2012 Offseason: Quarterbacks

[polska2211]

?

I think you meant to have the word reward in there somewhere.

i was speaking regarding where to draft a quarterback. there obviously is reward. his argument was to not take any quarterback in the first two rounds because of the risk, but the whole idea is that you have to balance the risk (the downsides), the reward (the upsides, i left that out because he was speaking on risks), and the costs (draft position).

 

[BooyaCS]

All of these QBs have too many negatives and are way too risky to pick anywhere in the first two rounds. We should wait until next year to draft a QB IMO.

As of now I like next years draft class even less than this years.

 

[AZ_]

The Bold is further from the truth as he was taking snaps in practice as the number 2 QB while being the number 1 WR.

I think it was more of Johnson not sucking that bad until his JR year. Tannehill to get on the field volenteering to play WR (after being recruited as a QB) and then when Johnson was sucking it up do you go with your LEADING WR and move them back to QB just because your QB sucks Or do you stick with the QB that sucks because well he has the more experience.

The problem was Tannehill was their leading WR before going back to QB.

Also if you are knocking Tannehill for the Lack of experience then you had to have knocked Cam Newton, Aaron Rodgers, Brandon Weeden, Brock Oswieler for the lack of Experience.

He has a lot more intangebles than Colt coming out of College.

You don't understand the meaning of "intangibles."

And as impressed as I am that Tannehill was taking backup QB reps in practice, that doesn't make him any more experienced as a starter.

 

[The Oi]

There is exactly zero chance Tannehill becomes a successful starting QB. The guy is useless at everything but running the ball.

If the Browns waste an extremely valuable first round pick on a project QB who showed less than Tim Tebow at the college level, we will know that holmgren and Heckert will never be succesful in Cleveland.

That would be just a terrible, terrible pick. In the third...maybe. But why even waste the pick?

 

[Soda]

There is exactly zero chance Tannehill becomes a successful starting QB. The guy is useless at everything but running the ball.

If the Browns waste an extremely valuable first round pick on a project QB who showed less than Tim Tebow at the college level, we will know that holmgren and Heckert will never be succesful in Cleveland.

That would be just a terrible, terrible pick. In the third...maybe. But why even waste the pick?

I agree. This team is in no position to be taking obvious risks with needs everywhere. Every player is a risk, but none has the chance to blow your franchise into the stone age than a shitty 1st round QB.

 

[BooyaCS]

There is exactly zero chance Tannehill becomes a successful starting QB. The guy is useless at everything but running the ball.

If the Browns waste an extremely valuable first round pick on a project QB who showed less than Tim Tebow at the college level, we will know that holmgren and Heckert will never be succesful in Cleveland.

That would be just a terrible, terrible pick. In the third...maybe. But why even waste the pick?

How is he a useless pick? Also he has shown he can throw a football much better than Tim Tebow. Not to mention Cam Newton only played 1 season before he was drafted as well.

 

[The Oi]

How is he a useless pick? Also he has shown he can throw a football much better than Tim Tebow. Not to mention Cam Newton only played 1 season before he was drafted as well.

Crappy, inaccurate arm. The next guy the Browns take must be as low risk as possible.

I'm finished with projects that have a million things workin against them.

 

[BooyaCS]

Crappy, inaccurate arm. The next guy the Browns take must be as low risk as possible.

I'm finished with projects that have a million things workin against them.

Low risk gets you nothing. At some point you have to take a risk to be successful.

 

[bgfalcon]

Low risk gets you nothing. At some point you have to take a risk to be successful.

RG3 was that risk and we passed on it. Tannehill isn't so much a risk as it would just be an idiotic pick. He has much more potential to turn into another Colt (I.E a qb we end up wasting years with) rather than a franchise guy.

 

[SauDogg]

We didn't pass on RG3

 

[bgfalcon]

We didn't pass on RG3

We didn't outbid the redskins so yes we did pass on him.

 

[BooyaCS]

We didn't outbid the redskins so yes we did pass on him.

When it is a blind auction and you have 1 chance to make an offer with no counter and the fact that the Redskins "knew" what our offer was I don't think we could say that the Browns passed...

 

[bgfalcon]

When it is a blind auction and you have 1 chance to make an offer with no counter and the fact that the Redskins "knew" what our offer was I don't think we could say that the Browns passed...

Regardless of how it happened the original point i was making was that RG3 would be more worthy of risk taking, not someone like Tannehill.

 

[I-77 NORTH]

When it is a blind auction and you have 1 chance to make an offer with no counter and the fact that the Redskins "knew" what our offer was I don't think we could say that the Browns passed...

The Browns fucking passed and you know it and I know it.

 

[JMcCurry08]

The Browns fucking passed and you know it and I know it.

that's wrong we threw the same offer but it was too late according to st louis