Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 12, 2012 10:00pm
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 would take cam without hesitation. RG3 wasn't even being looked at as a top 5 pick until the bowl games. I still have my doubts about him staying healthy. Give me Cam.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 12, 2012 10:02pm
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.
No thanks on Tannehill either. He is a project.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 12, 2012 10:02pm
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.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 12, 2012 10:05pm
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.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 12, 2012 10:06pm
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?
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 12, 2012 10:09pm
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.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 12, 2012 10:09pm
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.
Come on man, "ate up" wtf are they teaching you at Akron (or was it Kent??)?
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 12, 2012 10:11pm
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?
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Apr 12, 2012 10:14pm
Give me Colt McCoy
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 12, 2012 10:17pm
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??)?
Z
zach24oz
Posts: 598
Apr 12, 2012 10:19pm
^^ The Colt McCoy who played at Texas.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 12, 2012 10:53pm
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.
But since that is the case for you, why would you take RG3 over Newton?
SMITTEMS
Posts: 309
Apr 12, 2012 11:13pm
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
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 12, 2012 11:14pm
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
dazedconfused
Posts: 2,662
Apr 12, 2012 11:21pm
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
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 12, 2012 11:30pm
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?
As for Cam, I dont really see him doing much better stat wise, because I mean how much better can the weapons get around him? Now the Panthers may make the playoffs or have a pretty good record because the defense has plenty of room for improvement.
JMO, I really dont want to keep discussing it because its obvious we are going to disagree. Plus we are talking hypothetical situations.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 13, 2012 8:23am
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.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 13, 2012 8:28am
I would be beyond pissed if the browns pulled that bs. I'd rather them just select tannefail at #4 and keep their picks.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 13, 2012 8:44am
Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
Wooball
Posts: 1,325
Apr 13, 2012 8:59am
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
bases_loaded
Posts: 6,912
Apr 13, 2012 9:12am
SportsAndLady;1143258 wrote:Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
Oh no...you crossed BR...
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Apr 13, 2012 9:41am
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
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 13, 2012 10:27am
LOL +1SportsAndLady;1143258 wrote:Whenever BR starts something out with "I saw ____________ that said/had The Browns _________________" it's like 95% wrong lol
B
buckeyes_woowee
Posts: 512
Apr 13, 2012 10:28am
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.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 13, 2012 10:36am
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.