It's in civil court for now unless this is true:

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14742073/johnny-manziel-strike-ruptured-ex-girlfriend-eardrum-lawyer-says

It's in civil court for now unless this is true:

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14742073/johnny-manziel-strike-ruptured-ex-girlfriend-eardrum-lawyer-says

 

The TPO is a civil matter. However there is an active criminal investigation but is not in court yet as no charges have been filed....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14723352/dallas-police-open-criminal-investigation-johnny-manziel-cleveland-browns

This just keeps getting funner and funner

 

 

Browns deny NFL Network report that they lied about Johnny Manziel's concussion

 

The Browns said Tuesday a report by NFL Network's Mike Silver that they lied about Johnny Manziel's late-season concussion is false.

 

"Johnny Manziel came to our facility on the morning of December 30th and complained of concussion symptoms,'' the Browns said in a statement. "He was tested by an independent neurologist and entered the league's concussion protocol. He remained in the protocol until January 12th after being cleared by the independent neurologist."

 

Spokesman Peter John-Baptiste said the report the Browns lied about the concussion "is false."

 

Silver reported Tuesday on NFL Network that he was told by a Browns player that Manziel showed up for work drunk the Wednesday before the Jan. 3 season finale against Pittsburgh, and that the Browns lied and said he was in the concussion protocol.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/02/browns_say_johnny_manziel_did.html#incart_m-rpt-1

This just keeps getting funner and funner

 

 

Browns deny NFL Network report that they lied about Johnny Manziel's concussion

 

The Browns said Tuesday a report by NFL Network's Mike Silver that they lied about Johnny Manziel's late-season concussion is false.

 

"Johnny Manziel came to our facility on the morning of December 30th and complained of concussion symptoms,'' the Browns said in a statement. "He was tested by an independent neurologist and entered the league's concussion protocol. He remained in the protocol until January 12th after being cleared by the independent neurologist."

 

Spokesman Peter John-Baptiste said the report the Browns lied about the concussion "is false."

 

Silver reported Tuesday on NFL Network that he was told by a Browns player that Manziel showed up for work drunk the Wednesday before the Jan. 3 season finale against Pittsburgh, and that the Browns lied and said he was in the concussion protocol.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/02/browns_say_johnny_manziel_did.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

As I said when these rumors started, the concussion protocol is managed by the league's independent neurologists.  The team has no influence.    So for this to be fake, the league would have to have been involved.

Why couldn't both be true?

Perhaps there was a legit concussion AND he came in to work drunk hungover.

I don't think the 'rumor' was that he was drunk.  He was hungover.  However, if he did have a concussion, a lot of the same symptoms would be present - groggy, headaches, fatigue.

^fixed

Columbus Partnership drops request for state funding for Cleveland Browns summer camp

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/02/11/columbus-partnership-drops-request-for-state.html

Columbus Partnership drops request for state funding for Cleveland Browns summer camp

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/02/11/columbus-partnership-drops-request-for-state.html

 

""Despite open communication among Columbus, the Browns and many Cleveland leaders who support these plans, this request has surprisingly raised the ire of several Northeast Ohio politicians in a manner that mischaracterizes our collaborative nature," Partnership CEO Alex Fischer wrote in the Columbus Dispatch. "We would never advance state funding that is perceived as pitting Columbus against another Ohio community. As such, we will remove this request from the priority list we give to legislative leaders next week."

 

OSU has several argicultural sites where this statement would be useful.

 

Wonder how they'd like the Scarlet and Grey game being played at CBS?

Wonder how they'd like the Scarlet and Grey game being played at CBS?[/color]

 

Probably be okay with it since a recent Scarlet & Gray game was played at PBS!

Wonder how they'd like the Scarlet and Grey game being played at CBS?[/color]

 

Probably be okay with it since a recent Scarlet & Gray game was played at PBS!

 

Odd.  Cleveland is overwhemlingly Buckeyes fans while the Cincy area seems split.

Wonder how they'd like the Scarlet and Grey game being played at CBS?[/color]

 

Probably be okay with it since a recent Scarlet & Gray game was played at PBS!

 

Odd.  Cleveland is overwhemlingly Buckeyes fans while the Cincy area seems split.

 

Not really that odd.  OSU holding their spring practice game in Cleveland isn't going yield any more fans or recruits (like you said Cleveland is overwhemlingly Buckeye territory).  But holding the spring practice in Cincinnati might influence some on-the-fence fans or recruits in that area.  Which is probably what the Browns are thinking fan-wise with their forays into Central Ohio.

 

Besides, Cleveland got that OSU vs. Toledo regular season game at CBS in 2009.  Which likely means more to Cleveland-area Buckeye fans than a practice game.

Old rumor heating up. Take it for what it's worth according to a story on Bleacher Report, the Cleveland Browns are leaning towards Wentz at #2. If this is true, which I hope it's not, it would be a bad decision in my opinion. Goff has talent, has gotten better every year in college, played well in big games, has huge confidence all while playing in the FBS not FCS. The difference in playing in the FBS and FCS is too large to justify a number 2 selection, number 32 is better.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2618713-insider-buzz-browns-leaning-towards-qb-carson-wentz-with-no-2-overall-pick

It's not unprecedented. Steve McNair was an FCS player and picked 3rd in the draft.

 

I've now had a chance to study some film and am still underwhelmed by this QB class. Has anyone found a big board with a QB in the top 20?

It's not unprecedented. Steve McNair was an FCS player and picked 3rd in the draft.

 

I've now had a chance to study some film and am still underwhelmed by this QB class. Has anyone found a big board with a QB in the top 20?

Here ya go, Goff #10 and Wentz #11. Interesting to see that Paxson Lynch is no where to be found on this list after being praised for his physical attributes. Looking at this I do want to proceed with caution still after reading Wentz only played 24 games in the FCS and how his team went 8-0 without him. When I see things like that I wonder how vital you really were when it came to your teams success. I just am not sold on him. My biggest worry with Goff is his arm strength, if he had a great arm he would be a lock imo.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/big-board

I'm worried that Goff just doesn't have the frame to grow into NFL size

NFL coaches, and of course Browns coaches, don't last more than two years if they don't win soon. That has to be a factor for a team in desperate need of a QB in who they select for that QB. Wentz may have more upside, but that's a big unknown for a team like the Browns that doesn't have the luxury of time and unknowns.

 

What did it for me is that Goff took more than twice as many snaps than Wentz against tougher competition but with a weaker supporting cast than Wentz's yet had better production. Unlike Wentz, Goff didn't come into a well-oiled machine. NDSU was between 13-2 and 15-0 since 2011 with 5 straight national championships. Wentz was at the helm for about 1.5 years in that span. They were good before Wentz, and they'll be good after him. Cal was 1-11 Goff's senior year in high school.

 

Drafting a QB is a big investment. Goff is the smarter, safer investment.

 

I was a little wishy-washy on Goff a month ago, but I've read a lot of analysis of him (pro and con vs. Wentz) and watched a lot of tape on Goff, especially full-game videos where you can see more than highlights. Goff's downsides are few but can be addressed with coaching....

 

> He has the usual drawbacks that a rookie QB has like staring at primary receivers too much or wanting to run when he should stay in the pocket.

> Both of these are actually pretty rare for Goff. He does a better job of looking-off safeties than many college QBs and his pocket presence for a junior is remarkable.

> Even many NFL QBs have difficult time feeling pocket pressure and don't know which way to move in a pocket to avoid getting hit. Goff does this better than anyone I've seen in a long time.

> His performance at Cal was exceptional despite mediocre receivers (dropped passes and couldn't separate from DBs, forcing Goff to throw into tight windows), poor running game and weak offensive line. And their defense stunk, forcing Goff to play catch-up a lot. Yet Cal was a ranked team.

> Goff has brilliant QB mind. He is excellent at pre-snap diagnosis of plays and fixing plays before/after they break.

> His throwing accuracy is outstanding, even on long pass plays -- when he doesn't aim the long pass. He has to learn to trust and lead his receivers with long passes they can run under, rather than aim the throws.

> When Goff aims long passes, they tend to die at the arc of the throw and end up fluttering and being under-thrown.

> Is he lean? Sure. But he's probably going to fill out. Look up pictures of his father who was MLB catcher and also a heavyweight boxer. Yep, a heavyweight.

> He's a film rat, loves the game, loves to learn and is a high-character guy.

 

I've seen some analysts compare him to Matt Ryan. I've even seen some that compare him to former Cal QB Aaron Rodgers.

 

Consider this comparison. It includes batted balls, INTs, spikes, throw-aways. Note that Goff's receivers dropped 49 balls and Wentz's only 10!

 

 

 

 

During your lunch hour today, or perhaps sometime this weekend, watch this excellent breakdown of Jared Goff. You will learn a lot about the young man....

2016 Scouting Report: Jared Goff, QB, Cal

http://nflbreakdowns.com/jared-goff-qb-cal-nfldraft2016/

Awesome....

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-combin...ool-with-Mooch

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-combin...oom-with-Mooch

 

Goff and Wentz on the whiteboard with Mooch. Like anyone will be shocked to know the [moderator edit- c'mon man, you know you can't drop the f-bomb on here] whiz kids nailed it - Although the spread quarterback didn't know who Joe Kapp played for in the 60's, not sure that's a character issue though. ;)

 

But pleeeeeze don't trade for Kaepernick! Thankfully that report appeared to be BS.

 

The only way the Browns could screw up the #2 pick this year is draft a QB.

You really don't like Goff or Wentz? I do. I think Goff could start his rookie season, but Wentz could start his second year, absent an injury to McCown (which is likely!). You have to draft a franchise quarterback and the chances of finding one outside of 1st or 2nd overall decrease with draft position. Draft one now. If Goff or Wentz isn't the guy, then the Browns will be back at 1st or 2nd overall soon and they should try again. You keep drafting the highest-rated QBs with your highest pick until you find a franchise QB.

You really don't like Goff or Wentz? I do. I think Goff could start his rookie season, but Wentz could start his second year, absent an injury to McCown (which is likely!). You have to draft a franchise quarterback and the chances of finding one outside of 1st or 2nd overall decrease with draft position. Draft one now. If Goff or Wentz isn't the guy, then the Browns will be back at 1st or 2nd overall soon and they should try again. You keep drafting the highest-rated QBs with your highest pick until you find a franchise QB.

 

Agree. The situation is what it is. If you select an immediate impact player and win a few more games then it only stands to hurt you getting a QB in next years draft.

All other teams in the AFCN found their QB's outside of the top 10, so can the Browns *after* they put together a quality team.  The Browns have so many holes at every level on both sides of the ball, they need to take what the draft gives them and simply draft BPA, and none of these QB's will be BPA at #2.

And what's the record throughout the NFL?

And what's the record throughout the NFL?

Recent SB winners Patriots got theirs in the 6th round, Seahwaks in the 3rd round, Broncos through FA, Packers in late 1st, Saints (Brees) via trade and was originally 2nd round pick. 

 

If there was a Luck or Cam in this draft, then he'd be BPA and I'd be all for it.  But there isn't, so I'm not.

So that's one-sixth of the league. And if you look at it over a longer period, I'll bet that it's even less.

 

Browns have drafted how many QBs outside of the top-5 since Couch? How many franchise QBs have they found? Do you think they can break their bad luck and finally find that franchise QB by drafting one later on?

 

Teams don't draft BPA unless they already are pretty well stocked. Most draft BPA for need. If you want to compete for the playoffs every year over 15 years, you need a franchise QB. Every few years you retool the rest of the team.

 

I've seen Goff ranked as high as 5th overall. So drafting a QB, the most important player, 2nd overall isn't a reach.

 

EDIT: BTW, name the three starting QBs each for the Steelers, Bengals, and Ravens before Roethlisberger, Dalton and Flacco. You could probably name one or two out of the six. Point is, they each went through more than a few QBs without fanfare or success. In fact, they each went through a lot of QBs before finding their franchise QB. Admittedly not as many as the Browns, but then again no one has had so difficult a time.

Someone posted on a sports forum about this question. He mentioned that there is always a starting quarterback in every draft, and your chances of hitting on one are much better when you have the opportunity to draft the first quarterback overall. There was a very good PD article about this recently.

 

When another person said it would make no sense to pass on a better talent like Bosa. A different person responded....

 

The problem with Bosa is you leave yourself in QB limbo. Okay, so we pass on QB, but what if we end up winning 5/6 games next year and are once again not picking the top QB prospect. Maybe let it go another year.

 

The Browns logic is horrifically flawed - We either suck enough at the right time to land a once-in-a-generation QB, or we say "He's not a once-in-a-generation type QB, we'll just get one of the lesser rated prospects later on!"

 

How many 5-7 win teams have the Browns had since 2002 that could have been 8-10 win teams if the Browns had a franchise QB?

Right, we don't need Superman, just a franchise quarterback.  Looks to be 2 very good candidates in this draft.

There are a few potential candidates, but neither are worthy of a top 5 pick. If they were then some team would be trying to leap frog us to take them. Name the last QB selected #2 overall who was a success.  To make it even tougher, name the last QB drafted #2 overall in a draft in which another QB was not selected #1 overall. 

 

We need a franchise QB, but not as much as we need to be certain we don't bust yet another top pick.  Plenty of teams have went from bottom to top of the league recently without selecting a QB in the top 10. Bengals, Seahawks, Chiefs, Arizona, Saints, etc.

Since the Browns return 17 years ago, only two QB's drafted in the top 5 have won SB's, all other SB-winning QB's were drafted later in the first, in a later round, or acquired via FA or trade.  The Browns should emulate what winning teams have done, and ignore what teams like the Dolphins, Reskins, Jags, Lions, Rams, Bucs, etc have done, they are irrelevant when determining how to build a winning team.  The Browns are not special, they could find their QB outside of the top 10 like nearly every other winning team has done.

 

Bad teams that draft for need stay bad.  Established quality teams are the one's that have the luxury of drafting based on need, not the other way around.  The Browns need talent, really bad, difference makers anywhere on either side of the ball, there is no need to draft for need because they need EVERYTHING.

 

This draft is top heavy with great defensive players and since the Browns are actually worst on defense than they are on offense in every measurable category, then they should simply draft the BPA and take a pass rusher, run stopper, etc..

 

I have a feeling the Harvard boys are seeing it the same way, we'll see. 

 

I have a feeling the Harvard boys are seeing it the same way, we'll see. 

 

I do too..... but I also think that Hue feels he can make any decent prospect into a quality NFL QB.  He has a bit of an ego in that regard, perhaps rightfully so.

 

I'm just not liking the way this draft is shaking out.  I feel some of the better teams are going to get great players due to the de-valuing of certain positions and/or overemphasis on combine testing.  Can you imagine Seattle walking out of here with either Zeke Elliot or Derrick Henry to replace BeastMode?  I can't see the Ravens passing up on Bosa.  They have some experience in drafting successful college DE's who dropped in the draft after running a 4.8 at the combine...... Terrell Suggs. 

 

Overall, just not a great year to be picking in the top 3.  I don't feel like there is much separation between the top 5, or even top 15, prospects, and a few of those guys will drop lower than 15 due to modern trends in drafting.

Agree about Hue, I would think he'd accept the challenge to draft an unpolished guy but with a high ceiling, like a Paxton Lynch.  If Hue's a QB guru, developing a QB with high potential seems the most logical route while they find some guys that can play on defense.

 

I'm scared to death that the Browns eager to please the fans take a QB at #2 then the Ravens land either Bosa or Jack and terrorize our shiny new QB until we move on to QB #27?

 

I could see a scenario where the Browns stay at #2 and actually take who they have rated as BPA (most likely Bosa), then move up from #32 enough to get Lynch.  Somehow, I think they're going to get who they think they can work with at QB, develop, etc., but just not who most fans/media are thinking.  I wouldn't mind taking Cardale too if he's still around in the 4th, he's big, has the big arm, but needs quite of coaching to run a pro style offense.

What one player are you thinking we're going to take at #2 that will keep them from terrorizing our "shiny new QB"?

What one player are you thinking we're going to take at #2 that will keep them from terrorizing our "shiny new QB"?

Not having the ability to interview the players personally, I would take either Bosa, Ramsey, or Jack.  I'd then take a QB with the next pick, either Lynch or Cook but have McCown start the season.  I think Cook is the most NFL ready of the bunch having run a pro style offense but nursing an injured shoulder, but think Lynch has the highest ceiling, would depend on which route they want to go.

Cook not being a team captain is a huge red flag.

 

Lynch is the only QB outside of Goff and Wentz worth drafting. So we go yet another year without a franchise QB.

Cook not being a team captain is a huge red flag.

 

Lynch is the only QB outside of Goff and Wentz worth drafting. So we go yet another year without a franchise QB.

Cleveland is such a QB crazy town.  Last year McCown was playing well early in the season and the Browns were losing games 33-30, 31-27, etc., and all the fans could talk about was QB??  There was no mention of the defense getting sand kicked in their face week in and week out, as it has since 1999.

 

Draft Goff who was 14-23 as a starter going winless against every ranked team he faced while piling up wins against the Portland State & Sacramento States of the football world, or the FCS star Wentz and there's no assurance we've landed a "franchise" QB, but we will for sure miss out on a difference maker on defense which the Browns are also desperately lacking.  And having a franchise QB means nothing if the rest of the team is semi-pro caliber like the Browns.  Proven veteran franchise caliber QB's Eli, Brees, Rivers, and Flacco were all helpless last year when saddled with poor supporting casts, any kid QB the Browns draft would have the same problem.

 

The Browns need to focus more on building a quality team through talent accumulation on both sides of the ball instead of a singular focus on who QB number 25, 30, or 35 will be.  Besides, if Hue is the QB guru we think he is, he should be able to develop a QB that has all of the required natural ability, but needs coaching and time.

Lynch is the only QB outside of Goff and Wentz worth drafting. So we go yet another year without a franchise QB.

 

Or we draft Goff or Wentz, they turn out to be a bust like about half (if not more) of 1st round QBs and we go yet another year without a franchise QB.  In fact, in that scenario, we are likely to go another three years without a franchise QB.

 

To be clear, if the brass is convinced either of those two are worthy of the #2 overall pick, by all means, take 'em.  But don't reach.  Don't take the 35th best player in the draft with the 2nd overall pick.  When is the last time we picked that high?  If I'm not mistaken, as bad as we've been, we've only had a top 2 pick twice since we returned (Couch and Brown).  We had the 3rd pick a few times (Edwards, Richardson) and the 4th pick (Warren).

Not using any of our tags this year.  Looks like Gipson, Mack, Schwartz, and Benjamin will all get to test the market.  I doubt we bring back more than two of those guys, which is a shame because all are players we drafted (or signed undrafted right out of college) who turned out to be pretty good.

History shows the first QB drafted each year hits more often than those not drafted first among QBs.

History shows the first QB drafted each year hits more often than those not drafted first among QBs.

That's flawed logic. Of course they do. More talented players tend to rise to the top of the draft. However, it could just as easily be said that there are more quarterbacks not drafted first who hit. Players aren't more talented because of where they're drafted. If the Browns draft Wentz 2nd it doesn't make him any more likely to be a good QB.

History shows the first QB drafted each year hits more often than those not drafted first among QBs.

That's flawed logic. Of course they do. More talented players tend to rise to the top of the draft. However, it could just as easily be said that there are more quarterbacks not drafted first who hit. Players aren't more talented because of where they're drafted. If the Browns draft Wentz 2nd it doesn't make him any more likely to be a good QB.

 

Virtually every media outlet is saying Wentz is the best QB to draft. Are all these people wrong?

History shows the first QB drafted each year hits more often than those not drafted first among QBs.

 

Couch vs.  McNabb.

 

Though I do feel Couch did better than he gets credit for in Cleveland.

 

Then there's Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers.

History shows the first QB drafted each year hits more often than those not drafted first among QBs.

You can replace "QB" with any other position and that statement would be true.  However, QB's have the highest bust rate of any position.

It's comical how people look at QB's (especially young one's) and the position in a vacuum.  Thinking QB "X" would do the same thing for the Browns as they've done with another team.

 

QB's like Eli, Flacco, and Brees are perfect examples of the impact (or lack thereof) of a QB on a good team or bad team.  Put these 3 guys on quality teams and they're SB winners, put them on bad teams (like last year) and they're 5-6 game winners.  Same can be said for other QB's like Rivers and Palmer; 11-12 game winners on good teams, or 3-4 game winners on bad teams.

 

The franchise and overall team are far more important than who the QB is, once the Browns figure that out and stop trying to please fans with draft day championships they'll start winning.

Couch did do better than he gets credit for. He was handcuffed with a crappy supporting cast. Who knows how good he might've been

 

I am starting to slightly warm up to the idea of taking Wentz. He might be worth the risk. But only if we fill some major gaps via free agency

Jalen Ramsey needs to be the pick. If the browns pass on a qb at 2, I would bet that 1 of the top 3 is there are 32.

I would also trade a 3rd round pick to the Bengals for A.J if possible.

3rd round pick for arguably the best WR in the league?  Not likely

A.J Mccarron

That's flawed logic. Of course they do. More talented players tend to rise to the top of the draft. However, it could just as easily be said that there are more quarterbacks not drafted first who hit. Players aren't more talented because of where they're drafted. If the Browns draft Wentz 2nd it doesn't make him any more likely to be a good QB.

 

Except it's more stark than that. It's not that a QB drafted first among other QBs in that same draft merely performed better in the NFL. It's that the first QB drafted proved to be a long-term franchise QB, whereas the second QB drafted generally didn't perform well at all in the pros.

That's flawed logic. Of course they do. More talented players tend to rise to the top of the draft. However, it could just as easily be said that there are more quarterbacks not drafted first who hit. Players aren't more talented because of where they're drafted. If the Browns draft Wentz 2nd it doesn't make him any more likely to be a good QB.

 

Except it's more stark than that. It's not that a QB drafted first among other QBs in that same draft merely performed better in the NFL. It's that the first QB drafted proved to be a long-term franchise QB, whereas the second QB drafted generally didn't perform well at all in the pros.

 

Flacco was the 2nd QB taken, while JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and E. J. Manuel were all first.  The first two were first overall.