Chuck Wagon

Why do you come to that conclusion? I don't think any team in the league is trusting Bradford as being their starter for any real period of time.

Only Browns fans can go 0-16, trade day 2 / early day 3 picks for players who were likely to get cut and think it means playoffs.

Chase Daniel is 31.... He's never really played, though he appears to have some believers around the league.

If Baker's height was his only issue he'd be the consensus #1 overall pick.

I would be fine with Bradford. If he's on the field I think he's a clear upgrade from Tyrod, especially if we want to run an offense where timing and quick passes are a staple. One would hope he's gained plenty of perspective and would be a positive in the QB room.

Yep, which is completely my point on a trade up. I don't think anyone is pretending the top QBs don't have flaws, which is why they are actually available in a trade up, but we haven't had anyone near their potential in the building in 2 decades.

If I were Brees I'd see if I can get the Jets to do something really dumb, like $40+ mil guaranteed for a year. Take one ridiculous payday and ride into the sunset.

I think our realistic trade partners are the Giants (Panthers relationship, but may be too expensive) / Colts / Broncos (if they get Cousins) and then picks 7-10. I fully expect the Browns to use one pick on QB and the other on someone like Barkley / Chubb / Fitzpatrick.

Cleveland isn't picking a QB #1

Well according to your analysis, we just trade up to pick the first QB off the board and we are golden.

Please no. They were openly talking about replacing him with Sudfield after the Dallas game. Please just get a blue chip rookie for the first time in 35 years.

McCown - A guy who gets it, I remember seeing somewhere that he's going to be a highly sought after assistant coaching prospect when he hangs it up. Bridgewater - A gamble, but if he pans out he could be a valuable asset we can flip if/when the rookie is ready, however I worry about drama in the QB room. McCarron - A similar guy to Bridgewater, could be a very valuable asset to flip but again, I don't know he'll be fine handing the job over. Bradford - if he can be on the field is an interesting option, but I just don't see him being available all that much and I worry about putting the rookie in before he's ready. That being said, if we draft the right rookie, he'll be ready. Matt Moore & Derek Anderson - I'd be similarly meh about either, but I wouldn't outright hate it. Wildcard - Blaine Gabbert - He was not awful when he played for Arizona last year Keenum- will want a clear starting job / Cutler - easy pass / Geno - EJ - Henne - Mallet, just no

Going into the season with Glennon / Rudolph - Falk - Lauletta as the QBs is not what a "smart" organization would do.

That's how I look at Baker too. As long as he's succeeding, he's able to take in all the criticism and use it as a chip on his shoulder. But with a guy that emotional, what happens when he's throwing picks and is the reason for losing while getting hit in the mouth weekly? Is he going to throw his teammates under the bus? Lash out against fans or the media? I really worry about a guy at that position that seems to have that big of rabbit ears when it comes to things like social media. It was a long time ago, but walking out on Texas Tech when he wasn't handed the job is pretty concerning, he's also had his share of big game meltdowns.

"Generational can't miss QB prospects" aren't traded, bottom line. When Luck came up, the Colts let Peyton Manning walk and laughed at attempts to trade up. Bottom line, you don't get the "can't miss" prospects unless you happen to be the worst team in the league the year they come around.

I completely agree with you on this. I don't think he's a realistic option unless Beane has told him flat out they won't be drafting a QB high. Arizona seems like the perfect marriage for him.

I wonder if Green Bay wouldn't be an option. They've hinted they are open to changing their stance on FA, Rodgers and other players have publicly said they need more help and Jordy Nelson looked washed up last year (he's also openly hinted at retirement).

I don't think Peterman is a NFL caliber QB. That's fine, we fundamentally disagree on the prospect. Look, no one is saying cut Peterman now, but it's a little pie in the sky to plan on him being a major part of the team next year. If he does have a tremendous OTA and preseason, great, he's cheap, keep him around. But if he doesn't you can't not have a plan B (or a plan A) and be calling Kyle Orton up.

If it took less than a first to get Foles, he wouldn't be an Eagle anymore. The Eagles aren't 100% sure Wentz will be healthy to start the season. And like you said, Foles is cheap. He's the best insurance policy in the game currently. It's going to cost major draft capital to get him, I don't understand why this is so hard for people to comprehend.

McCarron for a year, then likely trade or release him. Then bring in a cheap vet backup that's been there/done that, like Hasslebeck with Luck in Indy or Fitzpatrick with Jameis now. Typically the life cycle for successful franchises is one veteran and one young QB, when your young QB is the starter, you want a smart vet in the room with him, when your starter is the proven vet you want a cheap rookie developing.

Teams typically have 2 Qbs on the roster. Ours should be a vet bridge and a highly drafted rookie.

Peterman shouldn't be viewed as anything beyond a camp arm. He can certainly prove otherwise, but he's shown nothing to count him as a sure part of the team.

I would be all for a "Glennon / Trubinksy" situation with McCarron / Rosen - Darnold. McCarron signs a deal we can get out of after a year and give him first crack at the starting job, but not precluding us from being aggressive and getting one of the young QBs.

Are there really that many people opening accounts thinking they have something profound to say that's utter nonsense, or is someone trolling?

No. Not putting yourself in that position to begin with is a well run organization.