PaattMaann

I think, because it is the NFL and the bodies are bigger/faster/stronger, it would be an insane idea to have the boatload of designed runs for Jackson that he saw in college. Not if you want your QB to stay healthy....now with that said, he has done a great job (similar to Shady) of avoiding the big hits. His legs are a part of his game, no doubt, that can really help an offense. I would guess he would put on bulk, you would still have plays that get him in space (some RPO, roll outs, naked bootlegs)... My main point was, people need to not view Jackson as a running QB that can pass, but rather a fully capable pocket passer. Take his legs completely out of the game and hes still a good QB.

exactly, and anyone who says that does not understand football. Check out Petrino's offense...similar concept wise to NFL, one of the most NFL comparable college offenses actually. Why does Jackson have so many rushing yards then? BECAUSE HIS RUNS ARE LARGELY DESIGNED. Not a one-read and then run, or bail out and run all the time type of QB Louisville has had ZERO offensive talent since Jackson has been in town (no drafted offensive players in that time...in any round...crazy) so he has to be QB and RB, and if there was a way for him to throw the ball to himself, I am sure they would have had them do that too

IF ONE IS ONLY LOOKING AT STATS TO COMPARE THE TWO, the only similar stat they had, as far as college career goes, was their YPA.... In every other stat category TT cant even hold Jacksons nuts Jackson accounted for about 120 collegiate TDs, TT accounted for half that number...that is all you need to really know BUT, if you wanna look at yards / yards per game in just passing....be my guest, and again, see that TT cant hold Jacksons nuts Jackson actually played college ball in an NFL offense, and therefore should be far more advanced as far as QB play than TT is even to this day (and Jackson still can do a lot of work to improve. So again, no...other than being black and athletic, TT and Jackson are nothing alike. Lazy mans comp. To think a Bills offense led by Jackson would resemble anything like the one led by TT last season is also a poor and lazy comparison.

just to interject, I don't know what your basis for disagreeing with 26 on this is... it is WIDELY known throughout college and the pro's that Petrinos passing offense is pretty complex and similar to what NFL coordinators are doing. Jackson got a LOT of rushing yards and TDs in his time at Louisville but that was most certainly not a result of plays breaking down and Jackson scrambling and trying to make things happen (ALA Tyrod Taylor as the Bills QB). Most of Jackson's rushes were designed rushing plays. Jackson very much led an NFL style offense that relied on him making reads and progressions, and this season hung tough in the pocket to prove that he could/would.. All of this while playing in an extremely untalented offense from a personnel stand point. NOT ONE Louisville offensive player has been drafted in 2 years....DRAFTED, like in all 7 rounds...not one!!!! That is freaking incredible. What Jackson performed (like winning a freaking heisman!!!!) with a bunch of scrubs supporting him is damn impressive and should be factored into all comments regarding his skill set. So I ask again, on what basis do you disagree? Just, like, your opinion man?

oh absolutely. I wouldn't trade Hughes for a 3rd or 4th because I think he is worth more than that to our team. I was just saying that is more realistic to what another team would value him as, ESPECIALLY when deciding to give up the number 2 draft pick lol

must have? ive been in and out of this thread, and was simply replying to the asinine comment on the current page replies... something similar to what you said? would you like an "attaboy"?

2nd? With his age, lack of production last year and major contract....I would bet we could nab maybe a 3rd or 4th

fail Jackson and Tyrod are both black and athletic, but that is truly where the similarities end.

our fans over value our own players sooooooo much I would imagine if we called the Giants with that offer, they would hang up and never pick up our calls again Now maybe both of our firsts, hughes, a fourth and next years 2nd they MIGHT do that Would I make the above trade to get up to 2 for Rosen, yes...we need a franchise QB, period.

I agree with this take. Especially after Hue's comments about wanting a veteran in the QB room. Could easily see them signing McCarron and having him likely start while they see if Kizer could develop. Trade back from 4 maybe and pick up an extra first rounder next year (like maybe from the bills), while stocking talent in this years draft. If they truly believe McCarron has what it takes to be "the guy" just as much as any rookie in this draft, why not do it if your the Browns?

while these are fun....there is literally no way in hell the draft could possibly shake out like that....right? lol

no its "fersure"!

Couldnt agree more with Logic's post above... Seriously, those who still think any trade that lands you a potential franchise QB is "too rich for your blood", defend yourself....how else would you expect to solve our double decades long QB issue? Seriously? Take a flyer on some late round QB and hope that works? How has that worked out in the past for us? If we can get to the top of this draft for one of the couple blue chip prospects, literally regardless of cost, I don't understand how anyone can think thats "too rich"...so please, defend your stance here and explain how else you plan to get a franchise QB?

interesting. I've heard "hang tight" or "hold tight"....what is the origin of "hang fire"? like as in, dont shoot? So like "hold fire"? TRULY not poking fun but am curious to the colloquialism

I see what you did there

I am basing the Nate Peterman Sucks mantra on him actually sucking, not based on one season. My wife can literally throw a ball with more velocity than baby arm nate, he doesn't have the physical attributes to even hold a clipboard. If this FO, or any other, ever go in with him being any type of legitimate option to start at QB, they need to be fired.

are these british quotes or something? at first I thought "typo" and moved along but then you did it again lol....what the hell do they mean??? is it his infant arm that makes you think that? his penchant for throwing INTs? Peterman is 100% NOT the answer, nor will he ever be...unless the question is "who should our 3rd string QB be", and even then, I would look long and hard at a list of street FAs to replace him with

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

He must be thinking, "why make a move to get a potential franchise QB when you can get a center, a LB and a DT. We all know those positions are more important than a franchise QB" Anyone thinking its silly to "trade so much" for a QB amuse me. A franchise QB makes EVERYONE better around them (look at Aaron Rodgers and the lack of talent across GBs roster) and you don't consistently compete for championships without one.

we heard this two years ago, we heard this last year...broken record Cleveland will always be poised to turn it around lol (I do agree that they are closer to being 8-8 than 0-16 this upcoming year though)

depending on what "it all" is...good idea, and dont know why you would have sarcasm about it

yea it seems odd...I mean they had a lot of weapons so I can see his targets losing overall targets, but the drop off was substantial. They started using him as more of a decoy/RB at some points too. Very odd. Would I sign him to a real small/incentive laden contract as a flyer? Probably, hes fast

legit fake news http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2018/01/john_dorsey_says_report_he_sai.html

great response to a dick post, kudos for rising above Just one comment though, I don't think Rosen has a "cannon" for an arm, I believe he has an adequate arm, IE he can make the necessary throws, but he is no Josh Allen

I wouldn't rule it out yet...if Cleveland passes on him we certainly have the ammo to move up to 2 or 3 and take him, IF our FO thinks he is worth it.