Iliketurtles
Posts: 8,191
Apr 20, 2016 12:42pm
I'm not saying pass on a QB because generally the 2nd QB normally doesn't pan out. But if you're not in love with that QB why take him just because you need one? There have been quite a few times where teams reached on a QB in recent drafts and it definitely did not go well. Also I was expecting a different comment from you and since I made this list anyway I don't want it to go to waste so I'll post it... 2nd QB and then the 1st QB taken in each draft since 1990. The number is the pick in that draft. I know it doesn't mean much but I still thought it was interesting how things panned out. Also was fun going back and looking at drafts.Commander of Awesome;1792418 wrote:So go the 3rd then?!? What a stupid argument.
| Andre Ware (7) / Jeff George (1) | 1990 |
| Todd Marinovich (24) / Dan McGwire (16) | 1991 |
| Tommy Maddox (25) / David Klingler (6) | 1992 |
| Rick Mirer (2) / Drew Bledsoe (1) | 1993 |
| Trent Dilfer (6) / Heath Shuler (3) | 1994 |
| Kerry Collins (5) / Steve McNair (3) | 1995 |
| Bobby Hoying (85) / Tony Banks (42) | 1996 |
| Jake Plummer (42) / Jim Druckenmiller (26) | 1997 |
| Ryan Leaf (2) / Peyton Manning (1) | 1998 |
| Donovan McNabb (2) / Tim Couch (1) | 1999 |
| Giovanni Carmazzi (65) / Chad Pennington (18) | 2000 |
| Drew Bees (32) / Michael Vick (1) | 2001 |
| Joey Harrington (3) / David Carr (1) | 2002 |
| Byron Leftwich (7) / Carson Palmer (1) | 2003 |
| Philip Rivers (4) / Eli Manning (1) | 2004 |
| Aaron Rodgers (24) / Alex Smith (1) | 2005 |
| Matt Leinart (10) / Vince Young (3) | 2006 |
| Brady Quinn (22) / JaMarcus Russell (1) | 2007 |
| Joe Flacco (18) / Matt Ryan (3) | 2008 |
| Mark Sanchez (5) / Matthew Stafford (1) | 2009 |
| Tim Tebow (25) / Sam Bradford (1) | 2010 |
| Jake Locker (8) / Cam Newton (1) | 2011 |
| Robert Griffin III (2) / Andrew Luck (1) | 2012 |
| Geno Smith (39) / EJ Manuel (16) | 2013 |
| Johnny Manziel (22) / Blake Bortles (3) | 2014 |
| Marcus Mariota (2) / Jameis Winston (1) | 2015 |
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Apr 20, 2016 12:43pm
"Better than shit we've had", sureSportsAndLady;1792395 wrote:there are two elite QB prospects in this draft.
"elite", no
Most scouts have them ranked below Mariota and Winston. I wouldn't call either of them elite either.
That said, if they like the other guy, take him. But the argument of "they need one right now so take him whether you think he is great or not" makes no sense. This team is nowhere near only a qb away. A trade gives them ammo to better the team all around. I am good with either of these scenarios. I'd dislike staying at #2 and picking Tunsil or the CB.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 20, 2016 12:43pm
It's like you're not even comprehending. So your argument is you think either wentz or Goff sucks? Thus we should pass of the one you think sucks is there at #2? S&l and I are saying we think both can be successful. Thus take who ever is there.Iliketurtles;1792422 wrote:I'm not saying pass on a QB because generally the 2nd QB normally doesn't pan out. But if you're not in love with that QB why take him just because you need one? There have been quite a few times where teams reached on a QB in recent drafts and it definitely did not go well.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 20, 2016 12:44pm
Combined QB rankings:iclfan2;1792423 wrote:"Better than shit we've had", sure
"elite", no
Most scouts have them ranked below Mariota and Winston. I wouldn't call either of them elite either.
1: Winston/Goff (tied)
2: Mariota
3: Wentz
4: Lynch
From Matt Miller this morning.Kiper/McShay are divided on who they think is the top QB and the news of who the Rams will take is different depending on the source. I'd say there is anything but a consensus.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 20, 2016 12:51pm
And this is the Weeden logic im talking about. "Well he's better than what we currently have."SportsAndLady;1792401 wrote:Yeah I think we just disagree on that.
Both of them, IMO, are going to be better than the shit we've had, and the shit we'll continue to have if we .
We obviously didn't think that, but our FO did. I'll eat my crow, but I think wentz has bust written all over him. Goff, I would have been ok with, but the Rams are going to make that pick most likely.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Apr 20, 2016 12:51pm
I don't remember saying that but I probably said id be fine with either one but I prefer goff over everyone and feel he will be the better qbSportsAndLady;1792390 wrote:About a week ago you posted there's no difference between Goff and Wentz. So which one is it?
Iliketurtles
Posts: 8,191
Apr 20, 2016 12:54pm
The only thing I'm saying is Sonofanump agrument isn't as stupid as your claiming it to be since history backs up his assessment. Now I will agree with you if you think both can be successful then take which ever one is there at 2. I have no idea if either will be successful. I personally like Wentz more than Goff but I don't think either is that special and if you can move down and still get a great prospect in the top ten that's what I would do this year. It's the Browns so chances are no matter what they do it will be wrong (This comment is just a joke as I agree with what like that said below).Commander of Awesome;1792424 wrote:It's like you're not even comprehending. So your argument is you think either wentz or Goff sucks? Thus we should pass of the one you think sucks is there at #2? S&l and I are saying we think both can be successful. Thus take who ever is there.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 20, 2016 12:54pm
Also, we can't just assume the Browns FO would fuck up if they were given all those draft picks in a trade. We are falling victim to being a Browns fan where everything is a disaster. This is a brand new regime. What farmer/Pettine/holmgren/heckert/banner did with all those picks have no bearing on this team now.
I get it. We have needed a QB since 1999, but I'm just not desperate enough to give up a big trade like that for somebody like wentz or goff (especially wentz). This team also also has a shit ton of other needs. If we punt and get a top QB next year I won't QQ.
I get it. We have needed a QB since 1999, but I'm just not desperate enough to give up a big trade like that for somebody like wentz or goff (especially wentz). This team also also has a shit ton of other needs. If we punt and get a top QB next year I won't QQ.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Apr 20, 2016 1:02pm
Any young QB needs talent around them to be successful. Do the trade, get some talent, and then put a young QB in a better position to be successful next year. That could be drafting a QB later in this draft or next year.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 20, 2016 1:10pm
Assuming there is a QB next draft AND the browns are in position to take him. That's a lot of assumptions.se-alum;1792434 wrote:Any young QB needs talent around them to be successful. Do the trade, get some talent, and then put a young QB in a better position to be successful next year. That could be drafting a QB later in this draft or next year.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We weren't in position last draft, and we thought we were sitting pretty this draft until we weren't. If we like Goff/Wentz and Goff/Wentz are there you pull the trigger. Pretty fucking simple. Not sure why you guys are making it more difficult than it is.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 20, 2016 1:14pm
Post 226 on NFL offseason thread. I can't quote it on here from tapatalk.Crimson streak;1792429 wrote:I don't remember saying that but I probably said id be fine with either one but I prefer goff over everyone and feel he will be the better qb
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Apr 20, 2016 1:14pm
No need to get butt hurt because you want a QB with the 2nd pick and we don't (if we get a good trade).Commander of Awesome;1792435 wrote:Assuming there is a QB next draft AND the browns are in position to take him. That's a lot of assumptions.
We weren't in position last draft, and we thought we were sitting pretty this draft until we weren't. If we like Goff/Wentz and Goff/Wentz are there you pull the trigger. Pretty fucking simple. Not sure why you guys are making it more difficult than it is.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 20, 2016 1:16pm
His words about getting talent this draft and just take the top QB next year is exactly what has doomed this franchise lol.Commander of Awesome;1792435 wrote:Assuming there is a QB next draft AND the browns are in position to take him. That's a lot of assumptions.
We weren't in position last draft, and we thought we were sitting pretty this draft until we weren't. If we like Goff/Wentz and Goff/Wentz are there you pull the trigger. Pretty fucking simple. Not sure why you guys are making it more difficult than it is.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 20, 2016 1:17pm
It's what the Browns have always done. Great recipe for success.SportsAndLady;1792439 wrote:His words about getting talent this draft and just take the top QB next year is exactly what has doomed this franchise lol.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Apr 20, 2016 1:18pm
No butthurt here. No problem calling out dumb arguments with failed logic.like_that;1792438 wrote:No need to get butt hurt because you want a QB with the 2nd pick and we don't (if we get a good trade).
Question for you, you like Goff correct and not wentz? If Goff is on the board at #2, you still doing a trade back?
Second question, Goff is taken #1, Wentz is there at #2, we do a trade back to pick #7, and Wentz is somehow still there. You like him then?
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 20, 2016 1:21pm
No one is getting butthurt. Just having a discussion. Let's not start with the "QQ bitch boy butthurt feelz" talk and just talk Browns. For once lol
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Apr 20, 2016 1:27pm
To me, the decision process isn't that tough. If those in charge believe a quarterback available to them will be a QB that can take a team to the Super Bowl, you take him. If not, you go best player. They just have too many other needs to take a flyer on someone they don't believe in.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Apr 20, 2016 1:34pm
Pretty much this. If the current FA doesn't like either QB, no sense in just taking them to take them.queencitybuckeye;1792443 wrote:To me, the decision process isn't that tough. If those in charge believe a quarterback available to them will be a QB that can take a team to the Super Bowl, you take him. If not, you go best player. They just have too many other needs to take a flyer on someone they don't believe in.
My guess is the Browns want Goff but they know the Rams are going to take him so now they are seeing if they can get value out of their pick knowing a top QB is still available. I'd take that Eagles trade in a heartbeat if its really 3 3rds and 2 1sts to move down 6 spots.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Apr 20, 2016 1:41pm
A few teams could occasionally be talented enough except for a quarterback to possibly justify taking a flyer. The Browns are not one of those teams. If they aren't confident in a QB, they can't afford the gamble.sleeper;1792444 wrote:Pretty much this. If the current FA doesn't like either QB, no sense in just taking them to take them.
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Apr 20, 2016 1:52pm
Trade completed, with Eagles.
Browns get 1st, 3rd, 4th this year, 1st 2017, 2nd 2018
Wow
Give up 1st this year and 1017 4th pick
Browns get 1st, 3rd, 4th this year, 1st 2017, 2nd 2018
Wow
Give up 1st this year and 1017 4th pick
Lovejoy1984
Posts: 5,277
Apr 20, 2016 1:52pm
Browns traded our 1st and 4th for 1,3,4 this year, 1 next year, 2 in 2018 with the Eagles.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Apr 20, 2016 1:53pm
I'll admit that's a nice haul.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Apr 20, 2016 1:54pm
And only moving from 2 to 8?
Solid deal.
Solid deal.
Midstate01
Posts: 14,766
Apr 20, 2016 1:55pm
Such a good trade.
Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
Lovejoy1984
Posts: 5,277
Apr 20, 2016 1:59pm
As long as we don't fuck up the picks that's a great deal for Cleveland