North Carolina QB Mitch Trubisky headed to NFL draft

[The Gipper]

If I felt that Mitch was on the same level as BR, Rodgers, or Carr then I would gladly take him at 1.

OK, then.

 

But remember.....what you feel don't mean a cabbage fart to anyone.

He is going to go top 5, and we may as well be the one's to take him.

[TexasAg1969]

OK, then.

 

But remember.....what you feel don't mean a cabbage fart to anyone.

He is going to go top 5, and we may as well be the one's to take him.

 

Well the best eatings are at the trash dump this year so we may as well get firsts.

[JosephSuxdick]

Cool. Now they can pass on him in favor of drafting a tight end, too.

[Harry Buffalo]

Every website has the top 4 QBS rated differently. Who knows where anyone of those guys will be picked.

[hoorta]

Oh shit. The groundhog just saw his shadow, 12 more weeks of Mitch's Bitches.

 

Zombo

 

Yeah Z, like that old Prince song "Party like it's 1999". This is exactly the same vibe from back then, except we had a couple of years to scout the college talent pool. I was mostly wrong about Couch- but I pretty much haven't missed since. The Camps are heating up, the Trubisky Train officially entered the station, and is taking on passengers. It's gonna get pretty heated before April 27th rolls around.

 

If this kid was from San Diego Fargo, ND and played for UNLV, North Dakota State. but everything else were the same, most people here wouldn't even know his name.

 

The same could be said about Wentz this time last year, and damn few had watched any tape on Goff either. Different story this year considering RG IIIs suckage. BTW, MHO is Trubisky is at least as good a prospect as Wentz.

 

Are BR, Rodgers, and Carr in this draft? Because I don't see any equivalent to any of them in this draft.

 

Mitch has been rated as the 12th ranked prospect (CBS Sports), 4th rated QB behind Watson, Kizer,and Mahomes (Sports Illustrated), and not in the top 32 prospects by PFF. So this isn't some fevered dream that someone would think that Trubisky doesn't set the world on fire with his play.

 

Then SI's opinion is full of it. I've watched all of the above, and I'll rank Mitch ahead of any of the others. Mahomes may not even get drafted in the first round- Some franchises are on record Watson is a third round prospect. BTW, there were questions about Carr in the 2014 draft too. Here's a re-do. Think the Texans just might trade Javedon Clowney for Carr right now straight up?

 

 

I've tried to stay out of the Mitch discussions, because the kid has been a household name here in my home since 2011. I'm bias as all can be. I've been following the kid since he was lining up as a wide-out at Mentor High School to get playing time as an underclassman.

 

I've seen the kid do some amazing things ... but if it were my call on the #1 overall, right now on January 9, 2017, I'd go defense. If he was there at #12, Hmmmmm ... that would be interesting, but again at this date, I'd still probably go defense again.

 

Hope this kid has a great career though, I'm not done watching him succeed yet. If I felt that the Browns had an organization to groom a young player, I'd be all for it, but they don't and they are not even close. I hope the kid falls to the late first round and some sound franchise snatches him up to be used in future years.

 

You're wimping out Stan. The Browns situation 2017 is not going to be remotely comparable to 1999 when we drafted Couch. I will be pissed as hell if the Browns pass on Mitch, and he goes on to have a stellar career with another team. It might be the final straw that will cause me to turn in my fan card. I watched the entire Packers- Giants game, and Gipper is dead on with his assessment. Not saying he IS, but- Mitch has a ton of traits similar to Rodgers. The pocket mobility- accuracy, arm strength. Sure he needs to sit and learn the Pro Game ,but who's to say the Browns won't give him that opportunity? Remember this quote from our new management team? "This team is being built for long term future success." The only way that has happened in recent NFL history is with a top level franchise qb. Take a look at the teams left in the playoffs- the Texans are the only outlier without a stud QB- and it could be argued they'd be sitting on the sidelines too, if Carr hadn't busted his leg.

 

Yes, I am aware that QBs are drafted higher than their value regularly. That doesn't mean that prospect is a good value. If Mitch fell to the 12th (BR), 24th (Rodgers), or top of the second, I wouldn't care to pick him up then. Spending a 1 on an overrated prospect is not good value...at all.

 

Sure, as Brian Billick said it's dangerous to draft need over value. But, you hit on your franchise qb, you can draft for need for the next 12 or so years. Sure, guys like Garrett or Allen would have an immediate impact- but what happens when their rookie contracts are up and they pull a Ndamukong Suh on the Browns? For sure, we draft Mitch, he's not going anywhere else. Job #1 for the Browns is to have stability at the qb position, everything else is background noise. Want the dumpster fire song to keep rolling on? Love the idea of going into 2017 with Garrett and RG III @ qb? And up the win total to 4? I sure as hell don't want that scenario without a way better Plan B.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

Mitch Trubisky is probably not #1 worthy for most teams. There are much better picks to be made at #1 this year. Given the way this board is laid out, we could stand to take a defensive player at #1 and hope Trubisky falls to us.

 

With all of that said....

 

Fuck him. Take him at #1. Let's do this shit.

[LogicIsForSquares]

Sure, as Brian Billick said it's dangerous to draft need over value. But, you hit on your franchise qb, you can draft for need for the next 12 or so years. Sure, guys like Garrett or Allen would have an immediate impact- but what happens when their rookie contracts are up and they pull a Ndamukong Suh on the Browns? For sure, we draft Mitch, he's not going anywhere else. Job #1 for the Browns is to have stability at the qb position, everything else is background noise. Want the dumpster fire song to keep rolling on? Love the idea of going into 2017 with Garrett and RG III @ qb? And up the win total to 4? I sure as hell don't want that scenario without a way better Plan B.

If I felt that Trubisky was the guy who would be worth keeping around as the franchise QB then I would totally be on board for spending the #1 on him. The Browns do need stability at QB. But I don't feel that Trubisky is that guy. If we drafted him and he went on to be great, I would happily eat crow. I want the Browns to succeed. I just don't see what some others are seeing with Trubisky. I think being a local has made some folks blind to any possible criticism of the kid.

[wargograw]

I don't see us drafting Garrett over Allen. Don't think Garrett fits the profile completely at all.

 

You let Trubisky fall to 12, go ahead.... wait, I want Foster, too.

 

dammit.

But he LOVES THE GAME and is a choir boy. What gives??

[Zombo]

 

Yeah Z, like that old Prince song "Party like it's 1999". This is exactly the same vibe from back then, except we had a couple of years to scout the college talent pool. I was mostly wrong about Couch- but I pretty much haven't missed since. The Camps are heating up, the Trubisky Train officially entered the station, and is taking on passengers. It's gonna get pretty heated before April 27th rolls around.

 

 

The same could be said about Wentz this time last year, and damn few had watched any tape on Goff either. Different story this year considering RG IIIs suckage. BTW, MHO is Trubisky is at least as good a prospect as Wentz.

 

 

Then SI's opinion is full of it. I've watched all of the above, and I'll rank Mitch ahead of any of the others. Mahomes may not even get drafted in the first round- Some franchises are on record Watson is a third round prospect. BTW, there were questions about Carr in the 2014 draft too. Here's a re-do. Think the Texans just might trade Javedon Clowney for Carr right now straight up?

 

 

You're wimping out Stan. The Browns situation 2017 is not going to be remotely comparable to 1999 when we drafted Couch. I will be pissed as hell if the Browns pass on Mitch, and he goes on to have a stellar career with another team. It might be the final straw that will cause me to turn in my fan card. I watched the entire Packers- Giants game, and Gipper is dead on with his assessment. Not saying he IS, but- Mitch has a ton of traits similar to Rodgers. The pocket mobility- accuracy, arm strength. Sure he needs to sit and learn the Pro Game ,but who's to say the Browns won't give him that opportunity? Remember this quote from our new management team? "This team is being built for long term future success." The only way that has happened in recent NFL history is with a top level franchise qb. Take a look at the teams left in the playoffs- the Texans are the only outlier without a stud QB- and it could be argued they'd be sitting on the sidelines too, if Carr hadn't busted his leg.

 

 

Sure, as Brian Billick said it's dangerous to draft need over value. But, you hit on your franchise qb, you can draft for need for the next 12 or so years. Sure, guys like Garrett or Allen would have an immediate impact- but what happens when their rookie contracts are up and they pull a Ndamukong Suh on the Browns? For sure, we draft Mitch, he's not going anywhere else. Job #1 for the Browns is to have stability at the qb position, everything else is background noise. Want the dumpster fire song to keep rolling on? Love the idea of going into 2017 with Garrett and RG III @ qb? And up the win total to 4? I sure as hell don't want that scenario without a way better Plan B.

 

Mitch's Bitches

Gays for Garrett

Allen's Assholes

Debbie (Trade) Downers

Garappahomos

 

Are we missing anybody so far?

 

Zombo

[hoorta]

If I felt that Trubisky was the guy who would be worth keeping around as the franchise QB then I would totally be on board for spending the #1 on him. The Browns do need stability at QB. But I don't feel that Trubisky is that guy. If we drafted him and he went on to be great, I would happily eat crow. I want the Browns to succeed. I just don't see what some others are seeing with Trubisky. I think being a local has made some folks blind to any possible criticism of the kid.

 

OK, that's fair. I'm 95% convinced on Mitch. I totally understand if you're not. Let's wait until the after the Combine and Pro Days to make a final determination. A lot could change. There's a lot of Margaritas at Maya's riding on this. My 0.02 right now is if we take Mitch #1, and get a pretty good (Ogbah level) DE at #12- say Solomon Thomas from Stanford I'd be happy. I absolutely agree- getting an effective pass rush is another high priority item for the Browns.

 

 

Mitch's Bitches

Gays for Garrett

Allen's Assholes

Debbie (Trade) Downers

Garappahomos

 

Are we missing anybody so far?

 

Zombo

 

LOL, There's a few Ma-homos out there too. I think TCPO is the only one in the Kizer Camp so far. No noted Deshawn Watson love here yet, though there's quite a bit on the other Board. That well could change after tonight if he blows up against Alabama.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

If I felt that Trubisky was the guy who would be worth keeping around as the franchise QB then I would totally be on board for spending the #1 on him. The Browns do need stability at QB. But I don't feel that Trubisky is that guy. If we drafted him and he went on to be great, I would happily eat crow. I want the Browns to succeed. I just don't see what some others are seeing with Trubisky. I think being a local has made some folks blind to any possible criticism of the kid.

 

 

I like him as a late first round pick, definitely. He possesses all of the tools you'd like to see, he's just a question mark due to scheme fit and lack of starting time.

 

What don't you see in him? He has some mechanical flaws, primarily in his footwork under pressure, but for the most part he's pretty solid as a prospect. He's certainly not perfect and he'll be slotted in likely below Mariota/Winston/ Wentz and around the Bortles level by NFL.com when all is said and done.

 

I'm also not from Cleveland nor have I ever lived in Cleveland, so I don't care about him being local. Couldn't give a shit other than the fact that he WANTS to play in Cleveland, which is a hell of a lot different than some of these guys we've had in the past.

[Zombo]

 

OK, that's fair. I'm 95% convinced on Mitch. I totally understand if you're not. Let's wait until the after the Combine and Pro Days to make a final determination. A lot could change. There's a lot of Margaritas at Maya's riding on this. My 0.02 right now is if we take Mitch #1, and get a pretty good (Ogbah level) DE at #12- say Solomon Thomas from Stanford I'd be happy. I absolutely agree- getting an effective pass rush is another high priority item for the Browns.

 

 

LOL, There's a few Ma-homos out there too. I think TCPO is the only one in the Kizer Camp so far. No noted Deshawn Watson love here yet, though there's quite a bit on the other Board. That well could change after tonight if he blows up against Alabama.

 

 

We have a couple empty warehouses to rent out to Kizer's Kunts and Wussies for Watson if those clubs form.

 

Zombo

[CaineDeSoulis]

i think going Taking Mitch at 1 is not as much of a reach as everyone is making it out to be. Garrett/Allen/Barnett are all top players for the line and the second tier is Thomas/Williams/Harris/Lawson. Importantly ALL of these prospects could be top 20 guys. There will be an Edge/DL player at 12 that has good value and is not a big step down from the top 2. For QB's there's much much less. Mitch is the top Pro QB prospect This is pretty much universally accepted at this point. Taking Mitch and then Best Edge available is a fine plan and actually solidifies a posistion

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

OK, that's fair. I'm 95% convinced on Mitch. I totally understand if you're not. Let's wait until the after the Combine and Pro Days to make a final determination. A lot could change. There's a lot of Margaritas at Maya's riding on this. My 0.02 right now is if we take Mitch #1, and get a pretty good (Ogbah level) DE at #12- say Solomon Thomas from Stanford I'd be happy. I absolutely agree- getting an effective pass rush is another high priority item for the Browns.

 

 

LOL, There's a few Ma-homos out there too. I think TCPO is the only one in the Kizer Camp so far. No noted Deshawn Watson love here yet, though there's quite a bit on the other Board. That well could change after tonight if he blows up against Alabama.

 

Whoa whoa whoa now - I've been in on Mitch since October. I just happen to also be in on Kizer.

 

If you were to file me into a camp, it would be "Camp Best Value", which I don't think Trubisky at #1 would fall into. I'm looking at the first three picks together and Garrett/BPA/Kizer is more enticing to me than Trubisky/BPA/BPA.

 

But if I had to choose between the three, I'd pick Trubisky over any of them.

 

As proof -

 

Mitch, Mitch, Mitch

I'm on the Trubisky train because I've been tepidly interested in him from the beginning of the season, but I was hoping he wouldn't cost the #1 overall to nab.

[The Gipper]

Mitch Trubisky is probably not #1 worthy for most teams. There are much better picks to be made at #1 this year. Given the way this board is laid out, we could stand to take a defensive player at #1 and hope Trubisky falls to us.

 

With all of that said....

 

Fuck him. Take him at #1. Let's do this shit.

Again, it would be hope against hope. One mock I saw had 3 QBs going in the Top Ten.

That is just the way it is with QBs.

[The Gipper]

OK, that's fair. I'm 95% convinced on Mitch. I totally understand if you're not. Let's wait until the after the Combine and Pro Days to make a final determination. A lot could change. There's a lot of Margaritas at Maya's riding on this. My 0.02 right now is if we take Mitch #1, and get a pretty good (Ogbah level) DE at #12- say Solomon Thomas from Stanford I'd be happy. I absolutely agree- getting an effective pass rush is another high priority item for the Browns.

 

Again, the Bet is that he goes in the Top 5.

And thanks for piping in. I think I will need help drinking all those pitchers to be bought by Stan/Z/Logic etc.

[DKAllDay]

i think going Taking Mitch at 1 is not as much of a reach as everyone is making it out to be. Garrett/Allen/Barnett are all top players for the line and the second tier is Thomas/Williams/Harris/Lawson. Importantly ALL of these prospects could be top 20 guys. There will be an Edge/DL player at 12 that has good value and is not a big step down from the top 2. For QB's there's much much less. Mitch is the top Pro QB prospect This is pretty much universally accepted at this point. Taking Mitch and then Best Edge available is a fine plan and actually solidifies a posistion

 

Exactly. There is tons of depth on defense this draft, with only 3 potential franchise QBs. We simply CANNOT come out of this draft/offseason without a franchise QB

[CaineDeSoulis]

Exactly. There is tons of depth on defense this draft, with only 3 potential franchise QBs. We simply CANNOT come out of this draft/offseason without a franchise QB

i actually like Mitch and Davis Webb as franchise guys i think kizer is cardale jones 2.0 and watson is not a pro style qb period.

[Harry Buffalo]

I think when it comes down to it, if we take Trubisky #1, then fine. That means he is their guy, for better or worse. If you believe in him take him. However it also sucks because we will then miss out on one of the true #1 players in the draft (Garrett/Allen) and they will then likely fall to teams to finished somewhere between 2-5.

 

Also with the QB's being rated so close together I wouldn't be surprised if he did fall to us at #12 if we didn't take him.

[hoorta]

Whoa whoa whoa now - I've been in on Mitch since October. I just happen to also be in on Kizer.

 

If you were to file me into a camp, it would be "Camp Best Value", which I don't think Trubisky at #1 would fall into. I'm looking at the first three picks together and Garrett/BPA/Kizer is more enticing to me than Trubisky/BPA/BPA.

 

But if I had to choose between the three, I'd pick Trubisky over any of them.

 

As proof -

 

Sorry guy if I can't remember everything you posted. Selective memory when you ran through what you liked about Kizer. I watched a couple of his games and came away unimpressed.

 

Here's my thinking. If Watson blows up tonight- there's a possibility all three (Trubisky, Watson, and Kizer) could all be gone by the time #12 rolls around. Anyone thinking Allen (from Wyoming) or Mahomes are going in the top 10 are #1 fanboys. WAY too many questions about them. OTOH we could land a very good DL with the #12. I don't see a Derrick Thomas or Mean Joe Green on the current incarnation of their respective teams. Hell, I'd have to go to NFL.com to even figure out who plays on the Patriots DL.

 

i actually like Mitch and Davis Webb as franchise guys i think kizer is cardale jones 2.0 and watson is not a pro style qb period.

 

What jumps out on Mitch for me is his TD\INT ratio,though he did toss a couple clunkers in the Stanford game. I haven't watched Webb yet- so I'll plead ignorance on that one. I've never thought about comparing Kizer to Cardale- but darn if that isn't an apt comparison. 100% agreed on Watson. There are no old running qbs in the NFL. Said it a bunch of times If you want another RG III, draft Watson. His arm isn't as strong as Griffin's- but hes just as inaccurate.

[DKAllDay]

Here's a thought:

 

It's clear that Cody Kessler was an analytics pick, and Hue said 'trust me' to take some heat off the FO..

 

I don't see how analytics would point remotely towards a QB who has only played 13 games in college (Trubisky)

 

The only 'top' QB analytics would really point to is Watson

[The Gipper]

I think when it comes down to it, if we take Trubisky #1, then fine. That means he is their guy, for better or worse. If you believe in him take him. However it also sucks because we will then miss out on one of the true #1 players in the draft (Garrett/Allen) and they will then likely fall to teams to finished somewhere between 2-5.

 

Also with the QB's being rated so close together I wouldn't be surprised if he did fall to us at #12 if we didn't take him.

No....silliness.

 

While I don't believe so much in Watson or Kizer,...and I don't believe in what I am saying here should happen, I should make another bet that both Watson and Kizer would also be drafted in the Top Ten. Something to eat to go along with the margaritas.

[The Gipper]

Here's a thought:

 

It's clear that Cody Kessler was an analytics pick, and Hue said 'trust me' to take some heat off the FO..

 

I don't see how analytics would point remotely towards a QB who has only played 13 games in college (Trubisky)

 

The only 'top' QB analytics would really point to is Watson

Why not? I mean, what does "analytics" mean such that a guy like MT would not be considered?

I mean, I know that analytics is supposed to be the application of various algorithms and mathematical formula. Do you think a small sample size would invalidate the analytical conclusions?

[LogicIsForSquares]

 

 

I like him as a late first round pick, definitely. He possesses all of the tools you'd like to see, he's just a question mark due to scheme fit and lack of starting time.

 

What don't you see in him? He has some mechanical flaws, primarily in his footwork under pressure, but for the most part he's pretty solid as a prospect. He's certainly not perfect and he'll be slotted in likely below Mariota/Winston/ Wentz and around the Bortles level by NFL.com when all is said and done.

 

I'm also not from Cleveland nor have I ever lived in Cleveland, so I don't care about him being local. Couldn't give a shit other than the fact that he WANTS to play in Cleveland, which is a hell of a lot different than some of these guys we've had in the past.

The issue is that I just don't see sure fire #1 talent out of Trubisky. At 12? No heartburn at all. The Browns would be walking out of the first round with Garrett or Allen and Trubisky. I would be content with that. I just don't want to see a top prospect passed on for a needs pick. Kizer at the beginning of the 2nd would sit alright with me.

 

 

The only early QB that I want zero part of is Watson.

[DKAllDay]

Why not? I mean, what does "analytics" mean such that a guy like MT would not be considered?

I mean, I know that analytics is supposed to be the application of various algorithms and mathematical formula. Do you think a small sample size would invalidate the analytical conclusions?

In their analytical world, they place a huge emphasis on starting experience in college. The more the better. Hence taking Kessler and not Wentz.

 

In fact, looking back at the 2016 draft, the majority of their picks were very experienced college players.

 

I'm not saying he won't be considered, in fact a Browns Org. Insider said MT is the #1 QB on their board.

 

I'm just stating observations

[The Gipper]

In their analytical world, they place a huge emphasis on starting experience in college. The more the better. Hence taking Kessler and not Wentz.

 

In fact, looking back at the 2016 draft, the majority of their picks were very experienced college players.

 

I'm not saying he won't be considered, in fact a Browns Org. Insider said MT is the #1 QB on their board.

 

I'm just stating observations

Well, since per one ranking, not a single Browns draftee last year was rated anywhere in the Top 50 best rookies of 2016, they may want to start considering TALENT...and not so much experience.

I mean, I guess Chris Weinke and Brandon Weeden would have been dream picks for them....guys with lots of experience....28/29 year old. Not worth spit.

[Tour2ma]

FYI, see a lot of the mocks. They universally have him going to the 49ers or Bears

 

... and therefore since the Mocks know best...

 

Mitch's Bitches

Gays for Garrett

Allen's Assholes

Debbie (Trade) Downers

Garappahomos

 

Are we missing anybody so far?

 

AJ McCarryOnsMyWaywardSoldiers? Too long? To Boomer-ish? Not R-rated enough?

 

We have a couple empty warehouses to rent out to Kizer's Kunts and Wussies for Watson if those clubs form.

 

I may be a Kunt, but I'm no Wussie...

 

If you were to file me into a camp, it would be "Camp Best Value", which I don't think Trubisky at #1 would fall into. I'm looking at the first three picks together and Garrett/BPA/Kizer is more enticing to me than Trubisky/BPA/BPA.

And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."

 

Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.

[Harry Buffalo]

No....silliness.

 

While I don't believe so much in Watson or Kizer,...and I don't believe in what I am saying here should happen, I should make another bet that both Watson and Kizer would also be drafted in the Top Ten. Something to eat to go along with the margaritas.

The thing is, if you go look at, lets say the top 10, top 20 mock drafts, you will see that at the very least they have all the QB's going in different orders. At this point I have seen Watson, Kizer, Allen, Trubisky and Mahomes going anywhere from the top 5 to the 3rd round. That isn't to say most mocks don't have 2 or 3 going in the top half of the draft, but most are not in agreement who is the #1 guy is. Normally you might see people talking about 2 QB's who might be #1, but this year it seems that there is 4 or 5 guys.

[The Gipper]

AJ McCarryOnsMyWaywardSoldiers? Too long? To Boomer-ish? Not R-rated enough?

 

Its "Carry on my Wayward Son". Sam and Dean Winchester would not appreciate you messing that up.

[The Gipper]

 

... and therefore since the Mocks know best...

 

 

 

 

And therein lies the rub... there comes a point in every players rise where you say, "that's too high, the risk is too great."

 

And that point is in no different place for Trubisky than it is for Garrett or Allen.

The ONLY difference is that he is a QB......and all the risks and rewards are admittedly greater for a QB than they are for DEs/OLBs.

I mean, look at the Browns history.

Most see the failure of Tim Couch to be a greater failure than that of Courtney Brown. Yet they were both #1 overall picks.

We just think that a failed high pick DE/OLB is much easier to replace, and much less devastating to the team than is a failed QB.

 

Happened for me with Tannehill when he popped into R1... ditto for Bortles when he hit top 15. I just haven't been able to get to Mitch at #1... but now that he's declared, we'll see.

 

And here you have mentioned a couple of underachieving high QB picks. Is a failed Bortles more devastating than a failed Dante Fowler?

Was a failed Jamarcus Russell more devastating than a failed Aaron Curry?

I think the answer is Yes....by virtue of the nature of the position.

 

 

But, you know, I don't think the Browns are in the position to take a chicken shit approach to this thing. "Well...lets take a DE, because if he fails, it won't be as bad as if our QB choice fails". That seems to be a lot of what I am hearing.

Chicken Shit.