DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Browns Front Office....still not ready for prime time..(imo)

LOL at the comprehension part. I understand you perfectly.

RG3 injury issue is/was/will be a concern for sure.

Kessler is for sure a project. Was and is. I wouldn't expect different from a bottom of round 3 prospect. I think most would agree that Rnd 3 isn't the place to expect to find rookie QB's that start their first year. (Dak is fluke - if the Cowboys thought he was that good he would have been drafted higher - imo).

McCown - I am a big fan of Josh's - if we had lined up with him as a starter this year, I would have been happy enough. In many ways he is the perfect veteran for a team that is under a total rebuild. I think it's a little unfair to say he's better than an uninjured RG3 - the sample size on RG3 was way too small and he had some good passes dropped week 1, which had they been caught might have changed how we viewed his performance.

We absolutely need a franchise QB. And as per the previous posts on Wentz, I think its too early to tell if Wentz is the Franchise QB that we blew it by not selecting.

So you deliberately twist and manipulate my posts? That's pretty sad dude.

The only problem with the Collins section of your argument is that Collins chose the Cowboys, not the other way around. Plenty of teams were offering him UDFA contracts, the Browns probably included.

Also, Do you know for a fact that the Cowboys would have taken Dak over Kessler if Kessler had been on the board at their pick?

What all actual NFL draft boards have you looked at?

Sure on a lot of internet draft guru's lists Dak was higher. But there is a reason they aren't NFL GMs, and they also don't have the same information as NFL GMs.

The Cowboys have also ignored red flags and had them blow up in their faces. See Randy Gregory and the Kraken (his real name randomly escapes me). Being willing to take a risk at a position of need in the 4th round doesn't mean they thought Dak's legal situation was a good thing/that he was in the clear. They may just have thought the rest of the QBs in the draft were complete garbage and wanted the one guy who had a chance of working out.

It wasn't proven that he was not guilty. It just wasn't proven that he was guilty. That's how the system works. You don't have to prove innocence. You just need to provide reasonable doubt. Can you please stop saying that it was proven that he was not guilty? Found not guilty is fine, but there is a difference.

Guilty or not, taking anyone with an alcohol story would have been a complete circus after what this team's gone thru the past few years. I don't see how anyone in their right mind would consider that the
Browns should even look at him... let alone pick him.

Interesting. So, what are your thoughts about the Browns welcoming back Josh Gordon?

In my opinion you just proved Dak is a fluke. . . . "he was projected as the 5th-7th best QB in the draft".

You simply don't have the top 5 or 7 rookie QB's starting game 1 and looking as good as Dak. He is a fluke. The idea that teams thought he was the 7th best QB in the draft and would look as good as he did in game 1. . . . makes no sense.

Why take Kessler over Dak ?? It's been discussed and you don't agree and you won't accept that after Gilbert, JM and Josh Gordon the need for less risk and more squeaky clean personalities was very real. . . does it look as if that was a mistake after one game of their rookie seasons - one a 3rd stringer the other looking good starting (for an injured Romo) ... yes. But it's early and a small sample size!

What's funny is that at this stage of the game, Dak is more NFL ready and producing. Yet people keep making excuses. lol

Speaking only for myself, at this point, Gordon is worth a shot. We would be nothing by dumping him,and maybe he has finally learned his lesson. I truly doubt it, but it costs us little to keep him, and we can always dump him at the end of the year if we want.

We already know that Gordon can be a premium, top of his position talent ..... if he keeps his head in the game, and stays away from the smoke.

We are, as many pointed out, trading the 53rd player on the roster for Gordon when he returns. He's worth that kind of risk.

j/c

This FO passed on using their #2 overall pick on a QB with question marks. They took a risk of being wrong in favor of multiple extra picks. Early returns are that QB may have been worth the pick.

Instead they continued to accumulate 15 players in 2016 (including acquiring Taylor in a draft trade), with multiple high picks in the next 2 drafts. With those 15 players they got 5 starters; Coleman, Ogbah, Nassib, Shoebert, and Taylor. I suspect Kindred and the other Coleman will become starters before the end of the year. If Thomas is traded, add Drango. If we finish the season with 7-8 starters out of one draft class, I would have to consider that a successful draft, even without solving the QB position. And we will have multiple extra chances in the next 2 drafts to solve it.

With all due respect, YTown............the argument that the other poster made [and there others who have said the same thing] was that we couldn't draft a guy who had off the field problems after the Manziel debacle.

Who in the hell has had more off the field issues than Gordon?

I see a double standard on the part of some fans.

Oh, and you and others won't and will go on a long rant about this and that's fine. I made my point and I'm done w/it.

On the other hand, Manziel was on our team at the time........with all of his issues having come to light.

Gordon was on our team at the time (not playing, I know) and not playing due to his issues.

How could the front office NOT shy away from a guy that may have issues? And it's not like we were the only team that shied away, remember.

When you're trying to deal with a Manziel AND a Gordon, why would you think about adding another possible problem?

Hindsight is 20-20. But at that time, I can understand the front office dropping Dak in the draft order.

You can't?

I never said that. I am saying that I believe some are simply defending the FO at each and every turn rather than judging each move on an individual basis.

The Browns cut Bess when he had a drug problem. Other teams cut players w/drug problems. The Browns could have parted ways w/Gordon this year, but chose to bring him in despite a long history of misconduct.

Thus, I don't know if I am totally buying they couldn't take a chance on Dak. Especially considering some of the qbs they liked including Kessler, Kap, and RGIII.

He's already here, he costs nothing in terms of draft picks or cash, and we can sever ties without any backlash if he doesn't pan out. It's a different situation as we're not utilizing resources and looking foolish taking yet another chance on a potential problem. We really have nothing to lose finding out if JG can return to glory.

That said, I wouldn't have had an issue if we let him go after the last infraction.

Okay, thanks for answering.

Dak Prescott

week 1...25/ 45 att, 55.6% comp, 227 yds. 1 pass over 20 yds. rating 66.4

why are we drooling over this guy? really? and that is with team 1 reps...smdh...Cody could match those numbers and he spent his time with the 3's


http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?a...e&Submit=Go

What were Kessler's numbers in week one again?

Vers I could put up those numbers and i am 50...are you trying to say that the 23rd QB last week is who we should have gotten?

LOL......just trying to keep it fair, Dawg.

Personally, I was kinda hoping we would grab Lynch at the bottom of the first or top of the second.

I would have been okay w/taking Wentz at 15 or so, but that obviously had no prayer of happening.

yes I remember Lynch. I think we were one of the only ones to hope Lynch was drafted by us...I flip flopped around a bit but settled on Lynch...I think we both didn't think there was one QB in that draft worth a top ten pick...me I didn't one was worth even a first rounder..

My fear is we have to see Kessler this year .. And it appears he's next man up .. I thought for sure we'd sign someone today to try and get them ready to be the next sacrificial lamb ..

I would want NO ROOKIE playing on this years O ..

I hope Hue sticks to what he said about feeding Crow all day ... I doubt he will do it ... But it is our best shot at keeping QB'S alive even When we don't do it well .. And we won't do it well ..

For what it is worth..............I liked Hogan over Kessler before the draft. His mechanics are whacked, but he throws the ball well and is a great leader .

there's no doubt we'll see kessler this year ... and probably even hogan

j/c

What is the over/under in hours before someone names a corner of the endzone "Hogan's Heroes"?



"I know nut-thing!!"

over under? 2 games

I was also part of the Lynch bandwagon. I would have done the one trade down then taken Lynch with that pick. I would have been afraid that he would not have made it to #15

Vers - in my mind there are a couple of big differences between Prescott and Gordon.

1, They were drafted by different front offices. So the 2 front offices may have different philosophies.

2, Yes, both had issues before we drafted them. However, We had not had issues with players prior to Gordon. When Prescott was drafted we had experienced both the Gordon and Manziel sagas. It was a completely different atmosphere.

3, Fast forwarding to today, in my mind there is a big difference between supporting one of your own which Gordon is and trying to help him through his trials and tribulations vs bringing in a new guy with issues.

I am not condoning the drafting of Gordon nor Manziel.
I am neither for nor against the passing on Prescott.
My point is that comparing Gordon's and Prescott's situations isn't the right comparison

Jester, you are a level-headed man and this is in no way an attack on you. Okay?

I wasn't talking about the drafting of Gordon. I was talking about bringing Gordon back this year after his suspension. His sins are far greater than Dak's, thus I don't buy the argument that there was "no way the Browns could draft Dak."

I believe that people who say that are just making excuses for what seemingly is a poor evaluation of the available qbs. That is just my opinion and yes, it is early.

But, you know as well as I do............that Dak got a lot more love before the draft on this board than Kessler did. Heck, I only remember one dude mentioning Kessler and he was laughed at.

Not talking about drafting Gordon eliminates my point #1. However #3 is still very applicable. And #2 remains somewhat though less applicable.

As for who's sins are greater, that can be debated. Certainly Gordon's are more repetitive.But if you ask someone in MADD or who lost a loved one to a drunk driver, they will disagree with you on who's mistake was more egregious.

You are definitely right that it is early.
The argument that there was no way we could draft Dak may or may not have some validity.
I think there is some reasoning behind it but I also think that some people may be making excuses.

Again, I am not trying to justify keeping Gordon or passing on Dak.
I just don't think the two are as comparable as you think they are.

And I in no way would have looked at your post as an attack, rather just good discussion.

But speaking of Attack. Has AttackDog been around? I haven't seen him post lately but I certainly could have missed it.

Uhmmmmm Jester.............Gordon had a DUI while he was under suspension for substance abuse.

Attack pops in occasionally. I think he was here about 3 weeks ago or so.

Forgot about Gordon's DUI. Oopsie.

It's a lot to keep up with.

And I would have been against drafting Gordon after the Manziel situation .... but we did not draft him. We already controlled his rights, and we owe him guaranteed money, so it really is a completely different situation.

imagine if the Cowboys had just given up on Irving. Gordon is in my mind a top 3 WR this league talent wise. and if you saw any of the preseason games Gordon looked like he didn't miss a step.

<<sigh>>

I know that. Why do people keep saying that to me? Do you guys think I am stupid? Seriously?

I am saying that the Browns did not have to bring him back. They could have got rid of him, especially after he failed yet another test in March. How the NFL allowed him back in after that..........I don't know!

I ain't buying the rhetoric that the Browns could not draft Dak. I still think it was all about how they evaluated the qbs.

Heck, there are other qbs I would have taken before Kessler. It ain't limited to Dak.

How many colleges was Irvin kicked out of for drug use?

How many times was Irvin suspended during his first 3 years in the NFL?

Just wondering?

ok lol a question for a question.

Was Irving's drug of choice much worse then a semi legal "drug" in weed?

also back then I don't think they as strict as they are today...if Irving was playing today do you not think he would be suspended for drug use? coke?

could be wrong but I doubt it. I am an intellectual. lol