DCH
Madman with a box.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,354
- Name
- Dewey
If I'm smart, yeah, I would. Look at it this way... there are 32 NFL starting QB positions. The following teams, you have little to no shot at the job because they have their QB:dont play coy.
You would want to go play QB in Cleveland over the other 31 organizations? yes or no?
- New England
- Miami
- Jacksonville
- Tennessee
- New York (NFC)
- Cincinnati
- Baltimore
- San Diego
- Pittsburgh
- Dallas
- Chicago
- Detroit
- Green Bay
- Atlanta
- Carolina
- New Orleans
- Tampa Bay
- Arizona
- Seattle
- Washington (arguably)
- Kansas City
- Oakland
- Indianapolis
- Denver (maybe not after this year, depending on Manning/Osweiler, but my point stands)
That leaves 8 teams where you could reasonably expect to come in and compete for a starting gig. In Buffalo you have to fight off Taylor. In New York, you're competing with Fitzpatrick and Geno Smith. In Minnesota, you're competing with Bridgewater.
So, now you're down to 5 - STL, SF, PHI, CLE, and HOU. Opportunity matters. You want to start? These are your teams. Cleveland may well have the best O-line of the choices, with Thomas, Mack, Bitonio and Greco.
Would I rather be in Houston? Hell yes. That team has a ferocious defense and a true superstar WR. They're a QB away. But Cleveland, why would it be such a bad choice? Because it's a Midwestern city? There's more to do there than in Green Bay. Because they've lost a lot? Their roster is better than San Fran's.
If you're partying your way out of one of the few starting QB gigs in the NFL that you actually reasonably have a shot at, you're incredibly dumb, IMO. You damage your future earnings, you damage your reputation, and when the average career of an NFL quarterback is 4.4 years, you're wasting valuable moneymaking time.