Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Camp Cardale


The Gipper

Recommended Posts

We have to have this do we not? Again....if the Browns do what I like (taking Bosa) then they won't be getting the QBs you all think are so great that are supposed to go at the top of the draft. That means they will have to look further down in the draft for someone that they hope will develop.

No one has more developmental potential than 12 guage.....and of course, it is also possible that no one needs more time to develop than he does (if he ever does).

Still.....if they take Bosa as they should....and pass on the overrated QBs as they should, then they are still gonna get someone......and 12 Gauge is as interesting a speciman as they come:

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1983783/cardale-jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm still all for taking a mid round flier on Cardale, regardless of what we do in the first few rounds. Not as a starter, which I can't emphasize enough, but as nothing more than a project - like a Brock Osweiler or Garrett Grayson situation.

 

 

He's probably the best mid round QB prospect we've seen in a while from an athletic/production standpoint. Regardless of how he looked this year, he at one point did produce at the highest level, which warrants a looksie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's a mlb'er still available in the 2nd round like a Borland....we can't miss on that. Before he retired obviously, Borland was a steal in that 2nd or 3rd round where he went. Yeah I know he got to play with Bowman and Willis and that for sure helped, but he produced for the 9'ers when both those guys were hurt or hobbled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Camp "I don't like QBs and I want Bosa"

 

 

Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

 

 

I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Au contraire. I'm in Camp Cardale and I want QB above all.

 

I don't see the harm in spending a third round pick on the guy and plug him in the QB room for three or four years. How is that any worse than taking a flier on, say, a RG and plugging him in the OL room for maybe two or three years?

So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you take Cardale in addition to a QB at #2???

 

I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

 

The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

 

 

People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

 

The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

 

 

People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

It might not be a bad strategy when you have 11 draft picks. It worked for the Redskins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

 

The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

Should Cardale be a full Combine participant, then maybe, but as of now a 3rd is too high IMO... no commensurate risk/reward. Plenty of good talent in that round including many positions of significant need. Assuming we spend our #2 on a QB, that position should no longer be one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would. It's something Browns haven't done in something like 40 years (and it didn't work then). But for a team that has had terrible QB luck, in a year that might not necessarily possess a true #1 QB prospect, taking a mid-round traits prospect (with production to some extent) can't hurt.

 

The upside potential of Cardale in the third is greater than that of plenty of players on the board, while having another QB mitigates the risk.

 

 

People cherish these mid-round picks like they're gold. Sure, we've had some decent mid-round production from guys. But you also have to factor in that, for a long time, our overall talent level was much lower than that of the rest of the NFL. If a third round pick could immediately contribute anywhere, it was Cleveland.

 

I'm with you all the way on this one, man. Great thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What round did Cousins go in? How about drafting two QBs? Or take a QB #2 and a different edge rusher at 32 and CARDALE if he's available in 4th round. If he's such a raw prospect he should still be there in fourth round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TCPO, it would undercut support for the #2 pick (if he's a QB) too much. Weren't you the one saying Tennessee should trade Mettenberger because fans' desire for him would be bad for Mariota?

 

I'd take Cardale if we went D with #2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TCPO, it would undercut support for the #2 pick (if he's a QB) too much. Weren't you the one saying Tennessee should trade Mettenberger because fans' desire for him would be bad for Mariota?

 

I'd take Cardale if we went D with #2.

 

 

I don't recall saying that, but that's also a completely different scenario - Mettenberger was an NFL starter for Tennessee before Mariota was drafted. A closer scenario to what you described would be if we drafted a guy at #2 this year and kept Manziel on our roster. Then it's like competing with your girl's ex who's always hanging around.

 

I don't think anyone was undercutting RG3 when they drafted Cousins. As a matter of fact, it was widely praised as a smart move by most analysts. Nor was anyone they undercutting him when RG3 got hurt the first time. The Cousins "support" didn't really come on full until Cousins' third year, after RG3's second (or third?) injury.

 

The undercut in support in Cleveland happens after one bad game. That's how fickle our fanbase is. If our guy at #2 throws a multi-interception game, there will be a cadre of fans calling for the backup regardless of who the backup is. If he has two bad games, that cadre becomes a mob.

 

So why not hedge our bets and grab a guy who could develop into starter material over time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as long as McCown is the starter, were gonna get that here no matter what.....because, according to many, he's a 13 year failure and therefore provides nothing for the Browns......so, unfortunately, they will be calling for the back up(non-stop) until McCown is replaced as starter....doesnt matter who the back up is.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as long as McCown is the starter, were gonna get that here no matter what.....because, according to many, he's a 13 year failure and therefore provides nothing for the Browns......so, unfortunately, they will be calling for the back up(non-stop) until McCown is replaced as starter....doesnt matter who the back up is.....

 

And then when McCown is on the bench, and the starter has a bad game, we'll be calling for McCown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm pretty sure it was you anyway.

 

I don't like the RG3/Cousins comparison. Cousins wasn't the hometown kid in a football crazed state that led Redskins' fans favorite college team to a national championship.

 

Agree that our fans will go Retarded with the first bad game by the #2 pick regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa. Our resident 'experts' will be here to shit on your analysis any second now. I think Jones would of been waaaayyyy more productive in a different offense, but the boy needs a little more touch. One thing you got 100% right is there is no worthy 1st round QBs in this draft. If you are going to ride a QB into the playoffs, he has to have a big arm to fit the ball in tight windows against the best defenses. Knowing where to throw it and getting it there are two different things in this league. Jones definitely has both. Thanks Diggy, as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was great, Emdig. I think, though, when you highlighted some of his

bad choices, wouldn't it be worse in the pros?

 

I don't see him as a starter for a year. He was benched for a reason - he has a lot to learn.

Hope he loves the game, and will be a film room wildman. The NFL is a huge step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...