The Browns should take Chubb and Barkley

[shopson67]

I don't think it's true that QB's in the late-first or 2nd pan out into good/solid NFL QB's at the same rate as early first. Overwhelmingly, if you go year-by-year. The top prospect QB's are typically the ones who have better careers. The QB's at the top of the league right now don't all fit that, but that creates a misleading narrative. That's somewhat of an outlier over the course of history.

I think you've got this right. If I remember correctly, the stat is that the early 1st

Also Brissett

Aggressive is not a synonym for good.

By aggressive I meant a more successful passing game, as in not conservative. We saw how that high octane Colts offense (with a healthy Luck at the healm) performed with a mediocre QB (Brissett) in his stead.

 

[rmilia1]

I don't think it's true that QB's in the late-first or 2nd pan out into good/solid NFL QB's at the same rate as early first. Overwhelmingly, if you go year-by-year. The top prospect QB's are typically the ones who have better careers. The QB's at the top of the league right now don't all fit that, but that creates a misleading narrative. That's somewhat of an outlier over the course of history.

Look at the starting QBaS in the league right now. How many of them are top 10 picks? Look at the last 30 years of Hall of Gamers. How,many of them are top 10 picks? Take a look at the last 50 SB starters at QB, how many of them are top 10 picks?

 

[shopson67]

Fair points...sounds a little like Alex Smith from your description...some of it was self inflicted. FWIW...don't blame BUF at all...we'll see what Hue can do with him.

After watching Tyrod for a few years, I don't see where he's all that different from the universally hated and panned Kaepernick. Just no political drama to focus on. He'll help you limit turnovers and escape leaky pass protections, but he just doesn't anticipate routes coming open well. Seems to be the failing of most "dual threat" QBs.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Hunt catch %

84.1

Fournette catch %

75.0

 

[richig07]

Look at the starting QBaS in the league right now. How many of them are top 10 picks? Look at the last 30 years of Hall of Gamers. How,many of them are top 10 picks? Take a look at the last 50 SB starters at QB, how many of them are top 10 picks?

Back in 2015 - There was an article I saw on this and it was pretty overwhelmingly in favor of "you have to take a QB early". I'll try to find it, but it will probably prove difficult.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Back in 2015 - There was an article I saw on this and it was pretty overwhelmingly in favor of "you have to take a QB early". I'll try to find it, but it will probably prove difficult.

I have seen the same general point written so it definitely exists. Unless you think you are smarter than everyone else or simply lucky, there's a reason the good QB's are probably gone after 10 or so, if they make it that far.

 

[Clayton]

Look at the starting QBaS in the league right now. How many of them are top 10 picks?

I think I counted 14 from last year. I think Palmer rotates out and Mahomes, Tannehill rotates in. Decent odds. I think Bradford rotates in as well so maybe 16+ next year.

edit - Cutler was picked at 11. Watson was 12.

 

[rmilia1]

So, you have the Browns potentially winning 10 games next year? If so, the Browns will be looking for their franchise QB next year in the bottom 3rd of the 1st round if they follow your plan and skip QB in this year's first round. Not a high success rate there.

WHEN they take a rookie QB in the top 5, he's still not going to start the season (and could sit all season).

I think simply adding Taylor and nothing else adds 5-6 wins based on last year's results . The other additions are very good and I don't 10 would be out of the question.

 

[rmilia1]

I think I counted 14 from last year. I think Palmer rotates out and Mahomes, Tannehill rotates in. Decent odds. I think Bradford rotates in as well so maybe 16+ next year.

edit - Cutler was picked at 11. Watson was 12.

Seems about right 50%.

 

[Myles]

I think I counted 14 from last year. I think Palmer rotates out and Mahomes, Tannehill rotates in. Decent odds. I think Bradford rotates in as well so maybe 16+ next year.

edit - Cutler was picked at 11. Watson was 12.

That is very decent odds.

 

[shopson67]

I think simply adding Taylor and nothing else adds 5-6 wins based on last year's results . The other additions are very good and I don't 10 would be out of the question.

Well, luckily for you there are other additions. 10 wins, however, is out of the question.

 

[rmilia1]

Well, luckily for you there are other additions. 10 wins, however, is out of the question.

I really don't think so. Cleveland lost 4-6 winnable games past year almost solely based on QB mistakes . AFC North is blah , games VS other AFC bottom feeders aren't scary. If they weren't playing the best division in football as their NFC crossover I'd really like their chances but for now I'll just say it's doable

 

[ATL96Steeler]

After watching Tyrod for a few years, I don't see where he's all that different from the universally hated and panned Kaepernick. Just no political drama to focus on. He'll help you limit turnovers and escape leaky pass protections, but he just doesn't anticipate routes coming open well. Seems to be the failing of most "dual threat" QBs.

Interesting I never really viewed Taylor as much of "dual threat" guy, much like I don't view Dak as one...at least not in the same vein as Vick, RG3, or Kaep...but agree 100% here, anticipating throwing windows, or "throwing a guy open" is definitely where the NFL game is and what makes it so different from the college game.

You've seen Taylor more than I have, but from afar, I looked at him, Dak, Wilson as guys that are more mobile than dual threat. IMO dual threat guys want to beat you running as much as they do passing.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I really don't think so. Cleveland lost 4-6 winnable games past year almost solely based on QB mistakes . AFC North is blah , games VS other AFC bottom feeders aren't scary. If they weren't playing the best division in football as their NFC crossover I'd really like their chances but for now I'll just say it's doable

This coming season...it is. I don't see them from 0 wins to 10 this season.

Agree in DIV...the north overall is soft, but DIV games by nature of familiarity are normally tighter contest. I will give you several of the losses LY were on the shoulders of the QB.

Baby steps imo...you learn to win games at home 1st. Hell OAK, TB, teams trying to take that next step are learning that winning consistently on the road is next level. Looking at their road games, I don't foresee a W in '18, home they have NYJ, LAC, KC, ATL, CAR + DIV...

 

[Across The Field]

Well, luckily for you there are other additions. 10 wins, however, is out of the question.

The Browns lost 6 games last year by 6 points or less, and the 6 point loss was in OT so there was a sudden death TD scored. They were also absolutely wrecked by injuries on defense. With decent health and the influx of talented additions via trade/FA/the draft, 10 wins is absolutely possible. Likely? No. Out of the question? No.

 

[DefCONNOne]

They said the same thing about Elliott and Fournette. How'd that turn out dumbfuck? They went top 5. They went to the playoffs.

You degenerates are years behind on this league. RBs matter again. Fact.

Triggered little bitches like yourself are triggered.

Enjoy your precious groupthink, asshat!

 

[rmilia1]

Triggered little bitches like yourself are triggered.

Enjoy your precious groupthink, asshat!

So serious question. You're taking the position that advocating a team NOT take a QB with 1 of their 2 top 4 picks is "groupthink"?

 

[DefCONNOne]

Giants could very well take Chubb even if Barkley is still on the board. First year coaches are loathe to spend their best draft choice on a QB that is unlikely to help them this year, especially with a 2x Super Bowl winning QB still on the roster (even if he's bordering on done).

I fixed your post because even the Browns aren't stupid enough to take an RB at 1.

 

[DefCONNOne]

So serious question. You're taking the position that advocating a team NOT take a QB with 1 of their 2 top 4 picks is "groupthink"?

No. Thinking Barkley is a once in a generation talent (he's not) and you (the Browns) should take him at 1 is the groupthink I'm talking about.

 

[rmilia1]

No. Thinking Barkley is a once in a generation talent (he's not) and you (the Browns) should take him at 1 is the groupthink I'm talking about.

So taking a RB at one is groupthink??