Do you just take everything you read on the Internet as fact?

 

Of course not. But I know we recently got rid of a defensive end who was a slacker and did not play very well for us so there is a reason to believe Gil Brandt on this one.

 

Yeah, I think they trade up with Houston.  Then someone trades up with the Rams for Clowney.  Then Bridgewater is ours.  The Texans then get who they want: Bortles.

 

Why would the Texans trade down knowing three other teams in the top five are hungry for quarterbacks? That would be the stupidest thing they could do.

---

Yeah, I think they trade up with Houston.  Then someone trades up with the Rams for Clowney.  Then Bridgewater is ours.  The Texans then get who they want: Bortles.

 

So the Texans get Bortles, who is who they want anyway, AND get another 1st rounder, to boot.... (which sucks for us as it will give the Texans TWO picks between their 4th overall and our pick at 37. )

 

THATS how you work the draft, my friends. 

---

I read somewhere on the internet that women attract bears... They can smell the menstration. Gotta be a fact.

 

I don't believe everything I read, but I have no reason to assume the Browns are lying about Manziel.

---

So the Texans get Bortles, who is who they want anyway, AND get another 1st rounder, to boot.... (which sucks for us as it will give the Texans TWO picks between their 4th overall and our pick at 37. )

 

THATS how you work the draft, my friends. 

 

Our second round pick is #39.

---

Of course not. But I know we recently got rid of a defensive end who was a slacker and did not play very well for us so there is a reason to believe Gil Brandt on this one.

 

 

Why would the Texans trade down knowing three other teams in the top five are hungry for quarterbacks? That would be the stupidest thing they could do.

Again... This makes no sense. So because we had one DE who was an apparent slacker (not sure who you're referring to... Harvey?) That means we should not take the best player available because he was triple teamed every play or didn't want to risk injury?

---

So the Texans get Bortles, who is who they want anyway, AND get another 1st rounder, to boot.... (which sucks for us as it will give the Texans TWO picks between their 4th overall and our pick at 37. )

 

THATS how you work the draft, my friends. 

 

Your ability to state your opinion as fact is absolutely astounding.

---

So the Texans get Bortles, who is who they want anyway, AND get another 1st rounder, to boot.... (which sucks for us as it will give the Texans TWO picks between their 4th overall and our pick at 37. )


THATS how you work the draft, my friends.

So wait. I thought we were spazzing a few weeks ago because the Texans signed the bestest coach ever and the best thing since sliced bread in Bridgewater.

---

So the Texans get Bortles, who is who they want anyway, AND get another 1st rounder, to boot.... (which sucks for us as it will give the Texans TWO picks between their 4th overall and our pick at 37. )

 

THATS how you work the draft, my friends. 

 

If they want Bortles, and IF he works out, then yeah great for them.  


If we get Bridgewater, and he's better will it really matter?

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

So wait. I thought we were spazzing a few weeks ago because the Texans the bestest coach ever and the best thing since sliced bread in Bridgewater.

 

I am very confused at this point. 

---

Again... This makes no sense. So because we had one DE who was an apparent slacker (not sure who you're referring to... Harvey?) That means we should not take the best player available because he was triple teamed every play or didn't want to risk injury?

 

I was referring to Jeremy Mincey being inactive, then cut, after missing a team meeting. It is proof David Caldwell does not want a slacker on his team.

---

I was referring to Jeremy Mincey being inactive, then cut, after missing a team meeting. It is proof David Caldwell does not want a slacker on his team.

Yeah, I'm sure there were no other factors in that decision...

---

Yeah, I'm sure there were no other factors in that decision.

 

He would have cut Mincey during training camp if his salary and statistics were bigger concerns than being a slacker.

 

Back to the topic, I want to know why anybody would think it is smokescreen because the Browns said they are looking for a coach who would be a good fit for Johnny Manziel.

---

"You got a real attitude problem, McFly. You're a slacker. You remind me of your father when he went here. He was a slacker too."

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

"You got a real attitude problem, McFly. You're a slacker. You remind me of your father when he went here. He was a slacker too."

 

You have some solid posts. I like your style.

---

He would have cut Mincey during training camp if his salary and statistics were bigger concerns than being a slacker.


Back to the topic, I want to know why anybody would think it is smokescreen because the Browns said they are looking for a coach who would be a good fit for Johnny Manziel.

Because that's what the Browns want you to think they are thinking. Reverse psychology my friend. It's about time those psychology classes paid off for me

---

"Expect for the best. Prepare for the worst. Capitalize on what comes."

 

I honestly was not expecting this thread to get this long so fast. That might be a record speed for the growth of my thread only minutes after I started it.

---

Because that's what the Browns want you to think they are thinking. Reverse psychology my friend. It's about time those psychology classes paid off for me

 

Since when have teams lied about coaches they want? I am only aware of them lying about the draft.

---

I would be ecstatic if Teddy fell to us.

---

I would be ecstatic if Teddy fell to us.

 

If the Texans pick Teddy and we pick Johnny will you be mad?

---

I'm pretty sure a bunch of teams want Manziel, whether some fans want him or not..

---