doesnt have great defenses, and he had legitimate talent around him. Has there ever been a #1 QB that has that talent around him immediately?
I go to Akron. And for the record, I never wanted RG3 either. Always was Luck or bust.like_that;1143115 wrote:So you think an unknown such as RG3 wouldn't get "ate up" in the AFC North, but it's a forgone conclusion that the guy who posted one of the best rookie years ever would be "ate up" in the AFC North?
Come on man, "ate up" wtf are they teaching you at Akron (or was it Kent??)?
I was also on the I don't want RG3 bandwagon.Pick6;1143123 wrote:I go to Akron. And for the record, I never wanted RG3 either. Always was Luck or bust.
I would say give me more than that. If you trade within your division, you make sure you rape that team. Their two lower first round picks wouldn't be enough for me.SMITTEMS;1143167 wrote:What would you do if Cincy offered you both of their firsts for our 4th pick because they wanted to move up to get Richardson? That would give us 17, 21 and 22
with a division rival? it'd have to be 17, 21, 53 and next year's firstSMITTEMS;1143167 wrote:What would you do if Cincy offered you both of their firsts for our 4th pick because they wanted to move up to get Richardson? That would give us 17, 21 and 22
I wouldn't. I think RG3 has a lot of potential, but he is also a huge risk. A huge risk isnt what the Browns need to be taking. Cam has a good year, so people start saying that RG3 is going to be good because Cam had a solid rookie season.like_that;1143154 wrote:I was also on the I don't want RG3 bandwagon.
But since that is the case for you, why would you take RG3 over Newton?
BR posted this on another forum. This better not fucking happen.BR wrote:Saw a mock with the Browns taking T-Rich at 4 and trading back up to #7 for Tannehill. Don't like that Tannehill part as it would likely cost 22, 37 and next years 1st at a minimum.
No way. We got 2 firsts, a second and 2 fourths from the Falcons last year for the #6 overall.SMITTEMS;1143167 wrote:What would you do if Cincy offered you both of their firsts for our 4th pick because they wanted to move up to get Richardson? That would give us 17, 21 and 22
SportsAndLady;1143258 wrote:Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
It's still better than your track record and it's not like BR is saying it's going to happen. He is just posting info.SportsAndLady;1143258 wrote:Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
LOL +1SportsAndLady;1143258 wrote:Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
To be fair, BR is kinda a cry baby who doesn't go to the games because he doesn't like talking to people.buckeyes_woowee;1143333 wrote:Yeah most of S&L's post are just little jabs at BR. I think maybe he doesn't have anything better to do with his time.
