Rod Johnson Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 6 hours ago, lancerman said: What's the HUGE vested interest lol? What does 5 games get you? You just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 27 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said: You just don't get it. No I do, the points just illogical. The goal is to win a Super Bowl if you know you aren’t, there’s no tangible incentive to spend a lot on a short term stopgap who won’t even get you halfway there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Johnson Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 5 minutes ago, lancerman said: No I do, the points just illogical. The goal is to win a Super Bowl if you know you aren’t, there’s no tangible incentive to spend a lot on a short term stopgap who won’t even get you halfway there The point is to run a profitable franchise. We've won 1 home game in 2 years. You wouldn't truly understand unless you've experienced 1-31. Winning 5 games is hugely beneficial in comparison for many reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbuff23835 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 13 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said: The point is to run a profitable franchise. We've won 1 home game in 2 years. You wouldn't truly understand unless you've experienced 1-31. Winning 5 games is hugely beneficial in comparison for many reasons. But why would you then settle on winning 5 games instead of taking the chance on winning 10+ for the next five years with a top rookie Qb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistakey Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 7 hours ago, lancerman said: What's the HUGE vested interest lol? What does 5 games get you? Uh, seeing a win on a Sunday- which we haven’t in like 3 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgX Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 41 minutes ago, bigbadbuff23835 said: But why would you then settle on winning 5 games instead of taking the chance on winning 10+ for the next five years with a top rookie Qb? Who says that us trading for Tyrod will prevent us from drafting a QB in the first round? There's no reason why it should prevent us from doing so. Having Tyrod would just allow for the rookie QB to sit until he's ready to play. Rosen is the only QB in this draft who I think would be ready to start right away, and while others potentially could do the same, I think they'd all benefit from sitting for at least half a year to a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Johnson Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 44 minutes ago, bigbadbuff23835 said: But why would you then settle on winning 5 games instead of taking the chance on winning 10+ for the next five years with a top rookie Qb? We are probably going to do that too. It's not mutually exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir L Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 lol i would have given up a 4th or a 5th for him but a 2nd.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Johnson Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Just now, Vladimir L said: lol i would have given up a 4th or a 5th for him but a 2nd.... The 65th pick is technically a 3rd rounder. We have a flurry of young talent drafted around that spot already on our team (we have drafted at 65 the last 2 drafts netting Larry Obgunjobi and Carl Nassib). It can net a great player if you're lucky but is more likely a backup for the next season. That was our 6th highest selection we have this year. I get that it's an overpay but we have played the value game the last 2 seasons, reaped whatever benefits that affords, and can afford to overpay. We still have the arguably the most assets in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir L Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Rod Johnson said: The 65th pick is technically a 3rd rounder. We have a flurry of young talent drafted around that spot already on our team (we have drafted at 65 the last 2 drafts netting Larry Obgunjobi and Carl Nassib). It can net a great player if you're lucky but is more likely a backup for the next season. That was our 6th highest selection we have this year. I get that it's an overpay but we have played the value game the last 2 seasons, reaped whatever benefits that affords, and can afford to overpay. We still have the arguably the most assets in the league. I get it hes an insurance policy if you take a qb in with the 4th pick or the 2nd round. I would go after cousins though and draft Barkley with the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 hour ago, bigbadbuff23835 said: But why would you then settle on winning 5 games instead of taking the chance on winning 10+ for the next five years with a top rookie Qb? Gotta save face with those five wins bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMountainGoat Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 2 hours ago, bigbadbuff23835 said: Bottom line are you winning a playoff game let alone a championship with Tyrod Taylor? If you don’t think so move on while you can and find someone who will get you there. Nothing against Tyrod as a professional, or as a person, he’s great in both of those aspects. But I’m ready for a franchise Quarterback. I’m 24 years old and have never seen one in Buffalo. It’s time. No. Settling for Tyrod is settling for never winning a SuperBowl. I'd rather roll the dice and risk losing, but having a chance a real success versus accepting 9-7 every season with zero chance of a SuperBowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgdish Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 hour ago, bigbadbuff23835 said: But why would you then settle on winning 5 games instead of taking the chance on winning 10+ for the next five years with a top rookie Qb? I'll jump into lake Erie with Hue Jackson if the Browns don't take a rookie QB with the #1 or #4 pick. I think Taylor is a bridge QB, and that probably indicates we're going to go after a high ceiling guy like Darold or (I hope not) Allen who would be best served sitting on the bench for a year before being thrown into the fire and ruined like we did Kizer last year. I don't think anyone in the front office or fan base is looking at Taylor as our great, take us to the SB QB of the future, that's going to be the rookie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFM18 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 minute ago, dawgdish said: I'll jump into lake Erie with Hue Jackson if the Browns don't take a rookie QB with the #1 or #4 pick. I think Taylor is a bridge QB, and that probably indicates we're going to go after a high ceiling guy like Darold or (I hope not) Allen who would be best served sitting on the bench for a year before being thrown into the fire and ruined like we did Kizer last year. I don't think anyone in the front office or fan base is looking at Taylor as our great, take us to the SB QB of the future, that's going to be the rookie. You'd have to question any NFL front office that thought that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtait93 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 The ultimate check down QB paired with the ultimate check down WR? I like your style Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.