Dr. KnOiTaLL
Posts: 2,682
Apr 15, 2012 3:14pm
This is what I said as a direct quote.Dr. KnOiTaLL;1144504 wrote:However, I believe NFL scouts and coaches are a MUCH better judge of potential and ability than any of you (I know, lhslep134, hard to believe with all of your professional scouting experience), so if they find it necessary to take Weeden, I wouldn't be upset over the decision. All I said is I WOULDN'T MIND if they took him, I never said THEY HAVE to take him or THEY'D BETTER take him.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 3:17pm
Answer my question:Dr. KnOiTaLL;1144551 wrote:This is what I said as a direct quote.
The direct inference there is that you wouldn't be upset because you're assuming they're making the right decision. Am I wrong?
Dr. KnOiTaLL
Posts: 2,682
Apr 15, 2012 3:19pm
I didn't say they ALWAYS make the right decisions though, did I? I simply alluded to the fact that they have access to much more information than any of us have with which to make an informed decision. Thus, if they decided that we needed to get a QB to take McCoy's spot, while it may not be desirable in anyone's minds this season, I wouldn't be upset with the decision until it proved to be a poor one. Could it be a horrible decision? ABSOLUTELY! But it could just as easily be beneficial.lhslep134;1144547 wrote:You said you wouldn't be upset with the decision because they're "MUCH better judges of talent".
The direct inference there is that you wouldn't be upset because you're assuming they're making the right decision. Am I wrong?
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 3:23pm
SportsAndLady;1144550 wrote:Yeah, because I think my opinion is so much better than everyones just because I don't think in my opinion Weeden is a good pick
/sarcasm
Your trashing the dudes opinion on weedon. To me that means you think your opinion is always right. I honestly think weedon can be a very good qb. Do I think the browns should take him? Not really I think there is better options. If he was 22-23 hell yes I would want him. As for the whole big 12 defense bs, it holds no weight. Either you can play in the nfl or you cant. Not because you faced certain defenses in college.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 3:27pm
It's not about finding a QB to replace Colt, it's about the value the #37 pick has. History has shown you're probably not going to find a franchise QB in that range, Weeden doesn't look like a franchise QB, and there are several positions on our team where the starter can be chosen with pick #37. Why would you waste the pick on a non-franchise QB when there are more urgent holes to address?
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 3:28pm
If it holds no weight, find me an elite B12 QB from the past 10 years.Crimson streak;1144561 wrote: As for the whole big 12 defense bs, it holds no weight. Either you can play in the nfl or you cant. .
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Apr 15, 2012 3:31pm
this.lhslep134;1144571 wrote:If it holds no weight, find me an elite B12 QB from the past 10 years.
Dr. KnOiTaLL
Posts: 2,682
Apr 15, 2012 3:31pm
I'm not going to argue with you, man. I agree completely that the Browns have a TON of holes that need to be addressed. I would prefer the Browns to address those holes rather than drafting a player for a position that we already have filled (QB). But like I said, if H + H determine that Weeden is who they need at 37, I won't complain about it until I see a lack of production on the field. This is all I was trying to say.lhslep134;1144569 wrote:It's not about finding a QB to replace Colt, it's about the value the #37 pick has. History as shown you're probably not going to find a franchise QB in that range, Weeden doesn't look like a franchise QB, and there are several positions on our team where the starter can be chosen with pick #37. Why would you waste the pick on a non-franchise QB when there are other holes?
We don't know exactly how far it set back the franchise, but I don't think it's a stretch to say if this was a Jaguars board we'd be furious that we wasted a top 15 pick on a non-franchise QB when there were so many other holes on that team.
Enforcer
Posts: 2,140
Apr 15, 2012 3:34pm
Hitlers actions made Him a bad Guy, If He would've just though it and not acted on it would that of made him bad?SportsAndLady;1144527 wrote:No one should be bashed for their opinion?
lol what?!
Hitler was awesome.
Enforcer
Posts: 2,140
Apr 15, 2012 3:36pm
I also dont want Weeden at 37, but if it happens it happens.It just means H+H must of seen something in Him to take a shot on HimDr. KnOiTaLL;1144576 wrote:I'm not going to argue with you, man. I agree completely that the Browns have a TON of holes that need to be addressed. I would prefer the Browns to address those holes rather than drafting a player for a position that we already have filled (QB). But like I said, if H + H determine that Weeden is who they need at 37, I won't complain about it until I see a lack of production on the field. This is all I was trying to say.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 3:38pm
Well considering I have faith in H + H I have to agree with you. I just don't think Weeden will be a franchise-impacting pro, and I hope that my opinion is shared by those in power.Dr. KnOiTaLL;1144576 wrote: But like I said, if H + H determine that Weeden is who they need at 37, I won't complain about it until I see a lack of production on the field.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 15, 2012 3:42pm
Oh okay..so disagreeing with someone's opinion means you think you're always right...gotchaCrimson streak;1144561 wrote:Your trashing the dudes opinion on weedon. To me that means you think your opinion is always right. I honestly think weedon can be a very good qb. Do I think the browns should take him? Not really I think there is better options. If he was 22-23 hell yes I would want him. As for the whole big 12 defense bs, it holds no weight. Either you can play in the nfl or you cant. Not because you faced certain defenses in college.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 15, 2012 3:43pm
Have you ever been so far even as decided to use go want to look more like?Enforcer;1144578 wrote:Hitlers actions made Him a bad Guy, If He would've just though it and not acted on it would that of made him bad?
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 3:46pm
lhslep134;1144571 wrote:If it holds no weight, find me an elite B12 QB from the past 10 years.
Romo played against scrubs in college, Brady was horrible in college, dalton played against mwc defenses. PAC 10 defenses aren't great by any means and look at Rodgers. Favre played at southern miss. Bradford isn't bad he's just had 3 different coordinators while he's been at st Louis. There just haven't been the prototype qb that has come from the big 12 like the rest of the conferences. Bradford's about the only 1. So honestly it holds no weight to me
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 3:55pm
Well at least I didn't have to read very far to discredit your post. He was far from horrible.Crimson streak;1144602 wrote: Brady was horrible in college
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 15, 2012 3:57pm
lhslep134;1144571 wrote:If it holds no weight, find me an elite B12 QB from the past 10 years.
Crimson streak;1144602 wrote:Romo played against scrubs in college, Brady was horrible in college, dalton played against mwc defenses.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 4:25pm
lhslep134;1144616 wrote:Well at least I didn't have to read very far to discredit your post. He was far from horrible.
Seriously? I would have called him average at best in college. I really just don't think the big 12 qb thing is a big deal. Either you can play or you can't it's as simple as that I don't give a shit if they played against school of the blind as long as they are a good qb and pass the eye test.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 4:35pm
Yeah, it's that simple? Here's a list of people who dominated in that conference. Name me an elite QB pleaseCrimson streak;1144654 wrote:I really just don't think the big 12 qb thing is a big deal. Either you can play or you can't it's as simple as that
Jason White
Colt McCoy
Graham Harrell
Todd Reesing
Chase Daniel
Taylor Potts
Sam Bradford
Blaine Gabbert
Those guys all put up monster stats and passed the "eye test" because they were playing against atrocious defenses. It's easy to look good when your competition blows.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 4:44pm
lhslep134;1144660 wrote:Yeah, it's that simple? Here's a list of people who dominated in that conference. Name me an elite QB please
Jason White
Colt McCoy
Graham Harrell
Todd Reesing
Chase Daniel
Taylor Potts
Sam Bradford
Blaine Gabbert
Those guys all put up monster stats and passed the "eye test" because they were playing against atrocious defenses. It's easy to look good when your competition blows.
How many of those were first round picks? 1. None of them were expected to do anything in the nfl. So thank you for making my point
hoops23
Posts: 15,696
Apr 15, 2012 4:52pm
Blaine Gabbert and Sam Bradford.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 15, 2012 5:07pm
The #1 pick in the draft wasn't expected to do anything in the NFL? The #10 overall pick wasn't either?Crimson streak;1144665 wrote:How many of those were first round picks? 1. None of them were expected to do anything in the nfl. So thank you for making my point
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 5:10pm
hoops23;1144668 wrote:Blaine Gabbert and Sam Bradford.
And there both young and the jury is still out on them. But not drafting a qb because they played in the big 12 is simply stupid.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 15, 2012 5:12pm
SportsAndLady;1144687 wrote:The #1 pick in the draft wasn't expected to do anything in the NFL? The #10 overall pick wasn't either?
And Bradford is a solid qb, and well gabbert was a huge reach and wasn't ready to step into the nfl and play.
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Apr 15, 2012 5:34pm
The big 12 is consistantly one of the weakest pass defense conferences. Also, a lot of spread offense is used there as well. It absolutely is a basis for your evaluation of a QB. Are you going to take a QB, that produces weak QB's(NFL wise), with a top 40 pick with all the needs we have? No. You can think we should take them. BR thinks we should get a QB. It's fine, but it's not going to help this team. We need talent at other positions, and the only way a QB is going to come in here and dominate is if it's Luck. Maybe RG3, but only because of his dual threat ability.Crimson streak;1144691 wrote:And there both young and the jury is still out on them. But not drafting a qb because they played in the big 12 is simply stupid.
I've said it before, the first 3-4 picks need to be RT/OLB/RB/WR in any order. We need to get starters at that position, period. Get a QB in the 5th round for all the fuck I care, but don't take Tannehill/Weeden with a top 40 pick.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Apr 15, 2012 5:35pm
And Tom Brady was horrible at scUM.Crimson streak;1144665 wrote: None of them were expected to do anything in the nfl.
Man, you are proving to be quite the persuasive one.