Great news: Browns interested in doing what they always do

[Gradysmanldy]

I think it's safe to say that there's no way we can get an Eli Manning in this draft (now).

heh. Just wait until April 27th's posts when they pick Tannyhill and the fan bois get all excited in their circe jerk.

Super excited for the daily reports out of Berea......Team Colt talking about how the game has slowed down for him and he's fitting the ball in such tight windows, developing as a leader.....and Team Silverlining discussing how Tanney/Weedon make all the throws, are super mature, can't wait for their moment, intangibles, etc...

.....followed by a few games scoring in the teens, squeaking by the POS teams, and the Browns faithful booing the shit out of Colt so that we get to see 8-10 games of bad decisions from a Christian-Ponder-esque project that plays JUST WELL ENOUGH to make sure that we don't draft the next flavor du jour next year.

Anyone want to take the under on this scenario?

[CleSportsTruth]

If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

One, Eli Manning? Two, sure, b/c scoring is TOTALLY overrated in the NFL.

I think it's safe to say that there's no way we can get an Eli Manning in this draft (now). There's no way they can deal with that hole this year.

My point was to challenge the assertion that mostly the Defense won the SB for the Giants. I should also mention Nicks and Cruz as well.

That said, in a perverse way, I get the strategy. Go defense again, lose 11+ gms. again, and have a shot at a QB in '13. Ready to tank it this yr.?

[Hikohadon]

Oh, if they start 1-4 or something, I'm ready to tank.

But if their Defense is better than last year, they'll be in most every game. Some of those they'll even win.

[leadpipe]

If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

One, Eli Manning? Two, sure, b/c scoring is TOTALLY overrated in the NFL.

I think it's safe to say that there's no way we can get an Eli Manning in this draft (now). There's no way they can deal with that hole this year.

My point was to challenge the assertion that mostly the Defense won the SB for the Giants. I should also mention Nicks and Cruz as well.

That said, in a perverse way, I get the strategy. Go defense again, lose 11+ gms. again, and have a shot at a QB in '13. Ready to tank it this yr.?

The Giants would've had the worst passing defense to ever play in a Super Bowl game - if they weren't playing it against the 2012 Patriots.

Not sure how anyone looks at either of those teams wire to wire and has much of anything good to say, save for the fact the Giants could pressure the QB.

And the best overall defensive squad was involved in a divisional playoff game in which 9,000 points were scored in the last 4 minutes.

And the team that many of us would've bet at about week 10 was going to run the table blew on defense as well.

What the hell are you guys watching on Sundays?

You gotta pass the ball.
You gotta protect your guy passing the ball.
You gotta pressure the other guy passing the ball.

You better have a damn good grip on these things if you wanna win.

Period.

Keep building a defense in 2012 while the above three remain unsolved and you've got yourself a losing team - just like the 9'ers were the year before Harbaugh got to Alex Smith - a good defensive bunch of losers.

[Hikohadon]

Doesn't building the Defense imply they're working on Precept #3 "You gotta pressure the other guy passing the ball."?

I'm reasonably confident they'll address the RT position, thus sealing Precept #2 "You gotta protect your guy passing the ball."

Not sure drafting a WR necessarily solves Precept #1 "You gotta pass the ball." The key to passing the ball is having a QB, and I think the Browns done missed on upgrading that for 2012.

[motherscratcher]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

[Fire Marshall Bill]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

I'll buy beer for everyone if jb can kick his leg that high

[leadpipe]

Doesn't building the Defense imply they're working on Precept #3 "You gotta pressure the other guy passing the ball."?

I'm reasonably confident they'll address the RT position, thus sealing Precept #2 "You gotta protect your guy passing the ball."

Not sure drafting a WR necessarily solves Precept #1 "You gotta pass the ball." The key to passing the ball is having a QB, and I think the Browns done missed on upgrading that for 2012.

My comments weren't aimed at what the Browns were doing, just responding to some rhetoric in this thread suggesting building a defense is going to make everything okey-dokey, and thus the Browns will become competitive.

Yes, sure looks like they are holding the bag in regards to number one - which pretty much guarantees another garbage season in hoping 13 points hold up in this day and age.

This draft is so lining up unbelievably poorly for the Browns, cause I understand the guy who says "Can't trade down - we gotta get a playa....problem is, in this draft, the playas available at number four aren't going to help the above 3 objectives much. As I mentioned last week, think Claiborne is fantastic - don't think he helps here much. Again, take a look at the clowns (including white slot receivers) running around in playoff/super bowl secondaries.

And they have their shot at the best RB - if RB mattered anymore.

Bottom line - regardless if the Browns are at fault or not, they are going to stink again next year, and really, I know Holmgren chuckles and says we shouldn't be upset about it, I'm not into another shitty season, involving about 5 games that are just unbearable to watch, just like I've had to put up with the last X amount of years. And no matter how much I wish someone could come in and make a big difference, it ain't happening unless he can somehow throw the ball.

By the way, in regard to trading down, the Browns are simply in a value position. If they get good vale to trade down, do it. If they don't, don't. A team that's a piece or two away, the value situation might not apply, with this squad, it's black and white. And I think they will handle it this way.

[jb]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

I'll buy beer for everyone if jb can kick his leg that high

Your money clip better hope its a midget free bar.

[peeker643]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

It was also the only post in this entire thread not based on solely conjecture. The one, true fact.

[SoulDawg74]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

It was also the only post in this entire thread not based on solely conjecture. The one, true fact.

Sd:

Which part ,

that you kicked mutha in the face or he munched JB's butt ???


SoulDawg

[Fire Marshall Bill]

JB called Motherscratcher a "butt munch". That's the highlight of this thread.

I know. It's kind of an honor. Almost like getting kicked in the face by Chuck Norris or something.

I'll buy beer for everyone if jb can kick his leg that high

Your money clip better hope its a midget free bar.

I'll believe it when I see it

[Triple-S]

May as well trade down, if you can net Richardson at 6, maybe you have something. Lets say we net us another 2nd rounder, and next years first (fuck you jeff fisher), that's a great move on our part, it allows us to have ammo for another shot at next years QB crop, and also helps us in the short term.

N
1st round:
6. Trent Richardson, RB, Alabama

A good running back is the only other way to make an offense remotely good. You're not getting RG3, Tannenhill is a developmental type you can nab later in the draft, and you can't buy folks into watching a crap fest of an offense, thus the choice is clear.

22. Jonathan Martin, OT, Stanford

Anyone want to see whomever is lining up center in 2011, crumble over the fact that there's a gaping at RT? Didn't think so.

2nd Round:

37. Alshon Jeffery, WR, South Carolina

Playmakers, Playmakers.

38. Mychal Kendricks, ILB, California

I hear this guy is an asshole. The one thing sorely need on this team for the past 20 or so years has been a team asshole. The Rats have them, the Inbred do, even the Bengals do. It's time that we finally net our team asshole.

3rd round:
67. LaMichael James, RB, Oregon

You honestly expect me to take a backfield featuring Chris Ogbonnaya, and Armond Smith seriously? Nope. You've got a shot to have a backfield featuring two Heisman finalists, both seeming to compliment each other very well. Please do this.

4th round:
100. Chase Minnifield, CB/KR, Virginia

You really want to pass on the son of another browns legend? Plus it's a position of need.

124. Russell Wilson, QB, Wisconsin

I don't like Tannenhill, and taking him at number 1 is to damn high. I don't like Weeden unless he's teamed up Blackmon. Cousins? Nope. None of these guys appeal to me, they don't seem to be the type of guys you can stick under center and expect immediate results. Colt is going to be the starter this year, but you may as well have a devolpmental guy behind him, let him play when Colt is out with the inevitable injury, and see if he has anything and just kind of pray to god you can net a franchise QB next year

Wilson is athletic, and intrigues me as a guy to take a chance with the 4th.

[pup]

I have seen Mike Holmgren.

I would be stunned if he allowed the Rams to get the pick/player they want after, according to him, they completely stiffed the Browns.

I would be equally surprised if the Rams were so dead set on Blackmon that they are trading up for him when there is at least a decent chance we won't take him and he will be there for them at 6.

[SoulDawg74]

I have seen Mike Holmgren.

I would be stunned if he allowed the Rams to get the pick/player they want after, according to him, they completely stiffed the Browns.

I would be equally surprised if the Rams were so dead set on Blackmon that they are trading up for him when there is at least a decent chance we won't take him and he will be there for them at 6.

SD:

First things first , If King is right its a two horse race for the services of Tannehill with Miami all in and the Browns al over it .

TR would make one hell of a smoke screen and a great secondary target if the Dulphins trade up to the third which lets us field multiple suitors for our fourth with kalil Claiy and TR in play.

and just for spice

Both the Chiefs and the Iggles are now eyeballin the Tan.


Eagles/Tannehill ... and, for that matter, Chiefs/Tannehill.

A contingent of Philadelphia Eagles will be in College Station, Texas, today for a private workout with quarterback Ryan Tannehill.

"I don't really know why,'' Tannehill told me Saturday night. "I'll just get ready to throw for them and do my best.''

Fact is, this is the time of year -- 24 days before Round 1 -- when teams buzz from town to town to get their drafting ducks in a row. The Eagles working out Tannehill could just be Philly doing its due diligence on a good player. That's what it probably is. But with the Eagles and quarterbacks, you never know. It could be more. The Eagles wouldn't seem to have a quarterback need, with Michael Vick set to play the season at 32, and the Eagles wouldn't seem to have the ammo to move up from their 15th spot in the first round -- without including their 2013 first-rounder -- to get their talons on a quarterback who might be picked as high as fourth (by Cleveland).

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/w ... z1qtif3Gg3
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/w ... z1qrWitDSP

SoulDawg

[Pabo]

I want to go on the record as saying that these Clowns should draft Tannehill. 4th, 6th, 8th, 12th, where-the-hell-ever, just go ahead and get him. He's 6-4 222 and by all accounts a smart kid. I don't really care if he's only been a quarterback for about fifteen minutes. Who is to say that he cannot be a franchise quarterback? I, for one, have seen enough of that twerp Colt McCoy. (And the preceding twerps Brady Quinn and Charlie Frye.) McC*y was never supposed to be the guy anyway, and his play has removed any and all reservations anyone might have had. Let's bring someone in here that actually looks like a quarterback and see what we've got. I'm sure Fritz can coach 'im up.

Why is everyone so afraid of Tannehill? His size? His arm? His foot speed? His smarts? If it turns out he ain't the guy, then so what? No one else has been the guy either. It's only a game.

[Hikohadon]

Why is everyone so afraid of Tannehill? His size? His arm? His foot speed? His smarts? If it turns out he ain't the guy, then so what? No one else has been the guy either. It's only a game.

I'm guessing you don't watch a lot of Browns games. You don't find many fans (in any city, of any team) that watch all the games and take a "so what" attitude about the QB.

Punter, sure. QB, no.

Nothing sets back franchises like picking the wrong QB high. 3-4 years to work the guy in, give him his chance, and finally give up on him. Call me crazy, but I actually care about whether or not the Browns are watchable.

[SoulDawg74]

Why is everyone so afraid of Tannehill? His size? His arm? His foot speed? His smarts? If it turns out he ain't the guy, then so what? No one else has been the guy either. It's only a game.

I'm guessing you don't watch a lot of Browns games. You don't find many fans (in any city, of any team) that watch all the games and take a "so what" attitude about the QB.

Punter, sure. QB, no.

Nothing sets back franchises like picking the wrong QB high. 3-4 years to work the guy in, give him his chance, and finally give up on him. Call me crazy, but I actually care about whether or not the Browns are watchable.

SD:

Only problem we picked a project in the third and handed him the keys like he was a number one pick .

Talk about setting yourself back.

Tannehill standing on the roster holding a clipboard is an upgrade over Colt Mccoy on your roster playing .

QB's cost less under the new CBA so a miss is not that devaststating if your astute enough to quickly evaluate if the kid you chose has the goods or not even if he has to sit a bit .

Because if you pick Tanne , and miss you just revisit next year add another ingredient and keep on boiling the pot until the soup is ready .

If your right you don't have too and next year we aren't talking about this and we have a QB .

The reward far exceeds the risk.


SoulDawg

[Hikohadon]

Colt is low-risk b/c he was a late 3rd rounder. It's not like they passed on a great player to take a shot on him. And he's only wasted one year (he wasn't the starter in 2010). If you get Tannehill now, that would be the only year he wastes. If you wait until next year, then likely Colt wastes 2, max.

If Tannehill is a miss, then not only are you passing on a great player to take him, but you're gonna give him a couple extra years to work in/prove himself b/c you thought highly enough of him to take him so high.

So if Tannehill is a whiff, then it's a LOT more damaging than missing on a late 3rd round QB.

[SoulDawg74]

Colt is low-risk b/c he was a late 3rd rounder. It's not like they passed on a great player to take a shot on him. And he's only wasted one year (he wasn't the starter in 2010). If you get Tannehill now, that would be the only year he wastes. If you wait until next year, then likely Colt wastes 2, max.

If Tannehill is a miss, then not only are you passing on a great player to take him, but you're gonna give him a couple extra years to work in/prove himself b/c you thought highly enough of him to take him so high.

So if Tannehill is a whiff, then it's a LOT more damaging than missing on a late 3rd round QB.

SD:

a tanne miss still leaves you in better shape than Mccoy making it .

He doesn't need much to beat that kid .

If he's not a franchise pick you've still upgraded over that third round drek , and you have 2013 and 2014 to revisit with better depth.


SoulDawg

[Hikohadon]

I'm not worried about Colt making it.

Colt will be replaced next year at the latest.

Hopefully with a prospect that I feel better about than Tannehill.

[SoulDawg74]

I'm not worried about Colt making it.

Colt will be replaced next year at the latest.

Hopefully with a prospect that I feel better about than Tannehill.

SD:

Would you agree that Tannehill would replace Mccoy if not immediately but without a doubt start ahead of him in 2013 .

If you do then by default he;ll be ahead of anybody you would draft in 2013 to play the position , because none of them are sure fire can't miss studs like Luck or RG3 .

BTW for two years we've known whoever drafts Luck has an instant starter from day one .

Can you identify that guy now in next years draft .

If your answer is no , then you begin to see the jist of my point .

If you start now your a year ahead of next year at this time if the clock doesn't start until next year your a year behind in 2013 .

Quite a bit different if you look at it like that .

and thats the reason I'm advocating we pick him now .

I'll settle for a draft day trade down with Philly if they move up for kalil if it involves Kafaka , because thats even better as we get Colt and Seneca as starters outta here immediately , but address this posiition this year with someone who can start next year,with an immense ceiling for improvemnt and development which leaves weeded out since he'll soon be collecting social security, ........... don't wait.

and

waste yet another year , guys will be coming off their rookie contacts and we still won't have a trained and capable QB.





SoulDawg

[pup]

Everyone else being bad does not make Tannehill any better.

Is he franchise?
1)If answer is yes, take him.
2)If no, pass on him no matter where he is.
3)If maybe, see #2.

[Hikohadon]

I'm not worried about Colt making it.

Colt will be replaced next year at the latest.

Hopefully with a prospect that I feel better about than Tannehill.

SD:

Would you agree that Tannehill would replace Mccoy if not immediately but without a doubt start ahead of him in 2013 .

If you do then by default he;ll be ahead of anybody you would draft in 2013 to play the position , because none of them are sure fire can't miss studs like Luck or RG3 .

BTW for two years we've known whoever drafts Luck has an instant starter from day one .

Can you identify that guy now in next years draft .

If your answer is no , then you begin to see the jist of my point .

If you start now your a year ahead of next year at this time if the clock doesn't start until next year your a year behind in 2013 .

Quite a bit different if you look at it like that .

and thats the reason I'm advocating we pick him now .

I'll settle for a draft day trade down with Philly if they move up for kalil if it involves Kafaka , because thats even better as we get Colt and Seneca as starters outta here immediately , but address this posiition this year with someone who can start next year,with an immense ceiling for improvemnt and development which leaves weeded out since he'll soon be collecting social security, ........... don't wait.

and

waste yet another year , guys will be coming off their rookie contacts and we still won't have a trained and capable QB.

SoulDawg

If Tyler Wilson were coming out in this draft, I'd take him over Tannehill. I might even take Barkley over Tannehill.

I do agree that if Tannehill is The Guy, then you waste a year by not taking him now. But if he's not The Guy, then taking him wastes 3-4 years, no matter if there's someone we have pegged as The Guy in next year's draft or not.

[SoulDawg74]

I'm not worried about Colt making it.

Colt will be replaced next year at the latest.

Hopefully with a prospect that I feel better about than Tannehill.

SD:

Would you agree that Tannehill would replace Mccoy if not immediately but without a doubt start ahead of him in 2013 .

If you do then by default he;ll be ahead of anybody you would draft in 2013 to play the position , because none of them are sure fire can't miss studs like Luck or RG3 .

BTW for two years we've known whoever drafts Luck has an instant starter from day one .

Can you identify that guy now in next years draft .

If your answer is no , then you begin to see the jist of my point .

If you start now your a year ahead of next year at this time if the clock doesn't start until next year your a year behind in 2013 .

Quite a bit different if you look at it like that .

and thats the reason I'm advocating we pick him now .

I'll settle for a draft day trade down with Philly if they move up for kalil if it involves Kafaka , because thats even better as we get Colt and Seneca as starters outta here immediately , but address this posiition this year with someone who can start next year,with an immense ceiling for improvemnt and development which leaves weeded out since he'll soon be collecting social security, ........... don't wait.

and

waste yet another year , guys will be coming off their rookie contacts and we still won't have a trained and capable QB.

SoulDawg

If Tyler Wilson were coming out in this draft, I'd take him over Tannehill. I might even take Barkley over Tannehill.

I do agree that if Tannehill is The Guy, then you waste a year by not taking him now. But if he's not The Guy, then taking him wastes 3-4 years, no matter if there's someone we have pegged as The Guy in next year's draft or not.

SD:

Hiko my man try and keep up .

Picking a QB or any player #1 is not the cap hobbling setback it used to be .

The front office doesn't have to stick with him if they find better in the next draft solely because the cap consequences would be a dire setback .

Its been done before at more cost when Jimmy picked Walsh , and followed up with Aikman the following year , when a setback at that spot was grave .

However Jimmy , unlike these Jackasses knew he couldn't even get started until the position was secure .

Tannehill is a superior athlete to Walsh , with an NFL arm unlike McCoy and the elite type athleticim this position is morphing into .

He has a compact delivery and quick release ... check

He's tall solidly built strong and athletic ....check

He's played under center in the very offense we employ here ...check

He has the talent to make plays on his own make others around him better ...check

On the negative side

He lacks expereince as a QB having only played 19 games ....check

He has a film record where he has made some boneheaded WTF plays and bad picks ...check

He's as willing as a young puppy , but rougher than a cob and will need seasoning ...check.


Final evaluation he's an incomplete project where you could develop and score big or what you see is what you get and he'll never get better .

Roll the fuckin dice man

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

[Hikohadon]

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

4 more years.

That's what I keep trying to tell you.

I don't care if the #4 pick gets paid the same as a Wal-Mart greeter, if they take him at #4 overall, they'll give him plenty of chances to show he's The Man. And if he ain't, that's 4 more years down the toilet.

And since I think he'll fail here, picking him is - to me - 4 more years down the toilet.

There's nothing that you can say that will make me feel OK about taking Tannehill at #4 b/c I am convinced that he will be a bust in Cleveland. Might be OK somewhere else in a couple years, but he'll fail here. I don't want another 4 years of suck (the upcoming season under Colt will be bad enough).

You like him. I don't (at least, not for us). It's that simple.

[yogi]

Everyone else being bad does not make Tannehill any better.

Is he franchise?
1)If answer is yes, take him.
2)If no, pass on him no matter where he is.
3)If maybe, see #2.

So, you're holding out for that sure thing.
Gotcha.

Then go to sleep and we'll wake you up when the next Elway, Manning, Luck becomes available and we are sitting with the 1st pick in that draft.

There's risk, there's always risk. Its Heckert's job to analyze all the information, most of which we will never know or see, and make the call.

[SoulDawg74]

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

4 more years.

That's what I keep trying to tell you.

I don't care if the #4 pick gets paid the same as a Wal-Mart greeter, if they take him at #4 overall, they'll give him plenty of chances to show he's The Man. And if he ain't, that's 4 more years down the toilet.

And since I think he'll fail here, picking him is - to me - 4 more years down the toilet.

There's nothing that you can say that will make me feel OK about taking Tannehill at #4 b/c I am convinced that he will be a bust in Cleveland. Might be OK somewhere else in a couple years, but he'll fail here. I don't want another 4 years of suck (the upcoming season under Colt will be bad enough).

You like him. I don't (at least, not for us). It's that simple.

SD:

Show me where its written in stone that he costs us four years .

whats are recor the last four years BTW .

We were willing to expend three #1's on Griffin eventually too late after our first half ass bid failed .

You could pick a QB #1 the next three years if you were willing to expend that much to net RG3 and have the time to evealuate and trade them out and accomplish the same thing if push comes to shove .

But bypassing Tannehill because he ain't Luck or RG3 isn't smart .

He has the potential to be a franchise pick , he does have the goods .

Is he ready now ...No .

Do you have a better alternative that could end this cycle of suck faster if he pans out ...... not that I can see.

I view Tannehill like I viewed Sanchez ..

Neither was ready when drafted , but Sanchez scrambled and got himself ready .

The Tannehil now after months with NFL coaching likewise does not resemble that puppy sliding all over the linoleum floor you saw in College .

So answer this question .

Does Tannehill have the goods to be an outstanding Pro ..._________________

If yes you grab him like a green banana if no you pass.

Me I pick him .

Because he does have the goods .


SoulDawg

[SoulDawg74]

Everyone else being bad does not make Tannehill any better.

Is he franchise?
1)If answer is yes, take him.
2)If no, pass on him no matter where he is.
3)If maybe, see #2.

SD:

Hey pup .

Is it clear he is a franchise pick now ....NO

But answer this does he have a franchise pick skillset ___________

Does he have escapability athleticism and enough arm ____________

What will he look like in three yaears of Pro Coaching _________________

Is there a kid in College in 2013 who will be ahead of this kid in 2013 with a year of pro coaching under his belt ________________________________________________ and who is it.

In 2014 name the QB with a year under his belt who would be better than this kid with two years in this system __________________________________---

If you have no names for those blanks , your as clueless as these ignorant fucks who throw darts at the position and hope for the best (Colt McCoy )Puhleeeze.

Set your prejudices aside about Tannehill and break down his game , and show me what the deal breaker is with him , and that its not lack of experience but a mental stoopidity like DA which is uncorrectable.

Give me the report he's unteachable .

Give me the quotes he's a dunce .

Give me a better alternative in 2013 as a starter next year .



SoulDawg

[pup]

s it clear he is a franchise pick now ....NO

But answer this does he have a franchise pick skillset __No_________

Does he have escapability athleticism and enough arm __yes__________

What will he look like in three yaears of Pro Coaching ___Shitty______________

Is there a kid in College in 2013 who will be ahead of this kid in 2013 with a year of pro coaching under his belt _____Wilson___________________________________________ and who is it.

In 2014 name the QB with a year under his belt who would be better than this kid with two years in this system ____Wilson______________________________---


Bro. You don't learn to be accurate, careful with the football and a strong decision maker in the NFL. You just don't. Those are his faults. They aren't correctable.

DA was more than being stupid. He had physical limitations. Tanny has some of the same.

You are reaching to fill a void. A void that needs to be filled. Doesn't mean you reach for shits and giggles. Miami trades up and takes him what are you going to do? Insert next best QB option, because he will also be better than Colt.

[General]

Magic Johnson wants a team for Dodger Stadium. Condos and Casinos on the lake front instead of the FOS.

[SoulDawg74]

s it clear he is a franchise pick now ....NO

But answer this does he have a franchise pick skillset __No_________

Does he have escapability athleticism and enough arm __yes__________

What will he look like in three yaears of Pro Coaching ___Shitty______________

Is there a kid in College in 2013 who will be ahead of this kid in 2013 with a year of pro coaching under his belt _____Wilson___________________________________________ and who is it.

In 2014 name the QB with a year under his belt who would be better than this kid with two years in this system ____Wilson______________________________---


Bro. You don't learn to be accurate, careful with the football and a strong decision maker in the NFL. You just don't. Those are his faults. They aren't correctable.

DA was more than being stupid. He had physical limitations. Tanny has some of the same.

You are reaching to fill a void. A void that needs to be filled. Doesn't mean you reach for shits and giggles. Miami trades up and takes him what are you going to do? Insert next best QB option, because he will also be better than Colt.

SD:

If Miami reaches past us with Minny , i make a deal with Reid for the 15th their 46th pick kafka and send both of my fourths over for their 51st as part of the deal so they can draft Kalil .

On Tyler , we'll have to disagree that he's a better starter September of 2013 than Tannehill after two training camps and year in the pros.

, you may be correct that he's the better pro as he has the ability to throw into tight windows and more consistant play at the position to postulate his possible progress.

but he is not as big or tough or fast as Tanne , and this system rewards athleticism from the signal caller position .

So we can agree to disagree no puzzle .

appreciate your candid reply .

SoulDawg

[CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07!]

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

Trent Richardson / whomever else would have gotten taken in that slot.

And what Hiko said. Taking a QB that high can be disastrous, regardless of financial implications.

[SoulDawg74]

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

Trent Richardson / whomever else would have gotten taken in that slot.

And what Hiko said. Taking a QB that high can be disastrous, regardless of financial implications.

SD:

Yeah its so much better to pass on an Aaron rodgers Mark Sanchez McNabb or a Rottenberger so they can go on to a team that can use them .


SoulDawg

[CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07!]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

[SoulDawg74]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

Bernie or Peyton Manning can't match that

SoulDawg

[Hikohadon]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

Bernie or Peyton Manning can't match that

SoulDawg

I would advise to argue one thing at a time and realize that using a Sanchez comparison is not going to help you with your Tannehill argument, regardless of how you view Sanchez.

To finish off the other... I feel Richardson is a Pro Bowl back for the next 5-6 years. I feel that he is not only really good, but also has an incredibly low bust probability. I have incredible reservations about throwing a Tannehill into this mix, I think you can get a Tannehill in just about every draft, take the player you're almost certain will be Really Good and see what next year brings us.

While I agree completely with the concept that waiting another year just sets us back another year, I also don't think Tannehill is the answer so we'll be waiting for another year (at least) to solve our QB problems should they take him or not.

So use that incredibly valuable pick to get a player that will fix at least one of the other 7 billion holes.

[mattvan1]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

SoulDawg

And the Jets think so highly of him they not only brought the Tebow revival circus to town, they're gonna televise it on HBO.

There's a big vote of confidence in the ol' Sanchize.

[Fire Marshall Bill]

What the fuck we got to lose .

SoulDawg

Trent Richardson / whomever else would have gotten taken in that slot.

And what Hiko said. Taking a QB that high can be disastrous, regardless of financial implications.

SD:

Yeah its so much better to pass on an Aaron rodgers Mark Sanchez McNabb or a Rottenberger so they can go on to a team that can use them .


SoulDawg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBCpcSvxYeo ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[SoulDawg74]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

SoulDawg

And the Jets think so highly of him they not only brought the Tebow revival circus to town, they're gonna televise it on HBO.

There's a big vote of confidence in the ol' Sanchize.

SD:

Whats conveniently forgotten around here is Sanchez was bypassed for the Luv Child du jour around here .

Lady Quinn who I told ya at the time flat out in no uncertain terms was a flat out bust .

So while we crow about Sanchez getting dogged by those imbeciles in NY .

What would our fates have been had we chosen him instead of lady Quinn.

Four playoff wins around hee would give him more than the great and powerful Kosar , while four wins in NY asures them of second place to the guiants in name and fame.


YMMV

SoulDawg

[SoulDawg74]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

Bernie or Peyton Manning can't match that

SoulDawg

I would advise to argue one thing at a time and realize that using a Sanchez comparison is not going to help you with your Tannehill argument, regardless of how you view Sanchez.

To finish off the other... I feel Richardson is a Pro Bowl back for the next 5-6 years. I feel that he is not only really good, but also has an incredibly low bust probability. I have incredible reservations about throwing a Tannehill into this mix, I think you can get a Tannehill in just about every draft, take the player you're almost certain will be Really Good and see what next year brings us.

While I agree completely with the concept that waiting another year just sets us back another year, I also don't think Tannehill is the answer so we'll be waiting for another year (at least) to solve our QB problems should they take him or not.

So use that incredibly valuable pick to get a player that will fix at least one of the other 7 billion holes.

SD:

There is no more valauable position than QB to luck into one or get him by design is unimportant , but the reward warrants the risk to acquire him .

The Ravens took a less polished turd than Tannehill in Boller and crapped out .

The Carolina Panthers chose a guy with less division one starting experience than what tannehill has , while the Browns chose the cough cough most NFL ready fan dandy Lady Quinn .

How'd that turn out.

I like the kid better than Locker who lacked confidence choosing to go back and cost himself 30 million in the process when the CBA changed .

He was aware of this and still went back .

Ryan OTOH chose to play another position than sit and hold a clipboard , he has a unique perspective as a QB having had to play receiver .

I like that he hasn't peaked and isn't close to topping out .
while having the arm strength to complete a deep downfield play after he's bought time with his legs and broke down a defense Much as the rottenberger can do.

I like that we have a QB coach in place in chilly to bring him along and I like that his presence would signal the end to eboller Mccoy sooner rather than later.

I see a better pro than what he was able to show as a collegian given some time, and
a kid who could eventually supplant the incumbents as the best QB in the division which we have no chance of doing now.

You don't think he has it .

That I can respect .

So we can agree to disagree.


SoulDawg

[Hikohadon]

I feel ya SD. I so badly want a QB answer too.

I do admit that I would feel a LOT better about taking a shot at Tannehill if the Browns were able to move back to 6 and get one of STL's high 2nd's, which they could use to still get, say, Lamar Miller and fill that RB void. I just don't see a trade with STL happening (for various reasons).

[mattvan1]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

SoulDawg

And the Jets think so highly of him they not only brought the Tebow revival circus to town, they're gonna televise it on HBO.

There's a big vote of confidence in the ol' Sanchize.

SD:

Whats conveniently forgotten around here is Sanchez was bypassed for the Luv Child du jour around here .

Lady Quinn who I told ya at the time flat out in no uncertain terms was a flat out bust .

So while we crow about Sanchez getting dogged by those imbeciles in NY .

What would our fates have been had we chosen him instead of lady Quinn.

Four playoff wins around hee would give him more than the great and powerful Kosar , while four wins in NY asures them of second place to the guiants in name and fame.


YMMV

SoulDawg

Stop changing the subject

Actually, I feel sorry for Sanchez - no QB should have to go thru what he's gonna face starting in training camp and lasting into the season. As far as BQ - all the reason why you don't reach for a QB in round 1 (Tannehill, cough, cough). As far as Sanchez winning playoff games at the Factory of Sadness, put down the Bud Lite can you made into an emergency pipe - the ghost of Eric Zeir could have won a playoff game with that D.

[SoulDawg74]

Correct, it is so much better to pass on Mark Sanchez.

You really think Tannehill is a Rodgers/McNabb/Ben? If that's the case you do everything you can to get him. Most people do not feel that way though.

SD:

Sanchez has four playoff wins in his first three years .

SoulDawg

And the Jets think so highly of him they not only brought the Tebow revival circus to town, they're gonna televise it on HBO.

There's a big vote of confidence in the ol' Sanchize.

SD:

Whats conveniently forgotten around here is Sanchez was bypassed for the Luv Child du jour around here .

Lady Quinn who I told ya at the time flat out in no uncertain terms was a flat out bust .

So while we crow about Sanchez getting dogged by those imbeciles in NY .

What would our fates have been had we chosen him instead of lady Quinn.

Four playoff wins around hee would give him more than the great and powerful Kosar , while four wins in NY asures them of second place to the guiants in name and fame.


YMMV

SoulDawg

Stop changing the subject

Actually, I feel sorry for Sanchez - no QB should have to go thru what he's gonna face starting in training camp and lasting into the season. As far as BQ - all the reason why you don't reach for a QB in round 1 (Tannehill, cough, cough). As far as Sanchez winning playoff games at the Factory of Sadness, put down the Bud Lite can you made into an emergency pipe - the ghost of Eric Zeir could have won a playoff game with that D.

SD:

Matt the reason I was down on Lady Quinn was that he was an inaccurate Muscle bound salami.

They told him to knock off the weight training and he kept lifting , resulting in him not being able to hit the broad side of a barn on demand let alone make a throw that counts when you need it .

Tannehill is a superb athlete still learning the game at the QB position .

What he brings to the table is a compact pitch and quick release that looks awkwardly like Bernies three quarter shot when he's rushed but not so elaborated or drawn out .

The other plus he can throw on the run and deliver strikes down field with a big arm , which is Colts biggest liability .

He may escape but he can't make a defense pay after he breaks em down , because by that time his receivers have outrun his arm.

Ryan has thrown his share of wtf plays and he has forced the ball .

I can understand youngins trying to force balls , it beats Colt being too chicken to throw it .

Both things kill drives , but you have to have the guts to pull the trigger and confidence you can make plays in the big leagues , scairt will never make a play.

I liken him to wild thang in that baseball movie with Costner , get him his own personal coach and straighten his monkey ass up .

Fuck but thats how you used to develop QB's you spot a kid with talent and coach him up .

Not trying to convince you ,just assuring you i haven't lost my mind over the hype , just extrapolating on the potential of the only real candidate left that can be salvaged from this draft who gives us an upgrade and can solve a major problem.

In a short market you take him a little earlier than you would normally

So what if you pick the QB at 4 and the RB at 22 if you had plans to get both , and the QB should have gone at 22 and the RB should have been picked earlier .

If there the guys you need to do the job get them, once their on the team it doesn't matter in which order they came.

I've said my piece on it .

RB's are a dime a dozen at the four spot use it on a QB if you don't have one and you can't get one better before you pick again.

SoulDawg

[jb]

I'm not worried about Colt making it.

Colt will be replaced next year at the latest.

Hopefully with a prospect that I feel better about than Tannehill.

^^^^^

This. And put in a better situation on a better team because we didn't waste the resources on Tannyhill.

[jb]

Roll the fuckin dice man

What the fuck we got to lose .

^^^^ Crux right here.

No, for god's sake do NOT roll the dice and reach worse that Mack or Faine. I grant you there is no such thing as a sure thing, but we can't ford to blow picks on hope an luck. No more.

If I don't have a shot at a legit franchise-type QB prospect, I want solid picks that aren't reaches and as few red flags as possible by the busload.

[SoulDawg74]

Roll the fuckin dice man

What the fuck we got to lose .

^^^^ Crux right here.

No, for god's sake do NOT roll the dice and reach worse that Mack or Faine. I grant you there is no such thing as a sure thing, but we can't ford to blow picks on hope an luck. No more.

If I don't have a shot at a legit franchise-type QB prospect, I want solid picks that aren't reaches and as few red flags as possible by the busload.

SD:

Whose to say Tannehill ain't a solid pick ,, you ,,, pup ...who

Add Polian to the crack party alongside Mayock and Mc Shay and myself in believing this kid should be the Browns pick .

For me its because we net the greatest reward at the four spot if he pans out and if he doesn't minimum he kicks Mccoy to the curb and we revisit like we've been doing every year since Bernie has been traded.

This kid can make the Rottenberger type big play , the arm strength close to DA with mobility and a brain and more touch ,, just rough as a cob maybe rougher.

http://www.cantonrep.com/browns/x760619702/Its-Pol ian-not-Analyst-X-pushing-Tannehill-for-Cleveland- now

SoulDawg

[pup]

Roll the fuckin dice man

What the fuck we got to lose .

^^^^ Crux right here.

No, for god's sake do NOT roll the dice and reach worse that Mack or Faine. I grant you there is no such thing as a sure thing, but we can't ford to blow picks on hope an luck. No more.

If I don't have a shot at a legit franchise-type QB prospect, I want solid picks that aren't reaches and as few red flags as possible by the busload.

SD:

Whose to say Tannehill ain't a solid pick ,, you ,,, pup ...who

Add Polian to the crack party alongside Mayock and Mc Shay and myself in believing this kid should be the Browns pick .

For me its because we net the greatest reward at the four spot if he pans out and if he doesn't minimum he kicks Mccoy to the curb and we revisit like we've been doing every year since Bernie has been traded.

This kid can make the Rottenberger type big play , the arm strength close to DA with mobility and a brain and more touch ,, just rough as a cob maybe rougher.

http://www.cantonrep.com/browns/x760619702/Its-Pol ian-not-Analyst-X-pushing-Tannehill-for-Cleveland- now

SoulDawg

I gotta say. Me and JB have a much better draft record than the Cleveland Browns.

[Hikohadon]

I'm not trying to use this as an argument for/against Tannehill, but it kinda cracks me up that Bill Polian is used as an example of "knowing QB's" because he drafted Peyton Manning - a move that is akin to falling out of a boat and "discovering" water.

And if he had stayed in Indy, people would say "Bill Polian really knows his QB's! He drafted Peyton Manning AND Andrew Luck! What a track record!" As if a diseased eunuch from Paraguay couldn't have made those picks.

[jb]

SD:

Whose to say Tannehill ain't a solid pick ,, you ,,, pup ...who

Add Polian to the crack party alongside Mayock and Mc Shay and myself in believing this kid should be the Browns pick .

For me its because we net the greatest reward at the four spot if he pans out and if he doesn't minimum he kicks Mccoy to the curb and we revisit like we've been doing every year since Bernie has been traded.

This kid can make the Rottenberger type big play , the arm strength close to DA with mobility and a brain and more touch ,, just rough as a cob maybe rougher.

http://www.cantonrep.com/browns/x760619702/Its-Pol ian-not-Analyst-X-pushing-Tannehill-for-Cleveland- now

SoulDawg

I can't refute you anymore than you can refute me. It's a hard, cold 20/20 hindsight issue. I just do not believe that in December Ryan Tannyhill was a top 10 pick on any one's board. I am always suspicious of post-season high risers in a Mike Mamula sort of way.

Anyway, the dif in the POV's has now been logically and thoughtfully been defined and discussed ad nausea now sans the usual inter webs doo doo. Advantage us. I'm good. Que sara sara homie. If Ryan is a Brown, I got the thread cutters ready to remove "Edwards" and I'm a fan. Still want either TR or a modest trade down to secure all the pieces parts prospects in rounds 1 & 2 with all the trade up ammo and still have comp pick to load up on LB & S prospects and line depth. But I ain't having aneurism if they call tannyhill.

Right now, betting with your $, I'm calling a trade down to Philly for their # 2 this year and next and # 3 this year. Word is they've soured on Vick and smitten with your boi.