Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Nov 19, 2012 9:33pm
SportsAndLady;1325478 wrote:Ok well that's pretty tough considering there was 2 QBs taken in the first 47 picks lol
Bradford isn't a stud, but he's still better than Weeden (and younger).
Tim tebow at 25? And Bradford may be better but he's not the qb you want to move forward IMO
Edit nvm the tebow part read your post wrong
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Nov 19, 2012 9:36pm
2000SportsAndLady;1325467 wrote:It's a rarity more than it is common.
2002
2007
2010 (Bradford is a maybe, but Im less than impressed)
2011 (ALL questions. Except Gabbert. He sucks).
I will also say, going through the other years, there were 2 or 3 where a guy fell to being good. Rodgers and Cutler for sure. The other years it was a no brainer with the guys. So basically, exactly what this year is, you have maybe a 3/12 chance to "find" a guy.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Nov 19, 2012 9:37pm
Thats true. But WHY were only 2 QBs taken??? Because it was a year like this, where it wasnt a no doubt for anyone.SportsAndLady;1325478 wrote:Ok well that's pretty tough considering there was 2 QBs taken in the first 47 picks lol
Bradford isn't a stud, but he's still better than Weeden (and younger).
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 19, 2012 9:40pm
I would agree if this were 2001. But, again, with what scouting has become, these guys are so good at weedin' (get it?) out busts.Laley23;1325485 wrote:So basically, exactly what this year is, you have maybe a 3/12 chance to "find" a guy.
This of course is just my opinion...don't have to agree.
shook_17
Posts: 3,023
Nov 19, 2012 9:45pm
This is what I am trying to say. The way all this shit is now a days, and it is this late in the season there should be somebody from ESPN slobbing on a qbs dick right now if he were top 5 worthy.. And there isn't, I know you talk about scouting n such but I'm sure ESPN has scouts that do all of Kiper and McShays bitch work and they aren't even talking about "that" guy. I do not want a guy that lights it up during drills in the off season and combine.SportsAndLady;1325474 wrote:Hasn't happened in 5 years though..when technology, social media, scouting, etc. has all skyrocketed. We'll find a good QB in the top 5.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 19, 2012 9:45pm
This year just doesn't have an Andrew Luck, doesn't mean it's going to be like 2010 where there were legitimately 0 decent QBs picked, outside of Bradford.Laley23;1325490 wrote:Thats true. But WHY were only 2 QBs taken??? Because it was a year like this, where it wasnt a no doubt for anyone.
I mean seriously..John Skelton might be the best QB taken in that draft, lol
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 19, 2012 9:47pm
Ehh, I guess. But the serious "scouting" comes in around combine time. Hard to gauge how good a QB is going to be when he's playing against Jacksonville State. But when they're evaluating him, physically, and when he goes up against his peers in senior bowls and private workouts, they'll get a much better, thorough evaluation.shook_17;1325504 wrote:This is what I am trying to say. The way all this shit is now a days, and it is this late in the season there should be somebody from ESPN slobbing on a qbs dick right now if he were top 5 worthy.. And there isn't, I know you talk about scouting n such but I'm sure ESPN has scouts that do all of Kiper and McShays bitch work and they aren't even talking about "that" guy. I do not want a guy that lights it up during drills in the off season and combine.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Nov 19, 2012 9:58pm
SportsAndLady;1325511 wrote:Ehh, I guess. But the serious "scouting" comes in around combine time. Hard to gauge how good a QB is going to be when he's playing against Jacksonville State. But when they're evaluating him, physically, and when he goes up against his peers in senior bowls and private workouts, they'll get a much better, thorough evaluation.
I think if a guy is going to blow people away at the combine it would be Landry jones or Tyler bray
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Nov 19, 2012 9:59pm
Bray's decision making is questionable at best.
What about Tyler Wilson?
What about Tyler Wilson?
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Nov 19, 2012 10:02pm
Pick6;1325524 wrote:Bray's decision making is questionable at best.
What about Tyler Wilson?
I agree, I completely forgot about him lol. I think he could be a steal if he slips to the 3rd
shook_17
Posts: 3,023
Nov 19, 2012 10:09pm
Yup I mentioned Tyler Wilson earlier. He's been hurt this year. But I do like him a lot.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Nov 20, 2012 8:32am
LOL @ the thought of starting McCoy now. Also laughing at the "draft a QB top 5...ANY QB just because I don't like Weeden" stupidity.
As mentioned, there isn't a "top 5" QB in this draft but some dumbass will reach for one. Not only are there no QB's in this coming draft that look like an upgrade over Weeden, I'd almost go to the point of saying there aren't many that are much better than McCoy.
Load up on the defensive side of the ball, get a veteran WR and a RG in free agency, and give Weeden one more year to show if he's got "it" with a legit offensive scheme. He's not a WCO QB, imo. He needs to be in more of a vertical offense. He may not be the answer but he should be given two years to prove it (or not).
As mentioned, there isn't a "top 5" QB in this draft but some dumbass will reach for one. Not only are there no QB's in this coming draft that look like an upgrade over Weeden, I'd almost go to the point of saying there aren't many that are much better than McCoy.
Load up on the defensive side of the ball, get a veteran WR and a RG in free agency, and give Weeden one more year to show if he's got "it" with a legit offensive scheme. He's not a WCO QB, imo. He needs to be in more of a vertical offense. He may not be the answer but he should be given two years to prove it (or not).
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 20, 2012 8:52am
Legitimately threw up in my mouth reading thisBR1986FB;1325700 wrote:LOL @ the thought of starting McCoy now. Also laughing at the "draft a QB top 5...ANY QB just because I don't like Weeden" stupidity.
As mentioned, there isn't a "top 5" QB in this draft but some dumbass will reach for one. Not only are there no QB's in this coming draft that look like an upgrade over Weeden, I'd almost go to the point of saying there aren't many that are much better than McCoy.
Load up on the defensive side of the ball, get a veteran WR and a RG in free agency, and give Weeden one more year to show if he's got "it" with a legit offensive scheme. He's not a WCO QB, imo. He needs to be in more of a vertical offense. He may not be the answer but he should be given two years to prove it (or not).
Lets just keep what we've been doing guys, because that's not the definition of insanity or anything!!
Lets build through free agency, because that's definitely helped us in the past and we have a good track record of attracting free agents!!
No one better than McCoy...I never say, "lmao", but...LMAO
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Nov 20, 2012 9:05am
SportsAndLady;1325723 wrote:Legitimately threw up in my mouth reading this
Lets just keep what we've been doing guys, because that's not the definition of insanity or anything!!
Lets build through free agency, because that's definitely helped us in the past and we have a good track record of attracting free agents!!
No one better than McCoy...I never say, "lmao", but...LMAO
Or, in YOUR eyes, "let's just draft a QB top 5....ANY QB....doesn't have to be GOOD as long as he's not Weeden." GTFO with your weak shit. You've been on the "anybody but Weeden" bandwagon since the start. Doesn't matter WHAT he does. The guy could be Ryan Leaf, as long as it wasn't Weeden, and you'd be happy.
The guy may not pan out but you don't just grab "Mark Sanchez Jr" (Barkley) or "Akili Smith Jr" (Geno Smith) just to say "phew...got my top 5 QB." The guy actually has to be good.
If there were a Luck or RGIII in this draft I'd be all in with your philosophy but drafting a QB, just to draft a QB, like you want, is the definition of "insanity."
And who said anything about "build the team through free agency?" I said add TWO pieces, an experience WR and a RG to replace Lauvao. Use the majority of picks on the defense. Not that hard to understand.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 20, 2012 9:20am
Right because I have this personal vendetta against Weeden. Man I just hate Oklahoma State, and in high school Brandon called my girlfriend ugly!
Give me a fucking break, the guy isn't a good QB that's why I don't like him as a QB.
The definition of insanity is to keep drafting a QB when your franchise is in desperate need of one? Interesting philosophy there br. Let me know how trying to convince free agents to come play in Cleveland works out. Or how our top 5 right guard is going to turn this around. Lol.
Give me a fucking break, the guy isn't a good QB that's why I don't like him as a QB.
The definition of insanity is to keep drafting a QB when your franchise is in desperate need of one? Interesting philosophy there br. Let me know how trying to convince free agents to come play in Cleveland works out. Or how our top 5 right guard is going to turn this around. Lol.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Nov 20, 2012 9:26am
From the beginning you've been on the "anybody but Weeden" bandwagon. I don't think you'd find a single person on here who would refute that. You come across like you'd rather have anybody, even a warm body, as long as it's not Weeden. You don't draft a QB just for the sake of drafting one and they aren't in a "desperate need of one."SportsAndLady;1325741 wrote:Right because I have this personal vendetta against Weeden. Man I just hate Oklahoma State, and in high school Brandon called my girlfriend ugly!
Give me a fucking break, the guy isn't a good QB that's why I don't like him as a QB.
The definition of insanity is to keep drafting a QB when your franchise is in desperate need of one? Interesting philosophy there br. Let me know how trying to convince free agents to come play in Cleveland works out. Or how our top 5 right guard is going to turn this around. Lol.
And WTF is your "top 5 right guard" comment? Do you have reading comprehension issues? A) you never take a guard in the top 5 and b) I said load up on the defense in the draft. Meaning "use your top 5 pick on a defensive stud."
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Nov 20, 2012 9:40am
The idea that anyone can determine how good a quarterback will or won't be ten games into his rookie season is stupid. Beyond stupid.
You draft a quarterback high and stick him in the lineup, if you have any sense at all, you commit for a MINIMUM of two years. The revolving door stuff people seem to want is ridiculous.
You draft a quarterback high and stick him in the lineup, if you have any sense at all, you commit for a MINIMUM of two years. The revolving door stuff people seem to want is ridiculous.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Nov 20, 2012 9:44am
Well said.queencitybuckeye;1325758 wrote:The idea that anyone can determine how good a quarterback will or won't be ten games into his rookie season is stupid. Beyond stupid.
You draft a quarterback high and stick him in the lineup, if you have any sense at all, you commit for a MINIMUM of two years. The revolving door stuff people seem to want is ridiculous.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Nov 20, 2012 9:57am
Yea, but usually within those 10 games you see something that gives you a glimmer of hope that a guy could be a franchise QB. Weeden has showed nothing. Like I said before, I'm all for leaving him in there and building up the rest of the team before we draft another QB though. Right now he's working with guys that would be marginal #2 receivers on most teams. We need to use the draft on WR, Rush DE, LB, and CB this year, then hopefully we'll be in a position to draft a QB the following year.queencitybuckeye;1325758 wrote:The idea that anyone can determine how good a quarterback will or won't be ten games into his rookie season is stupid. Beyond stupid.
You draft a quarterback high and stick him in the lineup, if you have any sense at all, you commit for a MINIMUM of two years. The revolving door stuff people seem to want is ridiculous.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Nov 20, 2012 10:02am
I've seen significant improvement.se-alum;1325769 wrote:Yea, but usually within those 10 games you see something that gives you a glimmer of hope that a guy could be a franchise QB. Weeden has showed nothing.
or better, be in a position not to need to draft a QB.Like I said before, I'm all for leaving him in there and building up the rest of the team before we draft another QB though. Right now he's working with guys that would be marginal #2 receivers on most teams. We need to use the draft on WR, Rush DE, LB, and CB this year, then hopefully we'll be in a position to draft a QB the following year.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Nov 20, 2012 10:05am
At some point, they will need to draft a QB. I think they'd be fools to blow this thing up and draft another rookie QB in 2013. Give Weeden another year and if he sucks, go after the next big thing. If Weeden does pan out, you draft a developmental QB in a couple of years, let him sit & learn.
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Nov 20, 2012 10:13am
You've seen significant improvement? You're the only one. Some improvement? Sure. Significant? No way!queencitybuckeye;1325774 wrote:I've seen significant improvement.
or better, be in a position not to need to draft a QB.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Nov 20, 2012 10:13am
Really? That 50% completion percentage over the last 3 games?queencitybuckeye;1325774 wrote:I've seen significant improvement.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 20, 2012 10:16am
We aren't in desperate need of a QB?!?! Seriously br..are you retarded?BR1986FB;1325746 wrote:From the beginning you've been on the "anybody but Weeden" bandwagon. I don't think you'd find a single person on here who would refute that. You come across like you'd rather have anybody, even a warm body, as long as it's not Weeden. You don't draft a QB just for the sake of drafting one and they aren't in a "desperate need of one."
And WTF is your "top 5 right guard" comment? Do you have reading comprehension issues? A) you never take a guard in the top 5 and b) I said load up on the defense in the draft. Meaning "use your top 5 pick on a defensive stud."
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 20, 2012 10:18am
Its not stupid. Hes shown no hope that he'll be anything more than an average QB. Why would we stick with that?queencitybuckeye;1325758 wrote:The idea that anyone can determine how good a quarterback will or won't be ten games into his rookie season is stupid. Beyond stupid.
You draft a quarterback high and stick him in the lineup, if you have any sense at all, you commit for a MINIMUM of two years. The revolving door stuff people seem to want is ridiculous.
Congrats br u found the one person that actually agrees with u right now.