FantasySharks.com

because I told before, your simple just wrong, there is more to it than that, you need more than 1st and 2nd rouders to make your team you need to find plauers every where make the ones on the depth chart work. Players have to have a reason to stay, and if they think a qb is part of the formula and the team they are on doesnt have one some of them eventually leave and then your stuck trying to find more peices to the eqaution.





No its not because, teams have to still find the pieces than try to look for a qb that happens to be one of the hardest positions to fill in the NFL. This is part of the reason that cleveland has been doing the same thing for years.


Look at it this way, when teams like the 4 I mentioned above keep winning and the browns are still trying to find that magical mix of players that will get them to the promised land you will understand what Im saying. The browns have been doing what your saying for years, its time to try something new. You never know you could end up being the next teams led by a no name qb, but those team are quickly forgotten.

So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???

correct

OK, hows that been working out so far for the browns?

again your not listening, what is the make up of the steelers those years, how many players came from 3rd round or later? how many free agents did we pick up in those years? How many undrafted player were on the roster?


I see your point, but the NFL disagrees with you.


Just for giggles, who do you think the browns take if they were in one of the top 2 spots in the draft? Who would you take if you were making the decision? This should be 2 answers, Im just wondering if they will be the same answer.

Your coach disagrees.

f@ck the rams

Rugger, the Browns have not done what I'm saying since their return. In fact they have tried everything but that since they returned. Their main issue has been not to build primarily through the draft until they have a solid foundation in place and then kick the regime out and start over. They started in '99 picking a QB 1st with no weapons, then they went the route of trying to win at free agency. Then they tried to get the QB again but it didn't work. If I use your data from '07, there is no proof that "getting the Escalade and parking it on the street when I still live at mom's house" works. I know that buying a house with a garage and THEN buying the Escalade works.

To answer your question about the 1st 2 picks, I would see what I could get in a trade and move down. Way too many holes to fill to spend it on a position that will have just as much value next year. Again, there will be probably 2-3 "franchise" QBs next year and the year after that.

again 5 years is a small sample size? Its more than data that makes this an easy decision. The outlook for this decade will tell you this. Nobody said you cant get the qb first and find the pieces later, since a qb isnt going to help, teams like indy and washington should be picking high next year to right? I have the NFL on my side whos on yours?

You didnt answer my question, what would the browns do and what would you do is the question?

Enjoy the merry go round.

Rugger, you do know that the Steelers are the poster child team for inward-out building don't you?

You do know this is not the same NFL that was in existence 10 years ago right? Its not that they built from the inward out, its where they got the players and what they did with them. The team isnt made up of 1st and 2nd rounders?


You do realize that any team in the first 2 spots in this draft who needs a qb would take luck or griffin without a 2nd thought, that should tell you something.

That's because the players they drafted 10 years ago are still playing for them, whereas other teams haven't had the stability or quality control.

This team is not built on 1st and 2nd rounders?

There are five 1st rounders on your defense alone. As well there should be.

Not to mention Worilds waiting in the wings as a 2nd round pick, along with Woodley, who is starting.

Regarding the first 2 spot in the draft, I do realize that the gm's occupying the 1st two picks are morons, and I don't expect anything more or less from them.

ok

We've just drafted awful players until the last 2 years, we aren't a good case for whatever argument you're trying to make. Pick a different team.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32

By saying there is no proof that getting the QB first works is referring to the fact that none of the QBs taken in the first round since '07 have won a Super Bowl, which is the end goal. We will have to see if any of them wins by the end of the decade, and if they do track back to when they were drafted. Then you can say picking the QB first works for more than just bowing to the hype of rushing to get the "franchise" QB. None of them beat the example of Ben, which was based on getting the pieces first. Flacco and Ryan will be out of the Brees/Eli window unless they do it this year and they have the best chance of the entire list (Stafford JUST made the playoffs last year). Bottom line for me is I just haven't seen where when you are a team that has been below .500 for 4+ years getting a QB first is the road to the Super Bowl. Don't disagree that you need one, I just disagree that when you have multiple holes to fill that HAS to be the first one filled.

As I said in the earlier post, I would trade down if my team is devoid of talent at so many positions. How am I giving my "franchise" QB the best chance to be successful when I don't surround him with tools? I can get a couple of playmakers and get him the next year, because as we all know there will be a "franchise" QB next year. Browns made a reach for RGIII, but not so much that they were going to give up the farm...

regardless, the person Im having the discussion with doesnt even have enough sense to take the best players available if he was in the right spot to do it and the other person thinks the the 2 teams that are sitting in those spots are morons for taking those BPA. My point still stands.