DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum JG - Chapter 8

I already have in prior threads. Not my problem you don't read them.

Can you show us those links to your expert analysis?

I haven't seen a black man and an Italian fight this much since Rocky II.

Id trade 12 overall for Garrapolo and a pick

For what when that's not my argument?

What do you think Jimmy g's trade value is? What is he worth, based on NFL production?

I ain't fighting, lamp.

I am truly curious as to how all the naysayers judge Jimmy G's skill set. They bad mouth him all the time. They say.......I wouldn't give up this, or that. They say he is a backup qb. They say buyer beware. They say he is Cassell.

I just wanna see them break down the tape and evaluate his skill set.

You know, skill set is important in the NFL. I wanna hear their expert analysis rather than all these inane comparisons that don't mean jack squat and even if they did, we have heard them a million times.

Let's talk about skill set, y'all. Where are y'all at?

And yo...............I still got ammunition that I haven't used yet. LOL

Is stating a fact a bad thing now? Is he not a backup QB?

He is a back up qb. However, I think he reads coverages well. Is that a bad thing?

I'll bite. I won't go pass by pass though, just overall impression, okay?

1. He obviously benefited from scheme (and I'm not saying that in a bad way. It's just "Dang, N.E. knows how to get receivers open" kind of way.

2 good velocity.

3 Accuracy is iffy. Some great accurate throws, some not so great. Questionable long ball accuracy.

4. Can move up in the pocket and still make a read.

5. Fair number of designed dump offs, some turned out great.

6. Tends to leave some passes too high.

Oh wow. Vambo liked another one of your posts.

I gather that Vambo will bad-mouth the FO if they trade for Jimmy G.

What say you, Vambo? Should the Browns trade for him or not? Or, is it time for you to slink back into the woodwork?

All generalizations are bad

OK OK put up his NFL starting 4th 5th 6th and 7th game tapes up for us to evaluate.

Can you put up Trub's, Watson's, or Mahomes, first NFL game tapes?

Vambo...............answer the freaking question. Do you want the Browns to trade for Jimmy G or not?

Will you bad-mouth the FO if they trade for him? Speak up, man!

I answered this a couple times in this thread already.

Wouldn't it be just as easy to answer it again.

Would you be upset if the Browns gave up the 12th overall pick and another pick next year for Jimmy G?

If not, perhaps it is time to be quiet.

You wouldn't do it for me.

So, you are avoiding the question?

What are the possible reasons for one to do so?

1. If the Browns don't make the trade, Vambo can continue to bad-mouth Jimmy G and say the Browns were smart by not making the trade.

2. If the Browns do make the trade, Vambo could say that he was always supportive of the trade, provided the price is right. And the price will be right, no matter what.

So Vambo...............can you please clarify your position for us?

Should the Browns trade for Jimmy G? Yes or No? Please select one.

If you said yes, what is the most you would give up for Jimmy G?

Will the FO be smart if they disagree w/your takes or stupid?

I have a feeling you won't answer the questions and will instead deflect, as usual.

Vers you haven't done this yet...


OK OK put up his NFL starting 4th 5th 6th and 7th game tapes up for us to evaluate.

I already said he didn't make those starts. That is a known fact. You think you are being clever, but your act is obvious.

Now, please answer my questions.

OK I already posted it twice in this thread and the web page and author can be determined by clicking the link.

Oh, I finally got it.

The author is being paid by the Browns to spread news to the public that the Browns want the public to hear in order to appease the said fans.

Thanks for answering honestly, Vambo.

If you say so I didn't say that. You are feeding false information if you post I did.

So answer the damn question.

I feel that the Browns need to build the Defense this year. Last year's D was horrible. It had some building blocks, but also just had some "guys" playing as well. We have all heard that Defense wins in the NFL. Houston made it to the Playoffs because of their Defense. Seattle has been among the NFL's best because of their Defense. Baltimore won championships because of their Defense. Defense wins games, no matter who your QB is.

I want the Browns to build a Defense, not to go mindlessly swimming after the QB du jour. Many on here seem to believe that JG will be the savior of the Franchise. That the Browns should do what Mary Kay suggests, give Belecheck anything and everything he asks for to get JG. So let me ask this... HYPOTHETICAL ...Lets say the Browns choose Myles Garrett # 1, Then trade the rest of their draft, all 10 picks, to the Packers for Aaron Rogers. Without a doubt, a better QB than JG. This is with Rogers having the same weapons that Kessler/McCown/RG III had to work with ( minus Pryor.. adding Britt ). Which player does more to help the Browns win ?

To me .. I believe it is Garrett. Garrett would improve the Browns much more than Rogers. The Browns do not have the weapons to make a QB, not even Aaron Rogers, a winner in Cleveland at this point in time. That is why I want to go Defense with every pick that New England could ask for in a trade for JG. If I don't feel that Aaron Rogers could make the Browns a winner yet, why in the world would would I want Garrapolo ?

JMHO

What.

Read the rest of the paragraph. If a receiver can't catch.. is injured for half the season.. if the backups are not good enough.. If the TE is getting slower.. Rogers will not help as much as Garrett.

JMHO

Rodgers, behind this line, could probably extend every play to 10 seconds.

Maybe he could. I'm not arguing that at all. He does that now with Green Bay. I feel that as far as overall impact, that Garrett makes a bigger contribution.

I know we could never get Rogers.. not even for the whole draft, minus # 1. My point was, both players could make incredible contributions, but given the rest of the roster, Garrett's contribution would be greater. JG is not Aaron Rogers. That being the case, I would prefer to go Defense and improve the immediate poorest side of the team, than go for Garrapolo.

I was using the HYPOTHETICAL trade to illustrate my point.

IDK man. It's just really hard for me to agree with such a statement when the QB has been made the most important position by coaches. You're talking about a top 3 QB in the league too. I'd honestly say that our offensive is a little better than GB's.

But yeah, I get your overall point. Build a great D to win a championship as it's easier to do than luck into a QB. Someone made fun of Houston on here awhile back, but would you rather be a Texans fan or a Colts fan right now?

I would much rather be a Texan fan right now.

I like Andrew Luck .. and what he is capable of doing, but he has to have all things clicking. Even then he has to hope he can score more points than the Defense gives away.

Gotta call this statement absolutely ridiculous. At least if it's talking about next year.........

No one player makes a difference as much as a QB. Garrett hasn't played a down in the NFL, Rodgers is the best player on his team (which regularly makes the playoffs), year in and year out he's up for MVP.


The only argument to make is that he's 33 years old (which is a pattern I'm noticing throughout the NFL. The old guard is getting OLD and the new guard isn't keeping up. QBs will be going earlier and earlier based on need)

I was basing that comment on what is surrounding them on their own side of the ball. The QB position is so dependent on weapons. Who to throw to.. if they can catch the ball.. if they can create separation from the defensive player covering them. If the OL can keep the pass rush off the QB. An NFL QB needs to have players surrounding them.

An NFL Pass Rushing DE effects the game more as a single entity. I'm not saying Rogers would not change the Browns, I'm just saying in the HYPOTHETICAL situation I described. Garrett would effect a greater change, because there is so much need on the Defense.

What I'm getting at more than anything is, if a Defensive player could even come close to making a major difference on the Browns over Aaron Rogers, at the cost of a very high price, why in the world would we pay the price Belicheck would be asking for Jimmy Gar0ppolo ?

I know.. it is all supposition, but it is why I would prefer to build the Defense than wasting multiple draft picks on Garopollo. The Ravens won with Dilfer and Flacco, the Texans make the playoffs with Hoyer and Osweiller. Why ? Because they built their Defense.

Then maybe we should focus on getting some receivers?

The Texans got blown out in the first round of the playoffs with Hoyer because of bad QB play. Oz won one game because Derek Carr was injured.

Trent Dilfer (2001 Superbowl) and Brad Johnson (2002 Superbowl) are successes of old. 15 and 16 years ago. I get that Peyton was average when the Broncos won the superbowl, but take a look at the teams that win superbowls and play in the big games frequently. They're the best QBs. It's a clear pattern.

Peyton, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Big Ben, Eli (who, when everything is right around him, is a very very good qb).

Put it this way. Aaron Rodgers, he's been in the playoffs for the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. By my count, that's 8 of 9 possible seasons for him (2008 being his first season, and the only season he didn't make the playoffs).


There's very few defensive players in the NFL that make anywhere near the impact that Rodgers does. Von Miller, JJ Watt would be probably the only two i can think of. Myles Garrett hasn't even played a game yet..........



I'm sorry, I'm just not buying your argument. QB is unquestionably the most important position on the field. Not even close. If I can choose to bring one guy to the Browns (just for next year), and the choice is between Von Miller or Aaron Rodgers, I will take Rodgers any day of the week. And Rodgers, no matter what weapons we have, will have a bigger impact than Miller.


Heck, the greatest example of how important a QB is is the Raiders. They're geared up to play the Texans in the playoffs and you have to choose between playing Derek Carr and Khalil Mack. Any day of the week Carr is more important than the Defensive Player of the Year. We saw that clearly in that game

Any of the naysayers wanna try answering these questions based on the available videos:

-quick or slow decision making

--accuracy

--arm strength

--ability to go through his progressons



--quick release

--anticipation

--pocket awareness

--mobility

--ability to throw on the move

--willingness to stand in there when throwing while being rushed

And if you have time to read the articles that are out there where his coaches and teammates talk about him, can you evaluate the following:

--leadership

--moxie


Anyone?

Nope, not my strength. I know what I see but I don't pretend to fully understand the intricacies of technique that produced the result...

Kinda JC but just realized that there's been 8 threads on this guy who probably isn't really even available.

I'd love to bring Jimmy in for the 12 pick, maybe a 2nd too. But I just don't think he's available. The Pats will hold on to him, evaluate Brady next year, and franchise Jimmy with the intention of trading him.

They know that teams are going to be needing QBs bad. Guys like Rivers, Eli, Ben, Brees, Carson Palmer are getting old in football years. There's bound to be a few teams that will be in the market from failed QBs too. Possibly the Rams, the Jags, and all the usuals this year.


I'm thinking they realize that they can keep him as a Brady Insurance Policy and can trade him next year for close to what they're getting this year.

The demand for QBs simply isn't going to go away. That's gonna make guys like Glennon get the contracts they're getting, guys like Garappolo holding their value and being tradeable assets under franchise tags, and QBs getting drafted earlier than we assume they should. Simple supply and demand

That's fine, but I don't really recall you consistently saying that the Browns should not make the trade for Jimmy G. It just seems to me that guys who are so adamant about not trading for him should at least be able to evaluate his skill set.

And I do think skill set is a much better evaluative tool than evaluating circumstances.

I have been open to the idea of a trade, even involving the #12 pick. However, I am not willing to sell the farm to acquire him. I said quite a while ago that it should be a "sign-and-trade" deal.

Of course skill set is prime, but you cannot ignore the circumstance (or environment) in which those skills were demonstrated. Would Dak have performed to the same level with the Browns? Doubtful...