I'm not hindsighting it, I said all those things before he played a down in the NFL. They were already on film for the whole world to see.
And I've argued about whether he would have lasted here before. There is no way in hell we would have cut ties or favored keeping someone in the FO or coaching staff over Allen. Although he was rough around the edges out of the gate, he was still making plays that jumped right off the screen. Not jumped off the screen for a rookie, jumped off the screen as nobody has or ever could do "that".
I'll admit I'm very passionate in my opinion (read: not trying to be a jack@ss). Truth is, this, more than any of the other b.s. we've been served, has me "checked out" as a Browns fan. Angry, grouchy, more convinced than ever that we're irreversibly cursed.
It's easy to understand that Josh would still be here from this perspective:
Year one: amongst the warts were plenty of "wow, wth did I just watch!" plays. That would have been true anywhere. And nobody ever cuts even the baddest of the bad after one season.
Year two: vast improvements in footwork, mechanics, football IQ... and nobody cuts ties with even average high-asset QBs after two seasons.
Year three: He and Mahomes were 1a and 1b, period. He threw as accurately as anyone in the league and completed passes at 70% -- along with all the ridiculous plays that only he can make... along with big collisions that saw him pop up and look down to make sure a LB or safety would be able to get back on their feet. He was already a man amongst boys.
And our timeline of FO and coaches likely would have followed the same course. Jackson was always an utter failure. Kitchens was just as bad. Kitchens cost Dorsey his job. NONE of that would have cost Josh his job and he would have spent year three with Stefanski. I think the argument that he wouldn't have worked out here is near futile.
| 
