#1) Luck will never be available unless he starts blowing dick which is unlikely.BR1986FB;1721690 wrote:And that comment about not paying the price for Andrew Luck was so "over the top/sleeper" I almost spit out my water laughing.
This is a good explanation of your comment. I wouldn't pay the price of what it would cost to get Luck. In a vacuum I would acquire Luck, but I would not pay what it would cost in the real world to acquire him.sleeper;1721699 wrote:#1) Luck will never be available unless he starts blowing dick which is unlikely.
#2) In the insane world that you live in, and Luck was somehow in his prime dominating the league and available, he would cost 5 first round draft picks and 3 whole drafts. I guess that's worth it in your eyes because we just need a QB. LOL.
QB rankings since 2006:sleeper;1721692 wrote:LOL @ Rivers being a "top tier QB". Come on, he sucks and you know it.
#8 QB by some asinine statistical analysis is now "top tier"BR1986FB;1721707 wrote:QB rankings since 2006:
2006- #9 (his first year as a starter)
2007- #15
2008- #5
2009- #8
2010- #1
2011- #6
2012- #17 (only losing season under Rivers)
2013- #5
2014 #8
Looks like a "top tier" QB to me
I would put him in the second tier, below the elite qb's of Manning, Brady, Rodgers.BR1986FB;1721707 wrote:QB rankings since 2006:
2006- #9 (his first year as a starter)
2007- #15
2008- #5
2009- #8
2010- #1
2011- #6
2012- #17 (only losing season under Rivers)
2013- #5
2014 #8
Looks like a "top tier" QB to me
Sometimes you just say stupid shit to make you seem smart. "In a vacuum" wtf is that.lhslep134;1721701 wrote:This is a good explanation of your comment. I wouldn't pay the price of what it would cost to get Luck. In a vacuum I would acquire Luck, but I would not pay what it would cost in the real world to acquire him.
7 of 9 years in the top 10? Yeah, we don't want that in Cleveland...BR1986FB;1721707 wrote:QB rankings since 2006:
2006- #9 (his first year as a starter)
2007- #15
2008- #5
2009- #8
2010- #1
2011- #6
2012- #17 (only losing season under Rivers)
2013- #5
2014 #8
Looks like a "top tier" QB to me
006- #9 (his first year as a starter) - 14-2BR1986FB;1721707 wrote:QB rankings since 2006:
2006- #9 (his first year as a starter)
2007- #15
2008- #5
2009- #8
2010- #1
2011- #6
2012- #17 (only losing season under Rivers)
2013- #5
2014 #8
Looks like a "top tier" QB to me
I called Rivers "elite" which was wrong. The only "elites" are Manning, Rodgers, Brady & Brees. Rivers is a "top tier" QB though, imo. Roethlisberger & Romo would also fall into that "top tier." Second tier, to me, are your Flacco's, Ryan's, Stafford's. Even though he's won rings, I'd probably put Eli in that second tier.thavoice;1721710 wrote:I would put him in the second tier, below the elite qb's of Manning, Brady, Rodgers.
Would put him in the same group as Roethlsiberger.
Fair enough.BR1986FB;1721716 wrote:I called Rivers "elite" which was wrong. The only "elites" are Manning, Rodgers, Brady & Brees. Rivers is a "top tier" QB though, imo. Roethlisberger & Romo would also fall into that "top tier." Second tier, to me, are your Flacco's, Ryan's, Stafford's. Even though he's won rings, I'd probably put Eli in that second tier.
You're willing to throw away at least a first and a 3rd for a 33 year old QB past his prime who's never won anything? LOLjmog;1721714 wrote:7 of 9 years in the top 10? Yeah, we don't want that in Cleveland...
"In a vacuum" is a concept that isolates outside factors such as reality. Since you appear to be unaware of the effect that reality has on situations let me make two separate statements to show my point. Hopefully it will expand your scope of understanding. If you didn't respond like a douche I wouldn't be doing this, because taking time and explaining how asinine your comment was is making me feel douchey.DeyDurkie5;1721713 wrote:Sometimes you just say stupid shit to make you seem smart. "In a vacuum" wtf is that.
And that's why it's a team sport. Yes, top QB's can cover up warts but if he has a shitty O-Line (Browns don't), a shitty running game (Browns won't) and a shitty defense (Browns won't) the whole team will be mediocre. The Browns have the pieces in place to be a playoff contender with a QB like Rivers. Hell, I think they'd be a contender with Bradford but if you have a shot at a top QB (Rivers) who doesn't have an injury history (like Bradford), you go with that guy if you can get him.Commander of Awesome;1721715 wrote:006- #9 (his first year as a starter) - 14-2
2007- #15: 11-5
2008- #5: 8-8
2009- #8: 13-3
2010- #1: 9-7
2011- #6: 8-8
2012- #17 (only losing season under Rivers): 7-9
2013- #5: 9-7
2014 #8: 9-7
In the last 5 yrs he's been an avg QB based on team record, but let's throw 2 1st round picks a FAT contract his way!!!
Not football related but Lebron's 30-31 and "past his prime." Should the Cavs dump him? He obviously doesn't have much left in the tank.sleeper;1721718 wrote:You're willing to throw away at least a first and a 3rd for a 33 year old QB past his prime who's never won anything? LOL
BR1986FB;1721724 wrote:Not football related but Lebron's 30-31 and "past his prime." Should the Cavs dump him? He obviously doesn't have much left in the tank.
Why? Rivers is still playing at a high level at a position that can be played at a higher level into the late 30's. Lebron's still playing at a very high level and should for a couple more years but he's not playing at the level he's played at in the past. Should we put take him behind the old barn and put him down too?sleeper;1721726 wrote::thumbdown:
Browns have a great oline? News to mean. I saw our center/RG spending most the season trying to block from their ass. Sure Mack will be healthy this season, but no depth behind him. And he'll prob be gone next season. Want to replace him? Oh nope can't, wasted a bunch of picks and cap money on a QB that will be throwing from his ass.BR1986FB;1721722 wrote:And that's why it's a team sport. Yes, top QB's can cover up warts but if he has a shitty O-Line (Browns don't), a shitty running game (Browns won't) and a shitty defense (Browns won't) the whole team will be mediocre. The Browns have the pieces in place to be a playoff contender with a QB like Rivers. Hell, I think they'd be a contender with Bradford but if you have a shot at a top QB (Rivers) who doesn't have an injury history (like Bradford), you go with that guy if you can get him.
Durkie is right though. This won't happen but if the Browns get the opportunity to do this, they'd be dumb not to.
Man, you care so much. I hope I never get to be like you.Automatik;1721362 wrote:Orange jersey with brown pants looks good.
Not white pants, too much like Clemson.
Can't wait to see that nose tackle they draft throw 30 TD's and lead the team to an above .500 record.Commander of Awesome;1721735 wrote:Browns have a great oline? News to mean. I saw our center/RG spending most the season trying to block from their ass. Sure Mack will be healthy this season, but no depth behind him. And he'll prob be gone next season. Want to replace him? Oh nope can't, wasted a bunch of picks and cap money on a QB that will be throwing from his ass.
Browns have a great running game? News to me. No back over 1000 yds, fumbles, running the wrong way, under 4.0 YPC. Do I think we have talent there? Sure. Did we have a great running game last season? no.
Browns have weapons for Rivers to throw to? YEah I think we have a servicable group. Not any better than in SD tho probably.
No this is a what have you done for me lately league, and Rivers has done nothing to warrant garnering 2 1st round picks and a new fat contract. Get real.
And nobody overvalues draft picks like Cleveland fans...especially when the shitty GM's tend to fuck up 13 out of 16 first rounders since 1999. But I get it....the draft is the Browns fans' "Christmas" since there's nothing else to cheer about.like_that;1721745 wrote: Some of you guys severely undervalue draft picks.
Whether Cleveland, or any team, botches a pick or not has no bearing on that pick's value.BR1986FB;1721747 wrote:And nobody overvalues draft picks like Cleveland fans...especially when the shitty GM's tend to fuck up 13 out of 16 first rounders since 1999.
