Since the RG3 debacle is behind us....
Now we all are assuming the Vikings will be taking Kalil. My question is what if they decide to go with a Blackmon/Percy combo?
Is it plausible that the Vikings could take Blackmon and if they do, who is the best option for us?
Even though i am in love with Blackmon i would love to get Kalil. Thomas, Mack, and Kalil sounds like a great line for the future. That would give us a back-up LT if Thomas ever goes down and solid line pieces for the future. Plug in play LG and Lavaou at RG and we have a Strong offensive line for the future.
Clairborne is still an excellent pick but I'm wasn't impressed with him at the combine. I think he has tight hips and definitely needs to work on some fundmental techniques. He is an great athlete with long arms, which I think helped him to recover. I really don't believe that he is that far ahead of Kirpatrick.
I predict
#4 Tannehill
#22 Cordy Glenn
#37 Curry
3rd Dwight Jones
I hope
#4 Tannehill
#22 Mercilus
#37 Alshon Jeffery
3rd round Mitchell Swartz
in a word, NO- its not possible that they pass on Kalil. Their left tackle is a turnstyle, and Hutchinson is supposed to be released as well. This pick has o-line written all over it.
Tannehill is such a reach at 4...this draft is gonna suck
I'm working on my "The Case for Kalil" post - might be up in a few days (pretty busy right now).
At this point my Brown Big board looks like:
1 Luck
2 Kalil
3 Claiborne
4 Richardson
5 Floyd
6 Ingram
7 DeCastro
8 Martin
9 Kuechly
10 Blackmon
11 RG3
12 Reiff
13 Coples
14 Upshaw
15 Barron
16 Kirkpatrick
17 Perry
We should be in good position to get at least two of those guys - which would make me happy.
My preference for the Browns goes like this:
1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Blackmon
4. Cliaborne
5. Kalil
....
We don't have a true #1 WR, and we have to get one to have any sort of passing threat. Hopefully they get one in FA, but if they can't then Blackmon remains my #3 choice. CB#2 and RT aren't as important to me because I think we can address those needs later in the draft.
Now suppose the Vikings take Blackmon or Claiborne and Kalil drops in our lap. He's the best LT prospect in the draft, do you think the Rams would trade up to get him? I think they would give up Washington's 2nd or STL 3rd to swap up to 4 to grab Kalil. That wouldn't be a bad trade and we could still address WR1 by taking Floyd at 6 or get a DE like Coples or Ingram. Might be worth it...
if we are doing Tannehill that early- i hope we can trade back a bit, maybe Jacksonville. That would make more sense.
If they somehow pass on Kalil, I have a feeling we'll be fielding some crazy trade offers.
Quote:
I'm working on my "The Case for Kalil" post - might be up in a few days
I would save your time, he won't be there. And it doesn't make sense to trade up for him. And i'm not so sure that he would do all that well at RT anyways...
Anything is possible.
If Kalil is available at #4....I trade his rights to the best offer.
He is a LT....so is Joe. As good as they are at LT, I don't think either would become a awesome RT. Both are a little light and run blocking isn't their best talent.
I am not saying they aren't good run blockers, but neither is a classic pancake run blocker who can collapse the right side like you typically want in a RT.
To me, in some ways a good RT is harder to find than a good LT. The guy who can drive block AND pass protect with some skill is pretty hard to find.
Quote:
If they somehow pass on Kalil, I have a feeling we'll be fielding some crazy trade offers.
Agreed - and as much as I love Kalil, I'd take it if the value is there.
Quote:
If they somehow pass on Kalil, I have a feeling we'll be fielding some crazy trade offers.
And we should drive up the price, early and often.
If Kalil is there you take him and don't look back. He would easily be the best player on the board at 4. At this point we just need to continue to upgrade talent on our roster. He grades out as high as any offensive line prospect since Joe Thomas. We all know how that worked out. Having two hall of fame caliber players on your offensive line is a good problem to have. He would simply be the biggest talent upgrade we could make if that situation presented itself.
With that said, he won't be there at four.
Just take Trent Richardson and get it over with. Having a hybrid Adrian Peterson/Maurice Jones Drew type player in your backfield will make your team better fast.
I say Heckert needs to keep it simple and continue to accumulate young talent. Draft the best player available at ANY position of need. When you do that then there will be plenty of quarterbacks that will want to play for us down the line. If we reach for Tannehill at four I will be on suicide watch.
Quote:
if we are doing Tannehill that early- i hope we can trade back a bit, maybe Jacksonville. That would make more sense.
big...I agree that the #4 slot is probably too high for Tannehill, but the Skins/Rams trade was more than most thought the #2 slot was worth.
This year, it appears that QBs are a priority and with teams like the Broncos and Cards kicking tires on the Peyton Manning bus, there could be more teams willing to move up to draft Tannehill.
We know that Miami and Seattle are on the hunt for a QB too, so if the Browns want Tannehill, they may have to draft him at #4...like it or not.
Quote:
He is a LT....so is Joe. As good as they are at LT, I don't think either would become a awesome RT. Both are a little light and run blocking isn't their best talent.
I am not saying they aren't good run blockers, but neither is a classic pancake run blocker who can collapse the right side like you typically want in a RT.
To me, in some ways a good RT is harder to find than a good LT. The guy who can drive block AND pass protect with some skill is pretty hard to find.
I dunno Peen, I think I'd take Joe over pretty much any RT in football (at the RT position). Sure, he might not be the best runblocker, but his pass protection is excellent and his runblocking is good too.
Some excellent DE's like Julius Peppers play on the left side. Strahan played on the left side.
Having a RT who can do both is great. I think people often get too caught up in, RT has to be a runblocker mentallity. Generally the RT isnt as good of a passblocker as LT because of the QB's blindside. But pass blocking is definitely a major part of their game, either way.
If we draft Kalil to be a RT, he'll do very well. Will there be better RT's at runblocking, probably. But as a whole package, Kalil would be hard to beat.... That being said, I'd rather use that 4 on someone like Blackmon and hope to get Reif, Martin, or hopefully....Glenn to man the RT position. That's just from a value standpoint though.......
Quote:
1 Luck
2 Kalil
3 Claiborne
4 Richardson
5 Floyd
6 Ingram
7 DeCastro
8 Martin
9 Kuechly
10 Blackmon
11 RG3
12 Reiff
13 Coples
14 Upshaw
15 Barron
16 Kirkpatrick
17 Perry.
This list is the best proof why this draft class sucks for 1st round picks...a G, an undersized DE, any RB and a DUI-filled WR in the top 10..and Kuechly over RG3, lol...Kuechly is so overrated, he's a good, solid LB but doesn't make a lot of big plays...he's a Laurianitis...shouldn't be on any Top 20 list in any draft imho
TRADE PICK #22 !!
First, Kalil is a really good run-blocker - he's strong and can bowl a guy over -- just because he has good feet doesn't make him "not a RT"
Second, most starting RTs in the NFL were LTs in college.
Third, we run a WCO - which doesn't mean that we don't need run blocking, but we also need a guy who can get out and make blocks on the second level (for the screen pass game) - Kalil provides both.
Fourth, he'd be the BPA by far, and at one of the primo positions in the NFL - you don't pass on that.
Quote:
I predict
#4 Tannehill
#22 Cordy Glenn
#37 Curry
3rd Dwight Jones
I hope
#4 Tannehill
#22 Mercilus
#37 Alshon Jeffery
3rd round Mitchell Swartz
I really hope your wrong... Tannehill at #4 is such a reach. IMHO i dont believe Tannehill will be even considered by any team until late 1st or 2nd.
I like mercilus, but not Jeffrey. Jeffery dropped off the radar from top 10 pick to 2-3rd rounder for good reason.
Quote:
If Kalil is there you take him and don't look back. He would easily be the best player on the board at 4. At this point we just need to continue to upgrade talent on our roster. He grades out as high as any offensive line prospect since Joe Thomas. We all know how that worked out. Having two hall of fame caliber players on your offensive line is a good problem to have. He would simply be the biggest talent upgrade we could make if that situation presented itself.
My issue with that is that Kalil will play here for four years and then become an UFA. Then he gets one more year with the franchise tag. So that's five years.
After that he HAS to become our LT. How long is Joe Thomas' contract? Will that fit? Because I don't think we'll want to be paying two tackles mega contracts........... Joe just turned 27 in December. So he'll probably have just turned 33 when we'd have to give Kalil a mega contract. Probably will still be going strong.
I'd rather have Trent Richardson/Blackmon (skill position players who we'll keep here longer than 5 years at 4 and a RT or Ryan Tannehill at 22 (hope that he's there).
Quote:
Quote:
if we are doing Tannehill that early- i hope we can trade back a bit, maybe Jacksonville. That would make more sense.
big...I agree that the #4 slot is probably too high for Tannehill, but the Skins/Rams trade was more than most thought the #2 slot was worth.
It was more than some fans thought that pick was worth.
Many of the experts and national writers said it was going to take at least 3 first round picks to acquire the pick, and it did. No surprise there. I didn't think it would get to that, but I would have paid that price.
It's not a matter of them doing well, they would.
Part of it is keeping them happy, and you can't pay LT money to your RT, and if the guy is a legit LT, he will want to be paid as one. No??
But after that, no, I don't think JT would be a great RT....he would be good, but it is a different body type.
LT's seem to have shoulders wider than their hips. It is why they move better. RT's have hips as wide or wider than their shoulders. It's why they can drive the blocking sled further than anybody.
In horse terms, it like a race horse and a plow horse. Same animal, totally different purpose. Put a plow horse in a race and it won't look very impressive. Put a race horse in front of a plow and you aren't going to turn much earth.
Or to put it differently, you want the horse on the left side, the Ox on the right side.
That's it....I want a Ox at RT.....but one quick enough to pass block in most cases..
yt...demand determines market value...
If the Seahawks do not get Manning or Flynn, they are going to be looking at the draft to find their QB...same for the Dolphins. The Dolphins have the #8 slot and the Seahawks have #12...would they take Tannehill?
When there are teams willing to do almost anything to get what they want...we either have to use our #4 or look at another option, such as Flynn.
Or we say that neither Flynn nor Tannehill is all that, and we move on without them.
We could then take a QB later in the draft, and do exactly what so many people have been crying for us to do, and that's build around McCoy. Those people can have their wish .... but now it seems like fewer and fewer people want that option.
I don't get it.
We shouldn't go grab a QB just to say that we grabbed a QB. The guys should have a chance at being a great QB, or we should pass. I don't see greatness in either Tannehill or Flynn ...... so we should pass on both. We can grab Richardson, and give McCoy a great running game to work with. People also said that McCoy couldn't operate last year because he had no running game. Well, here is a chance to fix that for a long time to come.
The very worst thing we should do is take a project QB with the 4th overall pick. He's not going to start this year, and probably not next year either .... and he's not going to help our current QB. Draft Richardson, give McCoy the help people have been crying out for, and see what he can do. We can take a WR either with our 2nd pick, or our 2nd round pick, and still get great value.
if they pass on Kalil.. no way in heck we do... and I'd be 100% happy w/ it too.
I have no problem taking tannehill at 4 because of the rest of the class. Love Trent Richardson, but I refuse to consider a top 10 pick on a RB that just had knee surgery. I really like Claiborne but I don't know if you need two top 10 corners.
Not a big fan of Blackmon. Don't need a DT. I don't want a top 10 RT unless he is a monster in both run and pass blocking. #1 DE vs #6 DE isn't that big of a difference.
Tannehill's tremendous upside makes him well worth a top 5 pick, especially in this draft. If we don't take him at 4, I hope we trade down and trade down some more. Load up for next year.
Holmgren, doesn't want to play a rookie QB anyway so spend a year for Colt to raise his stock or you bring in a McNabb for a year while the rookie gets more coaching than he ever imagined. I would play him from day 1 but that wont happen with this regime.
Eh, I guess we just disagree over the role of a RT today. I just don't see why there has to be a uniform standard of, RT has to be squattier and a mauler. Especially with the way teams pass the ball nowadays. I think we're going to see a lot less running with this team as soon as our offense is able to play. Remember the first couple games of the year, we threw the ball a ton. Now if we get someone like Trent Richardson, I expect to run the ball more, and in the cold we'll probably run it more too. But still, I think the Patriots/Eagles style of offense (throw the ball non-stop) is more like what will be happening. And that mauler RT won't be as key.
I just think you're putting an old stereotype into a RT position that has new requirements, at least for us.
I do get that the right side gets the majority of handoffs, as most QBs are right handed and that's why the right side of the line runs the ball that way (and why it seems the TE lines up on the right side), but we'll be throwing the ball a lot and a great pass blocking RT would definitely be a premium.
That being said, I do think Cordy Glenn or another top tackle at 22 makes much more sense (so we can get a skill player at 4). I just don't see Kalil and Thomas here on the same team in 4/5 years. We're talking like 30 million probably going into the two tackle positions. Makes no sense
Justin Blackmon would be my choice, but I will not expect it.
I would be happy with a FA signing at WR in his place however, but I'm not so high on any other WR's in this Draft.
Claiborne would be my 2nd choice, but I think we can find a starting caliber Corner later in the Draft too.
My third choice would be to trade down.
NACIH do I want Richardson at 4. We can get him later with a trade down scenario.
This regime likes big old bubble butt maulers. From Holmgren, to Heckert to Shurmur they like Big Butts lol
Man, I would love to sign Meachem and draft Richardson. Offense instantly is way, way better than last year, especially with Little in his second season (I think he's going to explode this year).
Ideal case, we pick up a pick, fall back, and get Richardson a little bit later. But I'm not opposed to taking Richardson at 4 either. And I would love to resign Hillis. Richardson, Hillis, Jackson. That would be a really, really good backfield. We would have some nice young pieces on both sides of the ball.
I would like to pick up a QB as well at a minimum to compete with McCoy ... Flynn, Tannehill, Weeden ... no idea who ... but I think some competition would be good for him. Let the best man win.
Three simple moves ... be the highest bidder for Meachem ... gives us a deep threat with some potential along side Little ... draft Richardson ... resign Hillis ... seems pretty simple to me ... unless Meachem doesn't want to come to Cleveland ... but money has a funny way of changing peoples minds.
This would instantly make us a way better team. Get it done Heckert!
Didn't Richardson just have ACL surgery?
Quote:
Didn't Richardson just have ACL surgery?
No, definitely not ACL. Some minor knee surgery. Very minor
OR at least it wasn't torn ACL, minor stuff as I said
I don't see us as a destination of choice for any free agent WR ...... simply because we have a heavily unsettled QB position.
People can say that it was all the receivers' fault last year, but receivers are going to check out a team before even coming to visit, and McCoy at QB, with the year he had, is not going to be a huge inducement for anyone.
I'll never say never, but i would be stunned beyond words if any of the top receivers wind up in Cleveland. The only way I see that is if we tell them that we are looking at QBs in the draft. What McCoy showed last year is not going to have any free agent receiver anxious to sign here. The QB matters to a receiver far more than a receiver matters to a QB.
I doubt that we're going to try and sign a Flynn in free agency. I cannot imagine that the front office looked at his tape and saw a lot of NFL throws. I also cannot imagine that they want to throw a ton of money at a guy they really have no way of evaluating. He didn't play much in college, and he hardly played at all in the NFL. In 8 years he threw less than 600 passes. That's not much to go on.
I think that all we can do is try to get through this year and hope that there is a QB we like in next year's draft who will be a mid 1st round type guy.
Quote:
Quote:
Didn't Richardson just have ACL surgery?
No, definitely not ACL. Some minor knee surgery. Very minor
OR at least it wasn't torn ACL, minor stuff as I said
It was Arthroscopic. Had it done to my elbow for some chips, cartilage and bone spurs. Basically cleaning it out.
I think for your own health you should take a break from the Browns and this board. I'm not saying quit the Browns or stop being a fan ... but maybe just take a break.
You are such a ray of sunshine for all those here, I can only imagine what it's like when you are not on here. It's probably not good for your stress level.
Maybe take a vacation. Or just get in the car and drive. No computers! Come back in a couple of months when you realize that while the Browns are a severe passion for most of us (and I get the emotional attachment, I really do) a 48 year old man should not be having the feelings you are having over your favorite football team. Sorry man, your fascination with RG3 and how it's now the end of the world because the Browns didn't get him has now reached the bizarre level. It's worse than your fixation with Mangini.
Step away, breathe, drive somewhere, fly to a place that has a beach ... do anything but come to this board and focus on the Browns. It really might help you cope a bit.
We are in a prime location to trade out.
My first option would be to call Dallas to see if they're interested in drafting Claiborne, then I'd switch the phone over to Tampa Bay. How much would they give to move up? We could say that Dallas wants to move up and is offering a lot more than Tampa Bay but that we don't want to move down that far but we'll take it if Tampa Bay won't give us an acceptable offer.
Then, if we work a deal with Tampa Bay and move down the one spot, we could look to get another pick or two. I'd be looking to get their 2nd rounder this year and 2nd rounder next year. Then we could either take Blackmon at #5 or trade again.
Would Miami look to add Justin Blackmon to Brandon Marshall? Move back again and pick up more picks. A move up from the #8 spot to the #5 spot should be able to get a #2 this year and another pick (either a 3rd this year or 2nd next year).
I'd look to get DeCastro there at #8. We could trade back again, but not too far - maybe Carolina at #10. I think Arizona would definitely try and get DeCastro if we moved back and getting him there. I think moving back from #8 to #10 should be able to get us another 3rd & 4th round picks this year, but it's possible that Carolina would nab DeCastro themselves.
It could be an interesting draft.
Why? Because I'm a realist? Outside of awful pain in my back, I'm perfectly healthy.
Now, let's play a game.
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
Are we that kind of team? (and please answer honestly)
Like TO to Buffalo, Rice to Seattle? I think we will try hard for Colston and get him.
Quote:
Why? Because I'm a realist? Outside of awful pain in my back, I'm perfectly healthy.
Now, let's play a game.
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
Are we that kind of team? (and please answer honestly)
First off, you're not a realist. You believe RG3 is going to be a Super Bowl QB because you watched a few games and read some scouting reports. Your disappointment in not getting him is disproportionate with the fact that he is still an unproven commodity. But let's get back to your game ...
Coaching? Check ... I think we've assembled one of the best coaching staffs in the league.
Staff? Check ... see "Coaching".
Philosophy? Not sure where you are going with this one, but are you saying WRs don't want to play in a WCO?
Personnel? Of course we are light on the personnel side. We were 4-12. You sell potential FAs on being a part of the upswing.
QB? Yes, we are deficient here. But that's why you make a "pitch" to the guy. You explain how we are and will address the position. Or you sell your belief in Colt and why. Again, you sell the guy on being a part of something. Then you show him the money. 
I think that sales pitch might be particularly appealing to someone like Meachem who already has a ring. If we offer him the most money, he will be an undisputed #1 on an up and coming team (and he's already got his championship) getting paid the most money he could make.
I'm not saying it will work, and I'm not saying guys won't consider who's throwing them the ball and how that might be a deal breaker. But don't act like good players have never gone to bad teams in FA. And Meachem isn't even a top tier guy. I think he would do wonders for us, but we're not talking V.Jax or Bowe here.
buyer beware with Colston.... i don't think he does well outside of NO.
I would jump for joy with Garcon.... he put up pretty good numbers with horrid QB play. We need a veteran WR badly, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I hope Manning makes his decision quickly. It really will have a huge factor in how things play out. If he goes to the dolphins, Flynn will be an option for Seattle or the browns. And I'm not sure if Seattle really upgrades with Flynn, they might be better to just roll with t-jack. If Manning goes to Arizona, I think Kolb here is a given. I think Flynn is stuck in limbo until Manning makes up his mind- that might give the browns a chance to strike fast with Flynn if we want him.
I really don't see Heckert drafting Tannehill at #4. He is by-the-book best player available. No way is Tannehill at #4 the best available. I don't think the browns take him unless they can trade down a bit and pick up another second rounder to "offset" a reach. No, i just can't see Heckert making a terrible reach even with the QB premium.
I like Garcon....I toss a bundle at him.
The Browns won't. Heck is happy with our stable of receivers.
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
Well, I had a whole response typed out, and the board crapped on me and lost it.
Anyway ...... who are our competitors for receivers right now? What can we offer, other than money, to a prospective signee? What hope can we give him that he will be a great player here, and that his talents will be used to their greatest advantage? What assurance can you offer that we have the QB situation under control, and that we absolutely have a plan there? (and keep in mind that almost every talking head was blasting Colt McCoy at the end of last year, and saying that we had to replace him .... and also that we lost out on a very public pursuit of RG3)
If a guy has a choice between playing here, and catching passes from Colt McCoy, or Washington, and catching passes from the nightly highlight package, RG3, where do you think he's going?
I could see an older guy chasing his last paycheck signing with us. That was really what Fujita was. he was a guy heading to the wrong side of 30 ..... (31 when he played his 1st game for us) who got a better deal from us than he could have anywhere else. We also signed Tony Pashos, chasing his last deal. We aren't getting many of the guys in the prime of their careers, unless they are backups who might get a chance to start here.
We are, and have been a team battling for the basement on almost an annual basis. We are the only team without real, honest, hope at the QB position. QBs make receivers, not the other way around. If a receiver can't get the QB to throw to him, or throw to him with any degree of accuracy, then he's not going to be effective. I honestly don't know how we sell an upper tier guy that this is going to happen here.
Heck shouldn't be in the position he is in if he is content with our WR's.
It is really hard to determine what to do with this pick before we find out who we gain and lose in FA. Do we need to pick Richardson if we resign Hillis? Do we need a WR at #4 if we get a top level WR and maybe a mid-level in FA who are both better than our 3-4? I read over the weekend that Blackmon had a very good workout. That could sway our pick or increase the offer for #4.
Maybe we should do what the Rams did. It should be all about needs and who is available at that pick or if they are looking at Tannehill, they should definately drop back. The Rams want Blackmon; Drop back 2 and we could get their second round pick that the Rams got from the skins. We would then have #6, #22, #36 & #39.
Still think if we were picking today and Kalil goes #3, Blackmon or Clairborne unless someone knocks our socks off for #4.
What's he supposed to say if he all but knows that the only way to sign a decent WR in free agency is to so completely overwhelm anyone else's offer ..... basically "do a Redskin", or they go elsewhere? You lower expectations, and then when you sign no one, you continue to talk about how much you like our receivers. (and frankly, I'm not sure that our receivers are as horrible as some make them out to be)
Quote:
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
So last year the FA pass catchers (who changed teams) were:
Sydney Rice -> Seattle (Jackson)
Zach Miller -> Seattle (Jackson)
Todd Heap -> Cardinals (Kolb)
Sims-Walker -> Rams (Bradford)
Plaxico Burress -> Jets (Sanchez)
Derrick Mason -> Jets (Sanchez)
Mark Clayton -> Giants (Manning)
Steve Breston -> Chiefs (Cassel)
Brad Smith -> Bills (Fitzpatrick)
Steve Smith -> Eagles(Vick)
Daniel Graham -> Titans (Hasselbeck at the time)
Kevin Boss -> Oakland (Campbell)
That is really some shining star power of QBs there.
Second lesson: Did any of those guys do anything this year?
Quote:
I like Garcon....I toss a bundle at him.
The Browns won't. Heck is happy with our stable of receivers.
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
Wow! You sure are in a ornery mood tonight peen.
Do you always judge a book by it's cover? 
Besides rice most of those guys are either too old, or not very good to begin with.
Quote:
Besides rice most of those guys are either too old, or not very good to begin with.
Same is true this year, except VJax and maybe Colston
Quote:
Quote:
Besides rice most of those guys are either too old, or not very good to begin with.
Same is true this year, except VJax and maybe Colston
Pierre Garcon and Robert Meachem are not old.
Rice was coming off a 280 yard season with an injury. He played 9 games last year. yea. he had one great year in Minnesota, and several "bleh" years.
Zach Miller was a decent TE, but hardly a front line guy.
Todd heap is at the end of his career as a TE.
Sims-Walker did sign with the Rams, a team expected to be an up and coming team. He was also coming off an injury plagued season where he played ..... 1 game. (he played 4 last year for the Rams) He's also never been a huge impact player.
Burress was coming out of prison.
Clayton signed with the Rams if I'm not mistaken. He was coming off an injury plagued 5 game season. He played 2 games last year, and was never an impact player.
Breaston is a decent receiver. He's actually had some productivity. KC looked like an up and coming team coning into last year. They did go 10-6 in 2010.
Brad Smith. Really?
Steve Smith was another guy with one big year. I think that you need more than one big year and a bunch of really small ones to be a "top free agent target".
Daniel Graham. TE, Career high 409 yards. That was 9 years ago. 'Nuff said.
Kevin Boss. TE, Career high 567 yards. hardly a prime free agent.
So there was one guy in this group who I would consider a guy who might even flirt with being a #1 receiver who wasn't coming off the IR list for most of the prior year. That guy is Breaston, and he went to a team that was 10-6 the year before.
Who, of the rest of these guys, would you consider a front line, #1 receiver?
So are you conceding guys of that stature might consider Cleveland?
Or are you talking in circles again?
Because Meachems career highs are 45 for 722. Hardly superstar stats.
Quote:
Steve Smith was another guy with one big year. I think that you need more than one big year and a bunch of really small ones to be a "top free agent target".
Steve Smith would be a decent fit for us. He had a bad injury with the Giants, came to Philly without being fully recoevered and never found his role.
That's a guy on the cheap that has reliable hands, runs good routes.
Definitely is someone I'd like to see here, especially at the cost
Quote:
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
I go where the money is the best.
How many highly paid free agent wide receivers have gone on to have success with a new team anyway? Not many.
Quote:
Why? Because I'm a realist?
No your not.
You are whining your ass off because the Browns did not give up the farm for your short man crush of RG3. (And we all know the crush didn't start until all the media hype) And now you are in a frenzy because Heckert gave the impression that they are not going to go crazy in free agency. I can name 2 teams in our own division that don't go crazy in free agency. The Steelers, and the Ravens. They seem to do pretty damn well every year right? You build a team through the draft, Not loading up on free agents, and certainly not giving away that many picks for the next Akili Smith.
God forbid the Browns pass on the next media sensation.
I gotta agree with Ytown (even though it kills me) on the fact that FA's will avoid Cleveland. The only way we get a FA like Mario, Colston, etc. is to WAY over pay... even then it's doubtful.
To heck with McCoy, who wants to play for Shurmur and a new HC in the next year or two? I'm ok with McCoy. Didn't really like the thoughts of over paying for RG3, but would loved to have had Luck.
I think we need to draft offensive weapons this year, period. On D a DE like Sheard would be nice too. I can live with the rest. One 10-6 season and we'll get all the FA's we want.
Akili Smith was a knucklehead, that played 1 season of college ball, and was primarily known for a strong arm. I have a few bucks in my pocket that says Griffin will throw for more than 5td's in his career. I don't see the comparison.
Quote:
Akili Smith was a knucklehead, that played 1 season of college ball, and was primarily known for a strong arm. I have a few bucks in my pocket that says Griffin will throw for more than 5td's in his career. I don't see the comparison.
They're both black.
Wow. You didn't pay attention, because I wanted RG3 probably before anyone else on this board, and well back into last season. I started talking about him a lot with 3 or 4 weeks left in the year.
The Ravens and Steelers don't go crazy in free agency, because they own the division between them.
When is the last time we won the division? (Can you tell me without looking it up? Be honest) Here's a hint. It's more than 2 decades ago. That doesn't help attract players to our team.
Plus, those teams don't go crazy, but they don't abstain either. The Steelers are more likely to add a specific guy, like James Farrior, while the Ravens add guys as needed like Matt Birk and Bryant McKinnie, and others. They also trade for guys like Anquon Boldin. (sp)
Both teams also have a lot of UDFA. Some even start.
As far as RG3, well, we'll see who is right as far as RG3 and who is wrong. It will be interesting. I admit when I'm wrong. I wonder how many will admit they were wrong if he becomes a top QB, and maybe takes the Redskins to a Super Bowl within a few years?
Quote:
They're both black.
I'm not picking on you specifically but this isn't the first time I've seen this misinformed, ridiculous, and honestly offensive garbage being spewed.
Personally I think RG3 is over-rated. He doesn't know how to run an offense. He's never had to learn to read a defense. He doesn't have proper footwork for taking snaps under center. He has poor pocket awareness. What he DOES have is a big arm and good athleticism combined with some uber media-driven hype. Due to this, he's going to be a top pick with an (IMO) extremely high chance of being a bust. Due to that, I call him Akili Smith 2.0. Race has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.
I don't dislike the man. If he ends up great then so be it. Good for him. I don't think using a top pick on a player with that much risk and question marks is worth the gamble, even if they do end up panning out. Some disagree.
Turn about is fair play. I swear to God, the next time I hear somebody compare Andrew Luck to Peyton Manning I'm going to call them racist. They only do it because he's "white". No? Why not? Same line of thinking. Give me a freaking break.
NOBODY CARES ABOUT HIS RACE!
So is Case Keenum also Akili Smith 2.0?
Or is he more Tim Couch 2.0?
No I'd call Case Keenum David Klingler 2.0. But that's probably "racist" too eh?
Just for the record.
I wasn't wrong.
They both are African American.
Which was my point.
Cam Newton had all the same question marks, and he answered the bell. In fact Carolina used the first pick to take him. In a lot of areas griffin is more polished coming out of college than newton was. You will see.
And like I said I wasn't specifically calling you out. It was a general response because I've seen it said more than once (and I was specifically called a racist in another thread) due to comparing RG3 to Akili Smith.
It's human nature that when we compare a prospect to another player, it's based on a player they "remind us" of. Generally, a black player will remind people of a similar black player. White players will remind us of another white player. Red headed athletes will remind us of other red headed athletes. It's not because everyone is racist...it's because a large part of being "reminded" of someone is a visual thing.
Case Keenum reminds me of David Klingler because they both were system QBs from Houston. Doesn't make me a "schoolist" any more than comparing a black prospect to a former black QB makes me a "racist".
And again, I find it personally offensive when people claim anyone is a racist who compares RG3 to any other black QBs who struggled even though (most of the time and for me specifically) it's based on the fact we don't like his skill-set and think he won't be a success either.
If I thought RG3 was a sure fire shot to be a stud QB for us in the NFL I'd be the first person on his bandwagon hoping we got him. So I say again. Race. Doesn't. Matter.
Quote:
Why? Because I'm a realist? Outside of awful pain in my back, I'm perfectly healthy.
Now, let's play a game.
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
Are we that kind of team? (and please answer honestly)
I'll play.
Say it was you, instead. You have 2 offers for 3 years of employment, and one person offers you 20% more, or 25, or 30. Would you accept less money to work for a more successful company?
Quote:
Quote:
Why? Because I'm a realist? Outside of awful pain in my back, I'm perfectly healthy.
Now, let's play a game.
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
Are we that kind of team? (and please answer honestly)
I'll play.
Say it was you, instead. You have 2 offers for 3 years of employment, and one person offers you 20% more, or 25, or 30. Would you accept less money to work for a more successful company?
I'll answer the question. I'd go to a team that is more likely to go to the playoffs and has a more guaranteed position and neither Washington with RGiii nor Cleveland with RGiii would fit that bill. I'd want an established team that is not placing their hopes on a single player to get them better. I'm going to a team that got close last year. Either place would be paying much more for a FA to sign with them.
Quote:
Or we say that neither Flynn nor Tannehill is all that, and we move on without them.
We could then take a QB later in the draft, and do exactly what so many people have been crying for us to do, and that's build around McCoy. Those people can have their wish .... but now it seems like fewer and fewer people want that option.
I don't get it.
We shouldn't go grab a QB just to say that we grabbed a QB. The guys should have a chance at being a great QB, or we should pass. I don't see greatness in either Tannehill or Flynn ...... so we should pass on both. We can grab Richardson, and give McCoy a great running game to work with. People also said that McCoy couldn't operate last year because he had no running game. Well, here is a chance to fix that for a long time to come.
The very worst thing we should do is take a project QB with the 4th overall pick. He's not going to start this year, and probably not next year either .... and he's not going to help our current QB. Draft Richardson, give McCoy the help people have been crying out for, and see what he can do. We can take a WR either with our 2nd pick, or our 2nd round pick, and still get great value.
YT...something some seem to have missed throughout all this qb debate, regardless of whom is playing QB for Cleveland, the supporting cast still needs to be upgraded.
Even if we had landed rg3, our supporting cast needed to be upgraded. Many were willing to accept free agents to fill supporting cast needs to offset the traded away draft picks.
Kind of proves a point many were trying to make..regardless of who ends up as the Browns starting QB, the supporting cast needs to be upgraded..WR, Oline, RB.
I have no problem if the Browns by choice or not end up with McCoy at QB and use our draft picks help fill the many needs on offense and defense.
Quote:
Quote:
I like Garcon....I toss a bundle at him.
The Browns won't. Heck is happy with our stable of receivers.
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
Wow! You sure are in a ornery mood tonight peen.
Do you always judge a book by it's cover?
No, I give it a couple of chapters. .
I see what you did there...very crafty!
Money talks.. 99% of the time, show them the money (guaranteed) and they'll go anywhere.. don't matter about HC, Owner, Staff, QB.. etc.. Just don't matter nearly as much as you want to make it sound.
Follow the money....
#4 Richardson
#22 Best WR availible
2nd round Best RT availible
3rd Round DE /LB best availble
4th round Best WR & OG
5th - 7th Best availible......
Money talks for the mid range and low level guys. No doubt about that. It is less of a motivator for the good players simply because they are going to get the money and they are going to have more options.
I think it is fair to say the more options a player has, the more the "Who, What, When, and Where's" come in to play.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I like Garcon....I toss a bundle at him.
The Browns won't. Heck is happy with our stable of receivers.
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
Wow! You sure are in a ornery mood tonight peen.
Do you always judge a book by it's cover?
No, I give it a couple of chapters. .
That's a pretty good come back, but
his first two chapters (Drafts) do not support your claims imo.
Personally I agree that he doesn't look the part, but I am only concerned with his end results.
Quote:
Since the RG3 debacle is behind us....
Now we all are assuming the Vikings will be taking Kalil. My question is what if they decide to go with a Blackmon/Percy combo?
Is it plausible that the Vikings could take Blackmon and if they do, who is the best option for us?
Even though i am in love with Blackmon i would love to get Kalil. Thomas, Mack, and Kalil sounds like a great line for the future. That would give us a back-up LT if Thomas ever goes down and solid line pieces for the future. Plug in play LG and Lavaou at RG and we have a Strong offensive line for the future.
Clairborne is still an excellent pick but I'm wasn't impressed with him at the combine. I think he has tight hips and definitely needs to work on some fundmental techniques. He is an great athlete with long arms, which I think helped him to recover. I really don't believe that he is that far ahead of Kirpatrick.
Now that Pashos is gone - we could see an offensive tackle at #4 overall. However, I'd prefer us to trade back for a tackle where you can find plenty of intriguing prospects to choose from. I think we can upgrade Tony Pashos as far back as round 2 (pick #37). And the guy might even be tough enough to play through a paper cut or even a common cold.
At #4, my favorite choice would be Blackmon contingent upon Minnesota realizing the best way to protect their 1st round QB is with the highest rated Left Tackle.
Quote:
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
I will simply put this with comments about how Crennel was a poor coach because he didn't sound good in interviews..... in the garbage.
Quote:
I like Garcon....I toss a bundle at him.
I do too, he's quick and kinda shifty and can get separation, runs good routes. More importantly, he seems to know the position quite well.
A deep burner is everyone's dream here, but I more kinda want the guys that are going to make things happen in the 5-15 yd range, then be able to get a little YAC. That is how you keep drives alive, not by going for broke all the time.
Sure, the deep ball is more exciting, and you need to show it every now and again to keep the defense honest, but you have to have guys that can make things happen in that middle range to make the defense cheat up in the first place so that your deep ball has a chance. If you can't do that (and we couldn't last year), then they can just cover that area without too much safety help, which means that they are now taking away both the mid-range AND the deep ball.... leaving us with nothing but dinks and dunks and failed-before-they-begin screens.
Quote:
Quote:
The guy is a goof. Pull up a vid of him talking if you need proof.
I will simply put this with comments about how Crennel was a poor coach because he didn't sound good in interviews..... in the garbage.
Don't forget the looks-like-a-rat test . . .
Love ya, Peen.
Quote:
Money talks for the mid range and low level guys. No doubt about that. It is less of a motivator for the good players simply because they are going to get the money and they are going to have more options.
I think it is fair to say the more options a player has, the more the "Who, What, When, and Where's" come in to play.
Sure,, I buy that.. More options means they have a choice.. Money being equal, they'll go for the fit. But if one team that is a sure fit offers 10 million and a team that isn't a sure fit offers 15 million... Money talks..
Quote:
Quote:
Why? Because I'm a realist? Outside of awful pain in my back, I'm perfectly healthy.
Now, let's play a game.
OK .... you're a top WR. You are free to go anywhere you want, to any team that wants you.
What kind of team do you look for? What do you look for as far as coaching, staff, philosophy, personnel, etc.?
Are we that kind of team? (and please answer honestly)
I'll play.
Say it was you, instead. You have 2 offers for 3 years of employment, and one person offers you 20% more, or 25, or 30. Would you accept less money to work for a more successful company?
I have turned down more money to go with a company that I felt offered a better opportunity.
2 rather promotions with my new company later, it proved the right decision. I was making 1 1/2 times what I started at, and blew away the salary structure of the competitor company. I had to earn it though.
Football is different though. No one player can win anything all by himself. However, there are certain positions that have more power to influence the outcome of a game. There are others that are completely dependent upon another position. Receiver is one of the latter. The receiver does absolutely nothing, outside of maybe an occasional run play, without the QB first getting him the ball.
In my case, I was in more and more control of my own destiny, and took on more and more authority and "power" as I progressed through the system. It will never be that way for a receiver.
You are talking the difference between earning 15 bucks an hour and 20.
In football type pay, that could be 2, 3, 4 or more million a year. It shouldn't make a difference I know.. But it does...
However, if my career can go beyond the contract I sign, or the good chance that I won't be able to finish out this shiny contract, then I look at what's best for my career.
This guy seems like he's been listening to me or something. lol
Free-agent receivers won't rush to play for Cleveland Browns until QB spot is settled, says Dennis Manoloff (SBTV) | cleveland.com
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-blog/index.ssf/2012/03/free-agent_receivers_wont_rush.html
Assuming the first three go Luck, RGIII, and Khalil, I am going to bet we do one of the following:
a) Richardson (but ONLY if we don't re-sign Hillis)
b) Claiborne (Holmgren loves his CB's)
c) Trade Down (Heckert loves to, although I wouldn't necessarily like the move this year)
d) Blackmon (I just don't see us taking a WR this high, but think we should).
I would imagine any WR is looking at a few factors when picking a team in FA...
1. Money - chance to sign the most secure, lucrative deal
2. Winning - chance to get to the playoffs and contend for championships
3. Stats - chance to get the ball and put up good personal numbers and be recognized.
4. Location - chance to play in a desired city
Its likely that each WR might have these 4 things ranked in a different order based on where they are in their career, what kind of success they have had, etc.. but it's safe to say that the ONLY area where the Browns can rank high right now is with #1... we could pay them more. But we can't guarantee #2 and #3.. and well #4 is actually an obstacle that Cleveland has to overcome and it will not be overcome until they can fix #2 and #3...
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Quote:
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Finally some sanity. Tannehil or Richardson at #4 is insane,
Quote:
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Im on board with this 100%
Quote:
I will simply put this with comments about how Crennel was a poor coach because he didn't sound good in interviews..... in the garbage.
Fair enough....I just get frustrated.
Overall I like the guy fine. I just think we flubbed this up and and we are stuck with some alternate plan at best. The A1 plan was shown, and it didn't happen.
I didn't say I wanted Richardson (I thought I made it clear that my choice would be Blackmon), however, this is how I see them going based on what happens in different scenarios (I also think we take Khalil in about 2 seconds if the Vikes pass on him).
No sweat, I understand frustrated... but, sometimes no matter how you try, it just isn't within your power to do something.
It's all a matter of personal feeling, but for my $0.02, given the high price being charged to take a chance on a guy - I'm definitely not considering us as having dropped the ball on this.
Of course, I never wanted us to trade up, anyway, but that just means that I'm thankful that it didn't work out for us (which, I think, works out for us, hehe).
@brownorangedragon - I was just commenting that I want nothing to do with Richardson. The way I see it, Adrian Peterson is pretty much the best RB to come out in a long, long, long time.. and right now, I wouldn't even take HIM at #4. The difference in impact just isn't there, IMO. e.g. we have RB's that are pretty decent, so "upgrading" to Richardson isn't that big of a deal. However, our WR's aren't so great, so Blackmon is a HUGE upgrade, and Claiborne teamed up with Haden gives us a ridiculous secondary... the impact is just far greater, IMO. Beyond those two, I think the biggest impact for our team is a trade down and perhaps look at upgrading LB or DE... and get another pick in the process that nets us yet another player.
If we go Tannehil with the 4th pick I think I'm going to be sick. When you draft 4th overall you HAVE to go with the best player available. That may leave us with a decision between Blackmon, Claibourne or Richardson.
Quote:
Quote:
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Finally some sanity. Tannehil or Richardson at #4 is insane,
I agree. Except I'm going trade down first, Claiborne, then Blackmon.
I'll walk straight out of the house and go to anger management if we draft Tannehill at #4.
Richardson I think is a mistake, but I wouldn't flip out . . .
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Finally some sanity. Tannehil or Richardson at #4 is insane,
I agree. Except I'm going trade down first, Claiborne, then Blackmon.
I'll walk straight out of the house and go to anger management if we draft Tannehill at #4.
Richardson I think is a mistake, but I wouldn't flip out . . .
Honestly, I don't think there is much chance we'll draft Tannehill at 4.. I get the feeling that trading down will be the priority (which seems to be what you would prefer also)
We are gonna come away with our two firsts this year, (22 and whatever we get in trade) maybe an extra 4th this year and something next year like a 1st or 2nd for someone to move up to 4.
If Heckerts run of finding guys like Haden, Ward, Taylor, Little and Sheard continue, we'll probably end up with 3 or 4 quality guys this year and the same next year.
I know it's frustrating,, but we very well could be getting there..
Ahh, there goes that glass half full talk again.... 
jc
The more I think about it...we will go Tannehill at 4...we almost have to if we don't go after and get Flynn
McCoy wold get his last chance until the bye, if he doesn't show significant improvement it's Tannehill time and if he does...well good for us and we have a valuable safety net behind him and there's always value in high picked QBs that sit behind a succeeding starter
Quote:
The more I think about it...we will go Tannehill at 4...we almost have to if we don't go after and get Flynn
But why?! You don't just take a QB at 4 to take a QB! You are one of the last people I expected to say this. Please PLEASE if you have ANY video showing a good reason to take him this high share it here. The only video I can find on him online makes him look like a mid-rounder at best.
*edit* actually, now that I think about it, you did want us to take Gabbert at 6 last year going into the draft in the off-chance that he worked out, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Not that Tannehill is Gabbert, but there can be parallels drawn between them in strengths and weaknesses.
Id rather us get another mid draft project then a project at #4. Seriously...C'mon, he isnt worth a top10 pick.
Quote:
Quote:
The more I think about it...we will go Tannehill at 4...we almost have to if we don't go after and get Flynn
But why?! You don't just take a QB at 4 to take a QB! You are one of the last people I expected to say this. Please PLEASE if you have ANY video showing a good reason to take him this high share it here. The only video I can find on him online makes him look like a mid-rounder at best.
and you don't have the videos of him looking his worst (Texas, OU, and OkieState in '11 in that order). no thank you. and JAX took a QB to take a QB last year. didn't work out so well for them.
I am hoping that we sign Flynn, and also use a mid-round pick on Foles or Coleman (guys that could have decently high ceilings that we can develop).
#4 pick is Blackmon, Claiborne, or trade-down for me. I think Kalil (if available) will be more valuable to other teams as a LT and will therefore get more back in a trade than his value to us as a RT.
Quote:
If we go Tannehil with the 4th pick I think I'm going to be sick. When you draft 4th overall you HAVE to go with the best player available. That may leave us with a decision between Blackmon, Claibourne or Richardson.
Shoot man....I know you guys are right.
I'll come around in a day or two. I am past the point of being able to think rationally about the Browns 24/7. Sometimes my primal feelings surface and I just go on emotion.
Does anybody else ever feel like breaking something??
Quote:
Quote:
If we go Tannehil with the 4th pick I think I'm going to be sick. When you draft 4th overall you HAVE to go with the best player available. That may leave us with a decision between Blackmon, Claibourne or Richardson.
Shoot man....I know you guys are right.
I'll come around in a day or two. I am past the point of being able to think rationally about the Browns 24/7. Sometimes my primal feelings surface and I just go on emotion.
Does anybody else ever feel like breaking something??
From September to January, I call that feeling "every moment of every day."
Quote:
Does anybody else ever feel like breaking something??
my sons and I have "breaking days" where we take a bunch of stuff we are going to throw away and have fun breaking it to pieces.
cheaper than therapy and twice the fun
That sounds pretty cool. I may try that.
It's been a while since I took my shotgun and just shot the crap out of water jugs, etc. I may go do that this afternoon.
Blow up a few cantelopes.
Exactly...and if you told me this 3 or 4 years ago I would have argued as most on here as I was/still am the most prospect happy and "BPA all the way" poster around...but QB is THE most important position in this contemporary NFL...10 years ago a QB rating of 80 was considered good...now it's well below AVG
Yes, Tannehill at 4 would be a need over-draft, but 1 I would be willing to gamble on simply because QB is our most important need...we are the only NFL team that doesn't even have "hope" at that position...we have a well below AVG QB with next to no upside who isn't even above AVG at anything and an aging never has been as backup...I don't see any team's QB depth chart look this hopeless and there are at least another 5 teams who will scramble around for a QB this FA/draft
We simply can't punt this position year after year after year...there will NEVER be a perfect timing without a great amount of luck like the Colts had this year...look at teams like the Phins, Chiefs or Seahawks...they won't even get the chance to draft Tannehill, an upside project at the position...Seahawks are a perfect example of this mess...they have drafted a strong D and have a good running game...yet they are a 7-9 win team in the weakest Division in the league...guess why....we are headed in the Seahawks direction in terms of talent, so we probably (hopefully) won't draft in the top 5-10 so soon again....and if we don't we won't have a shot at next year's Top 3 QBs, the days where the Rodgers' and Roethli's fell to the mid 1st are clearly gone...and the cicle continues
at 1 point we have to roll the dice...and if Tannehill fails, we haven't lost any other picks, right?
Concerning his tape: He does a lot of things right but isn't consistent yet..he hasn't put it all together yet, which is problematic as anyone wants a "safer" prospect but it is what it is: a gamble on upside and brains....yes, he is "comparable" in rawness to Gabbert although completely different...Gabbert had even more upside and experience but Tannehill has playing in a pro-style WCO going for him and I think he has more "it" factor, call it willingness, work ethic, brains...whatever
If there wasn't RG and Luck in this draft...and if I didn't feel burned by Gabbert last draft, I'd probably be as big of a Tannehill pimp as Mourg
Best Case: Eli Manning
Worst Case: Sanchez
Like both these QBs...he needs time and there will be grwoing pains, but I think he's worth a shot...mid-term, it's the best we have at this point imho
I think there are a NUMBER of QBs people should be prepared to find out Heckert likes in the later rounds. QBs not named Tannehill or Weeden. All would be coming in to sit and learn, just like Tannehill & Weeden would.
Like?
Underachivers like Cousins, Lindley? They are carbon copies of Chad Henne and certainly don't come close to having the "it" factor of Tannehill....there's a reason analysts came away more impressed with Tannehill's tape than those guys'
Like Heckert said, Untapped potential and a lot of upside.
There was a poster, who was arguing vehemently against RG3, who said that there are 4 1st round QBs coming out next year. led by Barkley, who we could draft.
I think it was Barkley, Landry Jones, Tyler Wilson, and I can't remember who else.
Do you think that it would be worth potentially suffering through a year with Colt McCoy, adding more talent this year, and then maybe adding one of those guys next year? I know that it's hard to project a draft a year in advance, but still, that looks like it might be a better option. Would that be better than taking a guy who is not going to be NFL ready in a year?
Man, I look at Tannehill and he needs built as a QB. There's not a lot there. He has size, and he has a decent arm. He can move, and appears to have good feet, although his footwork goes to hell under pressure. He makes good decisions and throws within 5-10 yards, but deeper stuff is hit or miss. He hasn't seen much as a college QB. He hasn't even started 2 seasons. In short, there are a ton of reasons why he worries me to death, and I think that he is now the fall back ..... and settling for the fall back doesn't seem to work out very often.
I would rather take a guy like Richardson, who would be a huge help for Colt McCoy, add as much talent as I could in this draft, and grab a QB in the 1st round next year. Hopefully we'll be in a better position to do so at that point. I simply think that Tannehill is a big mistake for this team. He might be an OK choice for a team drafting around15, who has an effective but aging QB .... But not us. He's gonna get thrown in the fire way before he's ready if we take him, and he's gonna get burnt to a crisp.
Like with Flynn, I just can't see wasting a high draft pick, and/or a lot of money on a "B" option. I don't see how that helps us in the long run ...... unless we're counting on luck to carry the day, and the guy we choose to somehow be better than he probably is. That's a scary proposition given how crappy our luck has been.
We really could take Richardson at 4, Cordy at 22, and a WR in the 2nd, and then we would know absolutely for sure what we have in McCoy. I think that's what many, many people used to call for ....... but that chorus has quieted quite a bit. That would give us a viable, breakaway running threat, an excellent right tackle, and then grab a WR in the 2nd and let's see for sure what we have. If nothing else, we'll be ready to slide a new QB right in.
There is no way we should go after guys like that unless it is as an UDFA or the Waiver Wire.
Worst case scenario at QB, we have our backup of the future already on the team... what the heck would we ever gain by drafting more low-round guys to fill the spot that an UDFA could fill?
I know that H&H have said that they could take a QB in every draft, but honestly I view that as a complete and total waste. There is no way we should do it this year.
We either invest big, or we roll with what we have.... and on the invest big front, that does NOT include reaching for a player at 4.
Thanks, I'll try to take a look after work (blocked here). So far I've seen v. Northwestern, v. Arkansas, and highlights v. Baylor. I didn't watch the v. LSU from the prior b/c I didn't think it would be fair.
As I said, that would just punt/delay the "inevitable" decision into next season...and there's no way you can predict an upcoming draft 12 months from it happening...hell, exactly 1 year ago everyone was happy we finally had the ammunition to trade up for Luck...How did that "plan" work out?
we couldn't even come up with enough picks to get the 2nd best QB...
Chances are that we'll pick outside the top 5, maybe 10 next season...heck, this year's 4th overall was highest in a loong time...and we're in the top 10 almost every draft...so, why could we confidently say we'd even get the 3rd best QB of next year's class?
Btw, if Landry Jones would have declared for this draft he would have been picked AFTER Tannehill...he looked like total crap last season
I share your concern for Tannehill getting thrown in too early but I agree with Mourg in thinking that he has the mental strength to "tough it out"
and btw...RB at 4, underachieving and overweight RT with 3rd round tape at #22 and then WR in the 2nd looks like a Mangini draft, as in...play it "safe", not trying to make any mistakes...we have a saying over here: "The contrary to Good is well-meant"...and that would fit to such a draft...Mack-Robo-Massa all over again, showing no understanding of value
RB market is a HUGE buyers market...there are good RBs in FA and all over the draft...I'd consider drafting Richardson at 4 a bigger waste in value than Tannehill
We can draft above AVG to good level players every draft like Mack, Dqwell, Haden, Ward, Sheard etc...so what? We're still picking in the top 5...every idiot can pick a "safe", good interior OL, LB or DB in the 1st round....you won't pull away from your competitors drafting like this
I really can't believe that there are posters that want to punt this decision another year and "draft another mid round QB"...if we would package all those late 1st to 3rd round picks we've wasted on QBs we'd would have half the price to get RG...and more importantly: we wouldn't have wasted year's on middling QB talent at the most important position...seriously, is there another Team in the NFL that does not have a 1st or 2nd round QB on their roster?
We laugh at "always next year" at has become a sad running gag among Browns diehards, but this is egtting replaced by "there's always next draft" when it comes to the inevitable decision to gamble on a QB early
Quote:
Quote:
If we go Tannehil with the 4th pick I think I'm going to be sick. When you draft 4th overall you HAVE to go with the best player available. That may leave us with a decision between Blackmon, Claibourne or Richardson.
Shoot man....I know you guys are right.
I'll come around in a day or two. I am past the point of being able to think rationally about the Browns 24/7. Sometimes my primal feelings surface and I just go on emotion.
Does anybody else ever feel like breaking something??
Yes, I'm on my fifth laptop in 3 years....
Quote:
Like?
Underachivers like Cousins, Lindley? They are carbon copies of Chad Henne and certainly don't come close to having the "it" factor of Tannehill....there's a reason analysts came away more impressed with Tannehill's tape than those guys'
Not my job to find him.
I'm talking about Heckert & Holmgren. I think we should be prepared to see them pick a guy late that isn't Tannehill or Weeden. That's all . . .
I know I don't have to list past successful QBs that GMs chose in the later rounds. . .
OK, LSU:
He does a nice job on some of the really short throws. He did have a couple of nice slants. There were back to back nice throws to the left about halfway through, and the fade for the TD was a really nice play.
he also had numerous throws that should have been easy pitch and catch type throws that appeared to be harder catches for his receivers than they needed to be.
He really struggles under pressure. Badly. I think that fade TD was one of only a very few completed passes while he was pressured.
He does like to run, and can do so effectively.
Arkansas:
Starts with 2 swing passes, then a nice throw down the right side. Then he gets picked going deep down the left. It was not catchable for his receiver, but he should have tried to break it up.
Next a swing pass, then a 4 yarder on 3rd and 11.
Tons of swing/flat passes.
The announcer says that scouts are telling him that Tannehill is a potential 2nd/3rd round pick. (4th game of the season)
He had a beautiful pass up and over the defense down the left side.
I am seeing several passes on 3rd and ..... that are just short of .....
Overall a decent game. Couple of really nice throws. Solid power behind the flat, screen, and slant passes. Still gets blown up by pressure.
That's all I have time for right now. Solid arm .... though he does have some passes start to quack just a little. Decent anticipation on some throws. He has some promise, but he needs a lot of work. He does run really well, and shows decent accuracy on the run.
I still don't see enough to take him at 4.
Quote:
seriously, is there another Team in the NFL that does not have a 1st or 2nd round QB on their roster?
Off the top of my head - The Patriots with a 5th, 3rd and UDFA.
But they are a terrible team and I would hate to follow their model of failure year after year. We need to do the opposite and reach for Tan.
Next, we can review the 1st and 2nd round QBs the Browns have had since the return to see the correct road to success. It obviously is draft QBs early and often while ignoring the rest of the team.
I don't see Tannehill as being ready for prime time next year. (his rookie year) he does know some of the language, so that would help, but I don't see him as finished enough to step in quickly.
I share your concern on "next year", but I think that it would be a far better idea to build the team than to over reach on a QB.
I don't know a whole lot about Cordy Glenn, but everything I have read says that he is a huge value at the 22 range. He has tremendous size, and would seem to be a great RT candidate.
From what I have read, he might not even be there at 22. He might go much higher. I have read comments from scouts that he has an NFL body .... and everything I have read says that he has remarkable athleticism for his size.
You obviously disagree with that. Can I as what you've seen that would make you disagree with almost every report I have read on him? (and I haven't seen much of him, if at all)
Also, the Chiefs with Cassel/Orton/Stanzi, and the Bills with Fitzpatrick/Thigpen/Smith
Quote:
I just think we flubbed this up
We were told to make an offer. We offered three first round picks. A different team offered three first round picks and a second round pick. We were never given a chance to make another bid.
How is that "flubbing" it?
Quote:
Quote:
I just think we flubbed this up
We were told to make an offer. We offered three first round picks. A different team offered three first round picks and a second round pick. We were never given a chance to make another bid.
How is that "flubbing" it?
I'm not at all certain that's how it really went down,, But I'm really glad we didn't go any higher,..
No one is certain that's the way it went down. But that's how almost every media source described the process.
I have a very good feeling that we offered both of our 1st rounders this year, and thats it. The rams then went to Washington and said we offered 3 1st round picks, at which point the Redskins jumped to 3 1st's and a 2nd and the Rams damn near killed themselfs getting to the phone to accept.
I agree with this statement. You don't take a guy JUST because you need him. Especially when it's the QB.
Yes we need to fix it, but you don't do a half-... er ... behinded .... job on something as important as the QB position.
We went through last year with a team led by a QB that didn't have an offseason - was unprepared - without talent - young - inexperienced and was essentially forced into the decision of playing too early. There is also the argument that by sticking with Colt it forced us to stay out of the QB game last year as we were still figuring him out.
And now some people want to do that with Tannehill as a reaction to missing out on Griffin?
Taking a QB is a necessity because you need a franchise QB. But don't take one just to take one especially if he is a project.
And I LIKE Tannehill but I would be sick to my stomach if we draft him and then force him in by the midpoint of the season ... only to declare the next 2 years or so with him at the helm instead of solving the problem the right way.
Even if Colt stinks and we are essentially out of play for a big name QB at the top of the draft (if we win another 5 to 6 games) ... we will have enough talent that a veteran stopgap could put us over the helm. I would rather have us do that then sacrafice talent for short term toys that happen to be at a position of need. That's the Phil Savage model ...
i'm a terrible shot and live in the city, so I can't use shotguns (though seeing cantelopes and water jugs explode sounds like fun).
I would let him compete and play but Holmgren will probably let his rookie sit for a year and endure Quarterbacking 101 as he intended to do with Colt.
I wouldn't be surprised to see McNabb brought in to compete with Colt and Wallace gets shipped out.
Quote:
I share your concern on "next year", but I think that it would be a far better idea to build the team than to over reach on a QB.
At this point, I agree. If we have more pieces in place next year, we might be more willing/able to part with a higher package to move up. Going for a QB just to get a QB is much worse than making sure it's the right QB.
Who would he learn that from in Cleveland?
Quote:
I have a very good feeling that we offered both of our 1st rounders this year, and thats it. The rams then went to Washington and said we offered 3 1st round picks, at which point the Redskins jumped to 3 1st's and a 2nd and the Rams damn near killed themselfs getting to the phone to accept.
I'd bet that's probably right.. I just don't think Heckert and holmgren are dumb enough to offer 3 firsts let alone 3 firsts and a 2nd rounder.. They know we need help everywhere....Stripping the draft of it's meat for the next couple of years doesn't seem like the way to go about it. But we'll see how the Skins do with that...
None of that story made sense from the start. If we were to cheap to part with pick 22 this year, does anyone think we would offer up 2 more future firsts? lol
Quote:
None of that story made sense from the start. If we were to cheap to part with pick 22 this year, does anyone think we would offer up 2 more future firsts? lol
I know,, that's whats so puzzling about guys wanting to believe all the garbage that's been circulating. No matter how hard I look at it,, we had more to give up by virture of where our picks were than any other team,,(except the Vikings and they were never rumored to be in the mix) that tells me that if we really wanted RG3,, if we REALLY felt he was "THE ONE" we had the best ammunition to go up and get him.
Quote:
I really can't believe that there are posters that want to punt this decision another year and "draft another mid round QB"...if we would package all those late 1st to 3rd round picks we've wasted on QBs we'd would have half the price to get RG...and more importantly: we wouldn't have wasted year's on middling QB talent at the most important position...seriously, is there another Team in the NFL that does not have a 1st or 2nd round QB on their roster?
The talent/skill gap between Luck and RGII when compared to Tannehill is huge. This is not one of those "coin flip" MIT decisions.
Drafting a QB high does not make him worth drafting high.
Did drafting Brady Quinn in the first round make him a good QB? He had deep accuracy problems similar to Tannehill. He was described as having a strong arm (I still remember the minicamp reports of Browns laughing at him for firing bullets into the wall.)
It's not "punting a decision," it's a decision. Is Tannehill the guy I want to hitch my team up to for a minimum of the next three years? No. Is he where I want to spend a premium resource? No. Now, I'll watch the videos that Ly was nice enough to hunt down and post to see if that will ease my resistance, but that's not being non-committal. Unless what he has linked is significantly different that what I have seen from him, then I am not interested in not only wasting the number 4 pick, but also the next three years of this team.
I wanted us to get Luck or RGIII in this draft. RGIII turned out to be way more expensive than I expected, and way more than I'd want us to pay. It doesn't mean I'm just going to take the next guy at the same pick I'd have taken Griffin because we still need an upgrade at QB.
Quote:
It doesn't mean I'm just going to take the next guy at the same pick I'd have taken Griffin because we still need an upgrade at QB.
Heck no! That is the very definition of Reaching.
Quinn, didnt have a whole lot of growth left in him. There wasn't a lot of specifics where one could say, he tightens this up he is gonna be good. He had pretty good mechanics and good footwork. His accuracy was not very good and the more muscles he added the worse it got.
Andrew Luck doesn't have a whole lot of growth left in his game either, other than the bad habbit of throwing off the back foot.
There were flags up about Quinn leading up to the draft. I think he got by on his height/weight and the fact that he spent a few seasons under Charlie Weis who had just got done making Tom Brady the best QB in the league and a 3 time champ.
We heard the accuracy stuff from some of the experts. I think the arm strength was exaggerated as we found that out after a few games of watching him. Real easy to sit back there and chuck when you are playing Navy and Michigan and not the Steelers and Ravens.
I was fooled. I can admit it. I thought he'd be a very good QB. He couldn't even beat out Derek Anderson for a job.
The only way I stay at #4 is for Claiborne, otherwise I'm trying to trade back 2-7 spots and grab an extra 1st or second rounder or two. I wouldn't take Tannehill higher than #22. Wouldn't mind Weeden in the 2nd or 3rd. The guy maybe 28 but if not for that he'd be a high pick for sure.
A trade back with Seattle would be nice...
Thank you! There's NO reason to draft Tannehill IMO. Is he really an upgrade THIS YEAR over Colt? Nope. He's a 2 year project and I still don't think you have a bonified starter when all's said and done. Everything I see when I see vids of him is thoroughly underwhelming, permanent back-up written all over him. If he's not an improvement THIS YEAR, then yes, punt the decision down the road. Start plugging all those myriad holes and upgrading across the board. Try to finagle some more picks for next year but for the sake of CONTINUITY (novel concept) you don't reach for a guy that never will be thereby watering down your draft and mucking up the locker room for the next year. We've got a quality backup in Wallace already. A similar number of red flags that were there for Quinn are there for Tannehill. The quality drop off from Luck and RG3 to Tannehill/Weeden/etc is laughably huge. You early picks HAVE to count. That's a 25/75 pick at best IMO. 30/70 and below QB picks are late 1st round thru high 3rd round IMO. Humongous fail at #4.
Quote:
The talent/skill gap between Luck and RGII when compared to Tannehill is huge. This is not one of those "coin flip" MIT decisions
Quote:
show me tape of him looking like a first rounder
Ask and ye shall receive. Watch the throw at 6:38 and let the tape roll from there.
http://www.youtube.com/v/HT57THwIZwg
That throw will remind you of someone...Tom Brady.
That's an NFL throw...beautiful footwork, beautiful balance, perfect throwing motion and release to a WR outside the numbers on a line. Simply effortless.
If anyone doubts why I like this guy so much...and Mourg and others just watch this throw over and over and over. That's the potential to go with brains, brawn, durability and college WR athleticism. There it is for all to see.
If Tannehill can make that type of throw with consistency he's going to be a top level NFL QB.
You wanted the proof. There it is.
The rest is just fun with RG3 and Tannehill. Nice scramble at 7:48 too.
btw....A&M beat Baylor 55-28 behind 415 yards and 6 TDs from Tannehill.
Quote:
If Tannehill can make that type of throw with consistency he's going to be a top level NFL QB.
I wouldn't bet a number 4 pick on "if".
Yeah, that play is cancelled out by the stupid decision and awful throw at 0:50 of the same video. What else you got?
Yeah that was blooper reel. But I'll take 415 yards and 6 TDs any day...
Oh do I pine for the days of Bernie Kosar where that kind of line was even possible.
Keep in mind that Baylor's defense was little more than Pop Warner caliber as well.
They stopped the pass by having the clock run out.
who he was playing really means nothing to me honestly.
that one throw tells me that if he has the determination to be a great nfl QB then he will be.
Quote:
Quote:
I want absolutely no part of Richardson - or any RB - at #4.
Claiborne, Blackmon or Trade Down are the only acceptable options, IMO.
Finally some sanity. Tannehil or Richardson at #4 is insane,
I agree and I actually like both, but just not at pick #4.
Quote:
Quote:
I just think we flubbed this up
We were told to make an offer. We offered three first round picks. A different team offered three first round picks and a second round pick. We were never given a chance to make another bid.
How is that "flubbing" it?
I have explained that man. I am not going to do so again. We flubbed the offer.
I found my reply, in the cuts thread from this morning....I'll copy and paste just for you.
I had some questions about the guy, but for me it was the bungled attempt at RGIII.
I know some say we simply lost a silent auction, I say bull.
All one has to do is think about it a moment.
All reports indicate we were going to send two first rounds plus swap picks. That is a clear indication RGIII was the guy we wanted and we went with what we thought was all in...in our minds we had our guy.
But we didn't think this through...we sat back with a smile on our face when what we needed to do was ask some questions.
Question: Why did we offer up 2-3 first rounders?(depends on how you want to add up the picks)
Answer: Because we were sure that is what the Skins were going to offer.
Question: Which team had the better offer on the table??
Answer: The Browns. We had a better pick at #4 and had another pick at #22, which is better than a future pick. Instant gratification for the Rams.
Question: How could the Skins make their offer better than ours?
Answer: Toss in another pick. It doesn't take a genius to figure out it was going to be a 2nd rounder.
So, Heck got lazy and didn't take this far enough. I'd bet we could have tossed in a 3rd rounder next year and we would have been in the drivers seat since nothing the Skins could offer this year could beat our hand.
Basically, Heckert allowed a 3rd round pick to kill the deal for the player the Browns really wanted.
That's why I am down on the goof right now.
This isn't me professing my love for RGIII....it's evident the Browns were professing their love for the guy by offering what we did.
So now we get to wait and watch. Either way it is going to suck. RGIII tears it up for the next decade and we are left wondering how things could of, should of been.
RGIII busts out....we can laugh at the Skins, but are still left with the uncomfortable feeling Heck had the guy targeted as our guy. We may have gotten lucky, but that doesn't change how all of this went down.
Peen,
I get what you're saying. but I think had we tossed in another pick, then the Skins would have added yet another as well. If Snyder really wants someone, he will not be outbid. He would have kept going until we stopped. JMO
Quote:
Peen,
I get what you're saying. but I think had we tossed in another pick, then the Skins would have added yet another as well. If Snyder really wants someone, he will not be outbid. He would have kept going until we stopped. JMO
No, this was at the point the Rams said give your best offer, we end it there.
The nimrods in Berea couldn't figure out our 3 first rounders were better than the Skins, so the Skins had to add a little something to push it over the top.
While Heck was happy dancing around his office the Rams were calling the Skins to tell them they just got the 2nd pick.
The guy is a idiot. He deserves to get fired for that debacle.
Face it, he screwed up. Once you are to the point of giving up 2 first rounders this year and one next year, nobody can tell me another 2nd or 3rd round pick is what made it too costly.
This is just laughable.
So now because he wasn't willing to throw the better portion of two drafts away for a huge risk he should be fired immediately?
Everybody is laughing at Washington for their trade. Apparently you'd rather they were laughing at us?
It couldn't POSSIBLY be that we were willing to give up both 1st round picks this year (way more than I would have offered) and that was it. Anything beyond that was just too much for us to give up for RG3. If someone else was willing to out-bid us, so be it. They did. Good for them.
We didn't "flub" anything IMO.
Quote:
Quote:
Peen,
I get what you're saying. but I think had we tossed in another pick, then the Skins would have added yet another as well. If Snyder really wants someone, he will not be outbid. He would have kept going until we stopped. JMO
No, this was at the point the Rams said give your best offer, we end it there.
The nimrods in Berea couldn't figure out our 3 first rounders were better than the Skins, so the Skins had to add a little something to push it over the top.
While Heck was happy dancing around his office the Rams were calling the Skins to tell them they just got the 2nd pick.
The guy is a idiot. He deserves to get fired for that debacle.
Face it, he screwed up. Once you are to the point of giving up 2 first rounders this year and one next year, nobody can tell me another 2nd or 3rd round pick is what made it to costly.
I don't know that it went down the way that you think it did. If I had a guess, I'd say Heck probably had a chance to bow out of the race. But either way, I'm elated we didn't make the move, and, yeah, I think that extra second round pick is the straw the breaks the camel's back.
We make that move and we're looking at not being able to add any pieces until the third round, and the second round next year.
Quote:
No, this was at the point the Rams said give your best offer, we end it there.
well damn peen.. what is it you wanted them to give up to get his kid? for crying outloud,,did you want them to give up more than three 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick?
Weren't you the guy that swore up and down and wanted to bet me a steak dinner that NO WAY would it take 3 firsts to get him?
yet,, that's what it took AND MORE, as I predicted.
You gotta stop your freakin whining already.., it's over.. done.. move on. if we made an offer, I'm pretty sure it was the best we were WILLING to make.
That DOES NOT mean we blew it,, it means we had a price in mind and the sale price exceeded what we were willing to pay..
END OF STORY..
jc
Peen has a point...IF it was indeed a silent auction...me thinks this was PR talk from the Rams and Fisher guaranteed his pal Shanahan to be able to top the Browns offer, giving away our hand...he knew he would get a "Browns offer what they think the Skins offer" from us and THEN something extra from his buddy...I have a hard time believing it was a silent auction...he can say that to the press and he probably told us and he probably told his buddy to say the same...perfect lie and win-win for STL and WAS...I think our FO got exploited without being able to prove it
Sadly, Peen is also right about the bottom line outcome: we have egg on our face either way...I really hope RG stars in this league because if he busts I'll lose a lot of my faith in Heckert
Quote:
j
Sadly, Peen is also right about the bottom line outcome: we have egg on our face either way...I really hope RG stars in this league because if he busts I'll lose a lot of my faith in Heckert
Can you explain that for me?
Quote:
This is just laughable.
So now because he wasn't willing to throw the better portion of two drafts away for a huge risk he should be fired immediately?
Everybody is laughing at Washington for their trade. Apparently you'd rather they were laughing at us?
It couldn't POSSIBLY be that we were willing to give up both 1st round picks this year (way more than I would have offered) and that was it. Anything beyond that was just too much for us to give up for RG3. If someone else was willing to out-bid us, so be it. They did. Good for them.
We didn't "flub" anything IMO.
I said he deserves to be fired....I didn't say he should.
I have grace and allowed people under me to make mistakes.
We'll see if he learned.
You guys can say what you want. We flubbed the offer.
We identified the player we wanted and didn't get it done because we weren't through.
That's the bottom line. Quite trying to make excuses and I'll quit hammering home the irrefutable point.
Quote:
Quote:
j
Sadly, Peen is also right about the bottom line outcome: we have egg on our face either way...I really hope RG stars in this league because if he busts I'll lose a lot of my faith in Heckert
Can you explain that for me?
I'll re-quote Peen for that, he said it best
Quote:
This isn't me professing my love for RGIII....it's evident the Browns were professing their love for the guy by offering what we did.
So now we get to wait and watch. Either way it is going to suck. RGIII tears it up for the next decade and we are left wondering how things could of, should of been.
RGIII busts out....we can laugh at the Skins, but are still left with the uncomfortable feeling Heck had the guy targeted as our guy. We may have gotten lucky, but that doesn't change how all of this went down.
Thanks for the clarification.
So, either way, the Browns get blamed. Got it.
Like I said - I've never seen such negativity on here.
You forgot that if we hadn't pursued the trade at all, then that just shows that this FO is clueless by putting its support behind McCoy.
I don't understand how some can't comprehend that we just weren't willing to overspend for RG3.
It's akin to me "wanting" a corvette really badly. I find one that has a blue book value of $30k, but I "really" want it so I offer $40k (already more than it's worth). Then, somebody else comes in and offers $80k for the same car. Am I a fool who "flubbed" the deal if at that point I say...umm for $80k he can have it??
ZOMG I WANTED IT AND I DIDN'T GET IT I MUST BE SUCH A BAFOON!
That's exactly what happened here. We wanted RG3. We offered at least what we thought he was worth if not more than he was worth. Washington offered even more. We said "they can have him for that". End of story.
Again, I'm glad people are laughing at Washington for paying $80k for a $30k car today instead of laughing at us...no matter how YTown and Peen want to spin this.
I fully comprehend that. The point is we were willing until the last $100 bill.
I don't know if you have ever played real poker before with some real stakes, but once you go 90% in, you might as well go all in because you are going to be all in every hand after that.
Quote:
I fully comprehend that. The point is we were willing until the last $100 bill.
I don't know if you have ever played real poker before with some real stakes, but once you go 90% in, you might as well go all in.
In poker though you have multiple rounds of betting, as reported, there was only one round so 90% or 100% is rather redundant.
Oh, there was more than one round....this went on a while.
It finally turned in to one hand.
Not if you believe the report that each was given the opportunity to turn in their best bid and the Rams went with what they thought was the best.
Unless you have some inside info I've not heard of yet?
Quote:
Not if you believe the report that each was given the opportunity to turn in their best bid and the Rams went with what they thought was the best.
Unless you have some inside info I've not heard of yet?
Yes, the fact that Pat Shurmur looks like a rat which automatically makes him a rat.
Technically Peen is right...we were pot committed....we offered 3 1sts, have 90% of our stack in and then got timed out...that looks bad and it is, no ifs and buts...a future 3rd could have sealed the deal, maybe
...but Peen I really think this NEVER was a real silent auction...Shanahan used Fisher to get the last bid and Fisher was allowed to use both Heckert and Shanahan to get max return...that's more probable imho
Quote:
Quote:
Not if you believe the report that each was given the opportunity to turn in their best bid and the Rams went with what they thought was the best.
Unless you have some inside info I've not heard of yet?
Yes, the fact that Pat Shurmur looks like a rat which automatically makes him a rat.
Oh... so this is about Shurmur. Here I thought it was about Heckert and his lack of toastmaster classes. Silly me... 
Your comparing an nfl quarterback to a car?? Last time I checked a car loses value each year. A great nfl quarterback will make your organization millions upon millions each year. Just look what Manning and Brees have done for indy and new orleans. Those 2 teams might be in different cities if it weren't for those two players. Sure the skins paid a steep price, but if they're right, they will recoup those draft picks 10 fold over time.
Wait, so are you saying a car can't play quarterback? That's a little discriminatory, isn't it?
Quote:
Quote:
Not if you believe the report that each was given the opportunity to turn in their best bid and the Rams went with what they thought was the best.
Unless you have some inside info I've not heard of yet?
Yes, the fact that Pat Shurmur looks like a rat which automatically makes him a rat.
It does....maybe it gets me kicked off here....good for you....you and Tulsa can kiss my butt....I don't care what you think....mock me all you want.
I think I have it right. It's not my problem you two choose to ignore the reality of the situation.
Quote:
I fully comprehend that. The point is we were willing until the last $100 bill.
I don't know if you have ever played real poker before with some real stakes, but once you go 90% in, you might as well go all in because you are going to be all in every hand after that.
I get your mindset but aren't you happy they didn't make that trade? You're a good dude and I respect your opinion but man I'm thrilled we didn't make this trade for a guy that may or may not be a good QB in this league. If he busts and we made that trade then I wouldn't hesitate to say that we would have set ourselves back about 5-6 years. Maybe it's just me but I was sooooo happy we didn't win the bid. Three 1sts and a 2nd to move up two spots? No thanks!! Much rather go with Colt again or sign Flynn. At least with Flynn it's Lerners cash not mine and we keep our picks.
I don't believe we could have ever outbid Snyder as someone else pointed out. I also think if the cards were even that the Rams would have traded it to the Redskins anyways due to the relationships. Another thing that we don't know is that maybe the Browns went over and above what they originally were willing to deal but still tried to keep up with the Redskins. Who knows?? Still glad it didn't happen though!!
No, I am not happy.
I do trust Heck as a evaluator. I don't like how he showed we were all in, then didn't go all in.
Makes no sense.
I would of offered the Rams the #4, #22, a 2012 3rd and the 2013 1st
Then when they accepted that...
I would of traded it to Washington for the #6, 2012 2nd, 2013 1st, 2014 1st
Quote:
It does....maybe it gets me kicked off here....good for you....you and Tulsa can kiss my butt....I don't care what you think....mock me all you want.
I think I have it right. It's not my problem you two choose to ignore the reality of the situation.
Whoa there bud, you're getting a might personal for a message board post and while it might be your reality it's not necessarily everyone's reality, and lets face it, reality is certainly subjective.
You might just want to accept the fact that people have differing opinions and the fact they don't necessarily agree with the "woe is me" mentality and choose a more positive outlook does not mean they are any less valid. They are simply different.
As a side note I don't believe I've mocked you in any way or fashion. If you're referring to my "Scotch" post, 79 fed me a straight line and I went with it. Sorry, if someone serves me a fastball when I'm looking for a fastball, I take my cut, you were not involved in that reply. I got a laugh out of it and that's all I was after.
Let's cut it back a notch or two, it's football after all, nothing that's going to change your tomorrow, even a little.
Quote:
I would of offered the Rams the #4, #22, a 2012 3rd and the 2013 1st
Then when they accepted that...
I would of traded it to Washington for the #6, 2012 2nd, 2013 1st, 2014 1st
So, you'd have traded 3 firsts and a 3rd for 3 firsts and a 2nd. Or better put, to move down two spots you've have given up #22 and a 3rd this year for a 2nd this year, flip flop 1st rounders next year (which could be a lot) and a 2014 first rounder. With all due respect, I'm glad you're not our GM.
Quote:
So, you'd have traded 3 firsts and a 3rd for 3 firsts and a 2nd.
Yes.
Quote:
Or better put,
Aka: The way I just said it sounds too positive, so let me rephrase it with a negative connotation...
Quote:
to move down two spots you've have given up #22 and a 3rd this year for a 2nd this year, flip flop 1st rounders next year (which could be a lot) and a 2014 first rounder.
This trade is all based on (sarcasm... I mean...) if the Redskins fail, all their picks will be high than ours logically, The Rams will have our picks, We'll have the Redskins..
Trading the #22 for a future first is assume the future first will not be higher than that, and because I don't think theres alot of awesomness in this draft around 22...
And then you're trading our 2014 for the Redskins, assuming we'll be better than they will by then... If we're a playoff team by 2014 (
) and Redskins have bottomed out (again) we'l still have high picks...
Quote:
With all due respect, I'm glad you're not our GM.
With all due respect I wish I didn't have to post in purple just so people knew I was being (obviously) sarcastic...
gotcha, didn't catch the (obvious) sarcasm in there
Great thread.
For every post about the #4 pick there are 30 posts about the sky falling and Heckert being a dolt and RG3 as Jesus Christ Superstar.
Lets try and stay on topic people.
Is this a football board or a pessimists anonymous gathering?
Quote:
Is this a football board or a pessimists anonymous gathering?
Well, it is the Cleveland Browns football board...
...Is this a trick question..?
Quote:
Quote:
Is this a football board or a pessimists anonymous gathering?
Well, it is the Cleveland Browns football board...
...Is this a trick question..?
To go on topic, as if it'll last. If we can't, or don't trade out of the 4 spot and the picks go as expected, I would be happy with either Blackmon or Claiborne. No particular order, I rate them almost even, with WR being the bigger need.
Assuming we stay at 4 and Luck, RG3 and Kalil are the 3 off the board then my preference is
1) Justin Blackmon
2) Morris Claiborne
3) trade back
I don't see another scenario that makes ANY sense.
Quote:
We identified the player we wanted and didn't get it done because we weren't through.
OR we identified a player we wanted and determined what he was worth, then backed off when the asking price was way, way to high.
The way that Snyder is overpaying for WRs and the way they're really flying off the FA board... it's looking like there's not going to be another option for WR.
It'd make the most sense in the world to Draft Blackmon. IMO If Flynn is signed, he signed because they told him that they're taking Blackmon at 4...
Though, IMO I want them to trade back and acquire another 1st next year.
You hear every year how the Draft is thin in areas or it's a 4-5 person draft. The truth of the matter is that those 1st round picks end up making some impact in some way... no matter if you see it or not.
This team will do better if they keep on acquiring talent. Another first round talent is better than one...
Is it just the Redskins over paying receivers, or is the value of receivers just that much higher now between the pass first offense and the new CBA? It seems like the Bills paid their receiver pretty high as well.
Quote:
jc
Peen has a point...IF it was indeed a silent auction...me thinks this was PR talk from the Rams and Fisher guaranteed his pal Shanahan to be able to top the Browns offer, giving away our hand...he knew he would get a "Browns offer what they think the Skins offer" from us and THEN something extra from his buddy...I have a hard time believing it was a silent auction...he can say that to the press and he probably told us and he probably told his buddy to say the same...perfect lie and win-win for STL and WAS...I think our FO got exploited without being able to prove it
Sadly, Peen is also right about the bottom line outcome: we have egg on our face either way...I really hope RG stars in this league because if he busts I'll lose a lot of my faith in Heckert
This may come as a shock to you, but I don't agree with any of that.
Peens and yours apparently, beliefs are based on reports that we offered a ton and got outbid..
I'd say the truth is more like we bid what we felt it was worth and someone else bid more.. end of story..
I don't believe egg was involved
Quote:
Is it just the Redskins over paying receivers, or is the value of receivers just that much higher now between the pass first offense and the new CBA? It seems like the Bills paid their receiver pretty high as well.
The new,more upbeat me will say,that's a very good question and we would need to do some research to come to an answer.
the old me would have said,I don't know,let's go ask Brandon Marshall.
I really, really hope we do not sign Flynn. I just don't see him as a top end QB. I would much rather see us give Colt one more year. If he sucks, we WILL be drafting high and have a shot at Barkley. If he improves, he will give us about what Flynn would anyways (for far less cash). Now if Tebow becomes available
.......
If....IF...we made an offer then you have a point.
Here is the thing....did we? Its been reported that we did...but nobody knows for sure when all we ever hear is 'league sources'.
What are league sources? I can guarantee that the rams told the skins that other teams were interested. I can guarantee that we were mentioned, wether we were interested or not. Why? Because it sets the price.....sets it REAL high.
Right where the rams wanted it. Sane teams would have walked away, but the skins weren't going to be beat.
For all we know a member of the rams front office leaked this. Or someone in the skins front office said that we were interested, because thats what the rams said.
Its ridiculous. I think we stick with McCoy for another year. I say this not based on results, but based on time giving the desired results.
The only qb that i can see us going after if our front office knows that McCoy isn't the guy is flynn. He's got 4 years in this system, his learning curve would be less than any rookie qb.
I don't see the point of bashing our front office, when in fact you and I don't know what they have tried or not tried to do. They have stated that they will build thru the draft, and not go crazy in free agency. So far they have done exactly what they have said they would do.
As painful as it is to watch....what happens if its whats needed to become a perennial contender? A little time...some experience for the players in the system?
We've tried everything else. Why not this?
Quote:
Now if Tebow becomes available .......
so, considering the thread, you are suggesting we trade the #4 pick for Tebow? that's an interesting suggestion (IMO terrible one, but interesting nonetheless)
It was meant more as a joke (ie getting Tebow).
Quote:
Now if Tebow becomes available .......
Holy crap on a cracker, I hope this was not serious.
Quote:
The only qb that i can see us going after if our front office knows that McCoy isn't the guy is flynn. He's got 4 years in this system, his learning curve would be less than any rookie qb.
I don't see us going after Flynn unless we can get him at a bargian basement price...which isn't going to happen. I think a much likelier situation is this: If Manning goes to Arizona...we will have an interest in Kolb when he is released. If Manning goes to Tennessee, we will be interested in Hassellbeck when released. If Manning goes elsewhere, we will look to the draft at most likely Weedon (but not to start right away) or another developmental QB.
Is it popular....no...but it is the SMART MOVE.
And IF NEED BE we will still be in a position to look at the QB class next year...regardless of whether it is Barkley or not...the class appears to be strong and we should be able to get a strong candidate thoughout the first round.
Quote:
It was meant more as a joke (ie getting Tebow).
sorry, mine should have been in purple. mine was also a joke to get back on topic to the thread!title 
I don't disagree with that. I'm just looking at it from what i perceive to be the front offices approach.
I know its not popular, but I think that what you see in a qb in years one and two is not the finished product. Holmgren has stated 2 years in the same system and then you know what you have. I take him on his word for that. Mostly because i don't have a choice, secondly because it makes sense.
I bring up flynn only because if...and its a big if...they think McCoy isn't going to cut it based on 2 years of film (even though its not the same system) and you have a chance to get a guy that you think can step in and perform better, then you do it.
I just don't see this front office straying from their plan. Even if Flynn = McCoy...meaning possible quality starter at qb, Flynn is still way ahead of McCoy as far as knowing the system. 3 more years of study is huge.
Unless we get rid of wallace, i don't see us bringing in an older vet...we could i suppose, if we thought McCoy needed to sit and learn some more, but i think we would have a hard time doing that now.
I don't know crap about Weeden, but I could see us bringing in someone to develop, except we might have that guy on the roster right now, that we stole from the rams.
Starter...backup, developmental.... 3 are filled imo....only question is it the backup or starter spot that needs upgrading.
Quote:
Here is the thing....did we? Its been reported that we did...but nobody knows for sure when all we ever hear is 'league sources'.
Any moment now,, you will be called me..... Careful
Quote:
If....IF...we made an offer then you have a point.
Here is the thing....did we? Its been reported that we did...but nobody knows for sure when all we ever hear is 'league sources'.
Look, if you guys want to hide behind that there is no use discussing it.
If we made a lower offer than reported, I think Heckert would be all over it saying we didn't offer that much.. He could sell it off as it was way to expensive and use that as the reason we dropped out....
At this point it doesn't matter. It's clear we are working on plan B....lets hope that works out.
I was discussing it....
I could just as easily say that since your mind is made up that we botched the deal, then there is no reason to discuss it.
We either did...and chickened out...or someone wanted it to appear that we were in the bidding.
Can you honestly tell me with a straight face that if you were the rams gm, that you wouldn't have been throwing our name out there as a bidder to drive the price up with the skins?
Thats salesmanship 101...
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
lol....I don't take this stuff that serious anymore. I used to get all irritated....still do sometimes i guess.
We all want a winner, and we all have different views on how to get there. I don't fault anyone for their beliefs.
I don't have to be right...and it doesn't even matter if i was. Heckert and Homgren...they are the ones that have to be right.
I'm just gonna watch no matter what....just like all of you
Quote:
I was discussing it....
I could just as easily say that since your mind is made up that we botched the deal, then there is no reason to discuss it.
We either did...and chickened out...or someone wanted it to appear that we were in the bidding.
Can you honestly tell me with a straight face that if you were the rams gm, that you wouldn't have been throwing our name out there as a bidder to drive the price up with the skins?
Thats salesmanship 101...
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
Ok, riddle me this. Why are we denying the faulty reports about being in the hunt for Flynn??
If Heckert allowed the Rams to play us for their benefit and didn't say anything to dispell that, Heckert doesn't have a hair on his ass.
Would you let someone play you like that??
I think it went down like this.
The Rams contacted us and they contacted the 'Skins. They said "give us your best offer. We're only taking one offer from each team and we're taking them at the same time. We will NOT give you a second chance."
So, our FO and the 'Skins' FO sat down, and they each thought about their best offer.
Our FO said "well, we have to think our two first-round picks this year plus our first next year is better than anything the 'Skins can offer. So, that's our offer."
The 'Skins sat down and said "We can't beat the Browns' offer of 2 firsts this year, so we'll go a first the next two years, plus a second."
We submit our offers at the same time. The Rams look at both, really think about it, and decide, for whatever reason, they like the 'Skins offer better.
I don't see that as screwing up the deal. I see that as our offer not meeting someone else's offer.
Think about a building contractor. They get a chance to bid on a job. They take into account all the materials, labor and profit margin. They then submit the bid. Does every contractor win every single bid they put in? No. Does it mean they're always screwing up? No. Maybe another contractor wants the work so badly that they give a ridiculous deal that no other contractor would ever offer.
I think that's what happened here. Our "bid" wasn't accepted. The only way we could have won is if we had offered even MORE than the 'Skins to begin with, and I think it's reasonable to believe that our two first-rounders this year plus a first next year would be a better option than firsts over the next two years plus a second.
JMHO
Quote:
I think it went down like this.
The Rams contacted us and they contacted the 'Skins. They said "give us your best offer. We're only taking one offer from each team and we're taking them at the same time. We will NOT give you a second chance."
So, our FO and the 'Skins' FO sat down, and they each thought about their best offer.
Our FO said "well, we have to think our two first-round picks this year plus our first next year is better than anything the 'Skins can offer. So, that's our offer."
The 'Skins sat down and said "We can't beat the Browns' offer of 2 firsts this year, so we'll go a first the next two years, plus a second."
We submit our offers at the same time. The Rams look at both, really think about it, and decide, for whatever reason, they like the 'Skins offer better.
I don't see that as screwing up the deal. I see that as our offer not meeting someone else's offer.
JMHO
Thats about how I feel about it as well.
what I don't get is how our #4 and #22 this year and first next year isn't better than what the 'Skins gave up.
I can't see our front office responding to every ridiculous bit of speculation by the media. They all say we need a qb...the draft pundits all say we need a qb....the fans all say we need a qb....
I'm sure they know they need a qb. Maybe we already have one. Maybe we are targeting someone else in the draft. Maybe we want to trade down with the rams into the skins spot.
I don't see how it matters...what is the point of dispelling the rumor? I'm sure there are tons of rumors....i would rather have them concentrating on the draft board.
If our front office said, "nuh uh...we didn't ask about a trade...." would you believe them?
Who knows peen. Its all smoke, mirrors, and bs right now...you know it.
Maybe we inquired what it would take just to evaluate our options. Maybe our front office is looking to upgrade the qb position, but they have a limit because we have other areas to upgrade too..
Maybe they see McCoy as being equal to flynn and cheaper to boot, so they dispelled that rumor, because McCoy will be the starter.
This is like high stakes hold-em, mixed with chess. I don't know what they are thinking any more than you.
I do know they want to build a winner, and i'm sure they have a plan as to how to best accomplish that. As for the rest....assumptions, and speculation...and you know how that goes.
Well, I guess the Rams saw it as having 2 picks this year and 2 picks next year (from us) versus having 1 pick this year, 2 picks next year, and 2 picks the following year (from Washington).
Only a hypothetical but...
Who would you rather have for the #4 pick, Justin Blackmon or Mike Wallace?
I take Wallce every time.
Why would that makes sense as a owner of a business who is trying to get the best return possible?
Why would the Rams give each team a fair opportunity instead of trying to drive up the value?
The Rams made it a bidding a war and let each team know what the other was offering until the other would stop bidding. That just makes the most sense on their part because they obviously want to maximize the value of their pick.
At any rate, Heckert graded RGIII as his guy and he failed....period....he failed....some people won't admit it but Peen is right, Heckert got beat bad and looks bad around the league.
However, its over, we must pick up the pieces and move forward.
I thought all the reports said that the Rams DIDN'T play the two teams against each other?
Quote:
Ok, riddle me this. Why are we denying the faulty reports about being in the hunt for Flynn??
Well.....We aren't.........can you find one article where the FO has come out and denied the Florida Paper's report??? It is other sources that are denying it for us...
The FO have come out long before these discussions supposedly took place for Flynn and said we won't be a player for him. that is the only denial from the FO...BEFORE any of this took place.
J/C
I just love how some of you people always seem to know exactly what happened so i want to ask if there is anyway i can get the ok to be in the room when these transactions are made since you people obviously are.
Quote:
what I don't get is how our #4 and #22 this year and first next year isn't better than what the 'Skins gave up.
I agree. So, if we did offer up 3 1st rounders, were they #4, '13, '14?
Why would the Rams have any obligation to tell the media or anyone else outside their inner circle how they run their organization?
I simply think in terms of how the deal went down behind closed doors and how a GM thinks to maximize the future potential of his organization...because trust me that is all the Rams were concerned with..who would give them more...and if the difference between having a great quarterback is only a second round pick, we are going to be a laughing stock for years to come...it's nice to tell ourselves what we want to hear and believe what we want to hear....
but the reality is Heckert was in the driver's seat and we botched the chance at a franchise qb....
Now we have to come up with another plan.
Isn't this thread about who we will take with the #4 pick?
Quote:
Isn't this thread about who we will take with the #4 pick?
apparently we are still hung up on doing something with the #4 pick that is no longer an option (packaging it and much more to move up to #2) that we can't move onto anything else to do with the pick.
We could still package all of those same picks and convince Washing to trade the #2 to us.... maybe throw in an extra 1st to boot.
Quote:
Why would the Rams have any obligation to tell the media or anyone else outside their inner circle how they run their organization?
But apparently they told you?
OK Lets take Blackmon at 4. Everything I've seen has him as at least the THIRD best WR in the draft or maybe Tannehil.
Claiborne? Richardson? Pfft no consensus best position players for us. We laugh at risk! Detroit took a lot of WRs and that worked out for them. Eventually
Now that we have a guard for the final preseason game I feel a lot better about this team.
Told him what? About the fourth pick in the draft? (Which is what this thread is about.)
Quote:
Told him what? About the fourth pick in the draft? (Which is what this thread is about.)
Correct.
Quote:
Why would the Rams have any obligation to tell the media or anyone else outside their inner circle how they run their organization?
OK suppose this situation.....Suppose Cleveland's offer was low... (perhaps it was) after all it was never told exactly what the offer was. It could have been a first and a 3rd for all we know. So now the Redskins put out a deal that no one in their right mind thought they would offer....so...because this story WAS going to get out BEFORE the trade could actualy finalize 5-6 days later. How do you save Washingtons face so that they don't back out of the deal???
Non competing bids sounds like a good story to me...and its sounds so juicy and like such an "insider" wokings kind of story....The kind of thing people just eat up.
Who knows...maybe the Browns offered 3 first rounders...maybe they didn't. Maybe they didn't offer a single thing....But you know what...everything we have heard is what EVERYONE ELSE has had to say and not one word has been what WE have said.
Now you wanted to know why would a story like that get out...well simply because there was no way that the story of the Redskins winning the pick would not get out....and when it was told HOW MUCH the Redskins paid....there had to be SOME face saving to be done in order to keep them from backing out of the deal before it could be done on Tuesday. Because if it got out that Cleveland lowballed and there were no other bidders.....What would you do if you were Washington????
Blackmon not consensus best WR? I've seen a couple devil's advocate articles about Floyd, but pretty much everywhere has Blackmon up top.
Also, you say top3. Who is the mystery 3rd WR in this discussion?
Quote:
If we made a lower offer than reported, I think Heckert would be all over it saying we didn't offer that much..
Come on man... we've all answered that about a million times and you just don't wanna see it.., Heckert said that "it's Crazy" when talking about the rumors of what we were offering..
I'm not sure what else you wanna hear from them.
He didn't say he didn't make it, just that it was crazy.
Maybe he made it, then sat back and thought, "damn, that's crazy".
Quote:
I was discussing it....
I could just as easily say that since your mind is made up that we botched the deal, then there is no reason to discuss it.
We either did...and chickened out...or someone wanted it to appear that we were in the bidding.
Can you honestly tell me with a straight face that if you were the rams gm, that you wouldn't have been throwing our name out there as a bidder to drive the price up with the skins?
Thats salesmanship 101...
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
Here is a scenario that hasn't been mentioned. Perhaps we talked with the Rams and said:
If the Colts take RGIII then we will give you #4,#22,#37 and next year's 1st (or whatever) because we want Luck but not RGIII. The Rams don't want to wait until free agency starts because if Manning and Flynn sign in the wrong places then the trade value of their pick gets squashed. So they take the Redskins offer which is a little less but not by much. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
300-pound Alshon Jeffrey?
I am not a fan of drafting Blackmon #4 overall because I don't think he is an elite level wide receiver along the lines of Johnson, Johnson, Fitzgerald, Edwards, and Green. And if he's not on that level he's not worth taking that high.
Do we need a wide receiver? Yes. Should we reach for one just because he is the best wide receiver available? No.
If Blackmon was in last year's draft would you have drafted him ahead of A.J. Green or Julio Jones? No. And Heckert didn't want to draft Jones with the 6th pick.
The way I see it, there are only two options: draft Claiborne (which is not a bad option at all) or trade down (which is also not a bad option).
If we draft Claiborne we now have two very good corner backs (in theory) in a passing league. It would also allow Sheldon Brown to move to third corner (or safety?) and Buster Skrine to fourth corner (if we don't re-sign Patterson). That would give us one of the best corner back groups in the league.
There are also several teams that might want to trade up to draft a player. Other teams may covet Blackmon (Rams, Jaguars, Dolphins, and/or Seahawks) or Claiborne (move one spot down and trade with the Buccaneers, Panthers, Bills, etc.)
We have some pretty good options and I see us having a very fruitful draft with Heckert at the helm.
As much as I like Blackmon, I have a feeling we're going to be getting some trade calls on him. I have to think the Rams will take him at 6, and I think if Claiborne is there, the Bucs take him at 5. So, unless we're totally in love with Claiborne, I can see a team like the Jaguars making us a nice little offer to move up so they can get Blackmon.
I bet Blackmon will look like a bust here...
Unless we're able to deal with the QB situation later in the 1st round or early in the 2nd.
I don't believe anyone would take Blackmon over Green. Green is going to be special. I would however have taken Blackmon over Jones. Just my personal opinion. I would be happy with Blackmon at #4. I would be happy with Claiborne at #4. I would be happy with trading down if we get good value.
Even if Blackmon is better than Jones (which is an arguable point), how much better is he? Not that much better if you ask me (which no one did). So why would Heckert draft Blackmon 4th when he didn't want to draft Jones 6th? (Not a question directed at you, although you are welcome to answer, but to everyone.)
Quote:
Even if Blackmon is better than Jones (which is an arguable point), how much better is he? Not that much better if you ask me (which no one did). So why would Heckert draft Blackmon 4th when he didn't want to draft Jones 6th? (Not a question directed at you, although you are welcome to answer, but to everyone.)
because there might not be a team willing to give us the same bounty that Atlanta did last year?
It did not last. No wonder people leave.
And if you are wrong????? What if he turns out to be Michael Irvin like good????
Frankly, I think the kid is a stud....I think he plays bigger than his size...everybody is always surprised to hear his actual numbers...And frankly I don't think you can compare hin with Green as they are 2 completely different receivers....Its like trying to compare Don Hutson and Jerry Rice.....2 completey different receivers who play a completely different game. Blackmons game is not AJ Green's game and vice versa. And Blackmon's game is actually better suited to our offense than AJ Green...I also like the attitude and desire (that can't possibly be measured ) which comes with Blackmon...It's not a me first "Braylon" type of attitude" Its a "I want to be the baddest mo fo on the field" attitude.
I don't think the kid craps out. The kid is a "football player" in the best sense....not a prima dona. And he is a pretty darn good player at that.
Now having said that...I am with some of the consensus that I will be happy if it is one of 3 scenarios at 4....Blackmon, Claiborne, or trade down a few spots.
Right, but if that were the case, wouldn't he just take the best player available. (I am assuming Blackmon is not that player as it seems there is a consensus that the top four players in the draft are Luck/RGIII/Kalil/Claiborne. After that I have seen either Richardson or Blackmon.
Quote:
Right, but if that were the case, wouldn't he just take the best player available. (I am assuming Blackmon is not that player as it seems there is a consensus that the top four players in the draft are Luck/RGIII/Kalil/Claiborne. After that I have seen either Richardson or Blackmon.
I agree that if Claiborne is higher on our board, then he should be the pick.
I had above Green and Jones last year. The only other WR in college that is close to Blackmon is Woods(usc).
Wait, you had Blackmon over A.J. Green?
(On a side note, Robert Woods is very good. His current USC teammate and former high school teammate Marqise Lee might be even better.)
I didn't want to make it its own thread, but here's what I'd like to see us do.
As much as some disagree, I think we're going to stick with Colt McCoy, and although it's not my favorite thing, I think I will be ok with it. You lost out on RG3. Grabbing Flynn would be overpaying, and I honestly don't think Flynn is much of an upgrade over what we have. I think Tannehill is only viable if you can trade back and fall in the perfect position. Pick 4 is too high, and the way quarterbacks are falling off the board, you may have to go 4 to get him. I think anything else they try and do at QB is chasing. If you don't know what chasing is, it's term us gamblers use. It's when you lose one bet, then go and make another to make up for the initial one you lost. You end up worse off then you did after your first wager. I think that's potentially what the Browns would be doing if they throw a giant bag of money at Matt Flynn or draft Tannehill with that first pick. Unless you had those guys that highly rated before you lost out on RG3, stick to your plan. There is no guarantee you aren't a 4-12 team if you grab Tannehill or Flynn anyway.
I know big time spending isn't on our radar, but I would love for them to pursue Winston, the tackle that was just released by Houston. Sell him on playing with pro bowl caliber players like Thomas, Mack, and Steinbach, as well as young players with promise like Lauvao and Jason Pinkston. An added bonus would be bringing back Hillis who has to be a lineman's dream, because of the way he runs, and how he doesn't need time to juke and dance behind you.
Other than that I would really only explore lesser known names at WR and DE. Guys who could blossom into good players, and at the worst, add some kind depth.
As far as the draft goes, my dream scenario would be to try and con St. Louis into thinking they need our pick to grab Kalil or Blackmon (I imagine one will be gone at #3). We switch spots, move back to 6, get an extra 2, maybe take a look
I think if you can get the OL back on track, get Steiny healthy, and have Hillis or Richardson in the backfield, I think Colt can be good. He was actually pretty ok when we had a run game. Remember way back when?
Quote:
Quote:
Even if Blackmon is better than Jones (which is an arguable point), how much better is he? Not that much better if you ask me (which no one did). So why would Heckert draft Blackmon 4th when he didn't want to draft Jones 6th? (Not a question directed at you, although you are welcome to answer, but to everyone.)
because there might not be a team willing to give us the same bounty that Atlanta did last year?
Exactly. You can't compare last years draft to this years draft in this fashion... If you have the #4 pick in the draft then you take approximately the 4th best player in the draft, whether he is better or worse than the 4th best player in LAST YEARS draft is totally irrelevant.
For all we know, Heck might have had Jones's name penciled in on a piece of paper waiting to see if a deal got done, which it did.. could very well do the same thing this year.. pencil in Blackmon and then wait to see if somebody gives us a trade offer that we think has more value... If it comes, great, if it doesn't send up the paper..
Quote:
Wait, you had Blackmon over A.J. Green?
(On a side note, Robert Woods is very good. His current USC teammate and former high school teammate Marqise Lee might be even better.)
Yep... I think he's a game changer. He's got that football "it" factor...imho
Quote:
He didn't say he didn't make it, just that it was crazy.
Maybe he made it, then sat back and thought, "damn, that's crazy".
Wrong.. he was talking about the rumors about what the Browns were supposedly offering, and he said that "its crazy"
and if you read the post you responded to, I am essentially acknowledging that we made an offer,,
Quote:
I didn't want to make it its own thread, but here's what I'd like to see us do.
As much as some disagree, I think we're going to stick with Colt McCoy, and although it's not my favorite thing, I think I will be ok with it. You lost out on RG3. Grabbing Flynn would be overpaying, and I honestly don't think Flynn is much of an upgrade over what we have. I think Tannehill is only viable if you can trade back and fall in the perfect position. Pick 4 is too high, and the way quarterbacks are falling off the board, you may have to go 4 to get him. I think anything else they try and do at QB is chasing. If you don't know what chasing is, it's term us gamblers use. It's when you lose one bet, then go and make another to make up for the initial one you lost. You end up worse off then you did after your first wager. I think that's potentially what the Browns would be doing if they throw a giant bag of money at Matt Flynn or draft Tannehill with that first pick. Unless you had those guys that highly rated before you lost out on RG3, stick to your plan. There is no guarantee you aren't a 4-12 team if you grab Tannehill or Flynn anyway.
I know big time spending isn't on our radar, but I would love for them to pursue Winston, the tackle that was just released by Houston. Sell him on playing with pro bowl caliber players like Thomas, Mack, and Steinbach, as well as young players with promise like Lauvao and Jason Pinkston. An added bonus would be bringing back Hillis who has to be a lineman's dream, because of the way he runs, and how he doesn't need time to juke and dance behind you.
Other than that I would really only explore lesser known names at WR and DE. Guys who could blossom into good players, and at the worst, add some kind depth.
As far as the draft goes, my dream scenario would be to try and con St. Louis into thinking they need our pick to grab Kalil or Blackmon (I imagine one will be gone at #3). We switch spots, move back to 6, get an extra 2, maybe take a look
I think if you can get the OL back on track, get Steiny healthy, and have Hillis or Richardson in the backfield, I think Colt can be good. He was actually pretty ok when we had a run game. Remember way back when?
Spoke to soon. So much for hoping for a healthy Steinbach.
I'm with the Browns on this building plan but even the blind faith fans have to hate this move. The left side of the line was so solid, all reports were that Steinbach was 100% back. It was a money issue and I hate that.
Quote:
Quote:
He didn't say he didn't make it, just that it was crazy.
Maybe he made it, then sat back and thought, "damn, that's crazy".
Wrong.. he was talking about the rumors about what the Browns were supposedly offering, and he said that "its crazy"
and if you read the post you responded to, I am essentially acknowledging that we made an offer,,
What he meant was "It's crazy that anyone thinks that we could get the pick for as little as has been rumored ......."
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
He didn't say he didn't make it, just that it was crazy.
Maybe he made it, then sat back and thought, "damn, that's crazy".
Wrong.. he was talking about the rumors about what the Browns were supposedly offering, and he said that "its crazy"
and if you read the post you responded to, I am essentially acknowledging that we made an offer,,
What he meant was "It's crazy that anyone thinks that we could get the pick for as little as has been rumored ......."
LOL Believe as you wish my friend..
Well, as it turned out, we couldn't get the pick for as little as was rumored ...... so I'd say it's a pretty good guess ...... much better than yours.
Quote:
I'm with the Browns on this building plan but even the blind faith fans have to hate this move. The left side of the line was so solid, all reports were that Steinbach was 100% back. It was a money issue and I hate that.
I was under the impression that many people on this board expected the move.
I know that I sure did. Steinbach has been a great guard for us. I wish him well. But I'm fine with Pinkston at LG next year. Our guards are young, affordable, and the position we really need to focus on (on the O-Line) is RT.
Quote:
Well, as it turned out, we couldn't get the pick for as little as was rumored ...... so I'd say it's a pretty good guess ...... much better than yours.
We were RUMORED to have offered as much as 3 first round picks.. there was even one rumor saying we were offering our two 1st rounders this year, our 1st next year and our 3rd and 4th next year. (never thought that was real,,but a rumor just the same.
Bottom line, the only way the Redskins will be able to win is with Free Agents which as you can see, they are doing.
Two schools of thought as to how to build a team
1. Build through the draft, control your CAP, build for the long haul
2. Build using FAs. Lose your mind trying to deal with your cap, can't keep the team together very long because sooner or later, the high salaries will kill ya.
Apparently you subscribe to the latter... I do not, thus the reason for the conflict between us..
Geesh, I was just yanking your chain a little.
Anyway .... I subscribe to the theory that you don't win a damn thing as far as Super Bowls in today's NFL without a great QB.
I further subscribe to the theory, backed with with significant evidence, that we do not have one.
However, that's all well established, and if I continue someone will check in with condescending remarks and downright hateful comments ...... and I simply don't feel like putting up with that right now. I'm going to be happy with life in general ....... miserable with the Browns (just like almost every year) ...... and hope that my back gets somewhat better.
Why is the media forcing a QB on us?
Now that reports are out that we are not interested in Flynn.. they are saying we are going to take Tannehill at 4.. what in the world??
Quote:
Why is the media forcing a QB on us?
Now that reports are out that we are not interested in Flynn.. they are saying we are going to take Tannehill at 4.. what in the world??
The media is ridiculous but I feel their pain. It's gotta be tough to cover Colt McCoy and that offense (as it stands)
I want a QB as much as anyone, but Tannehill at 4 is laughable. The Browns aren't going to get duped into panicking.
Also, It seems like the media wants a QB because they don't want 4-12, but how does grabbing Tannehill in the draft or even if we had RG3 guarantee we get more than that. Blaine Gabbert anyone? Christian Ponder?
I just think that we are this far along, that there is no reason to panic and grab a QB just to grab one. I only want Tannehill if the Browns were high on him well before RG3 went off the board.
The only thing that is really important is that, I was right and Ytown was wrong. we didnt get RG3. :P lol I was also right about not going after flynn. So excuse me while i give myself two pats on the back.
Now back to Pick #4. Trade down, Tannehill, Claiborne and the longer shot Blackmon. I been saying for months we would draft Tannehill and it is looking even more like that will happen but never know. No Griffin, No flynn they are gonna draft Tannehill and groom him for the starting role but Colt will have to go out and beat him in camp.
Lombardi btw on path to the draft NFL network (watching now) is now saying the browns made a very luke warm offer towards trading up for Griffin.
Quote:
Why is the media forcing a QB on us?
Now that reports are out that we are not interested in Flynn.. they are saying we are going to take Tannehill at 4.. what in the world??
Because they have eyes and saw how the QB played last year, without benefit of orange and brown colored glasses?
I still hope that we don't make a panic pick like Tannehill at 4. We need sure fire great player at that position, not a questionable talent who might not even be ready to see the field for a couple of years.
Good for you man. I too am getting tired of mocking comments and people sticking to the idea we didn't make a competitive offer to the Rams.
A few years ago I had the energy to take it on. Now I don't.
People can be thrilled as heck with plan B and plan C. I'm not.
Quote:
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
I don't believe that simply because in this "good 'ole boy" network that is the NFL once word gets out about a move like that and nobody will ever want to deal with you again.
That's an awful high price to pay for an extra mid-round pick.
I just don't believe it works that way. I'm sure there's a lot of "car salesmanship" going on at all times, but I don't think lying like that gets good reviews from their peers.
Quote:
Quote:
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
I don't believe that simply because in this "good 'ole boy" network that is the NFL once word gets out about a move like that and nobody will ever want to deal with you again.
That's an awful high price to pay for an extra mid-round pick.
I just don't believe it works that way. I'm sure there's a lot of "car salesmanship" going on at all times, but I don't think lying like that gets good reviews from their peers.
Exactly, but some people don't get it or have ZERO ethics. There was no lying, and if there was and Heck didn't protest, he's a punk.
Quote:
what I don't get is how our #4 and #22 this year and first next year isn't better than what the 'Skins gave up.
If we offered what you suggest and the Redskins offered what they did, then I can answer this.
In terms of draft position, 6 > 22 and 39 > null.
As for me, I'm glad that we didn't win the RG3 debacle.
Quote:
People can be thrilled as heck with plan B and plan C. I'm not.
What exactly do you suggest Plans A, B, & C have been?
It's obvious plan A was RGIII. The others, I have no clue since I am not sure the goofs in Berea know what plan B is.
Why was RG3 obviously Plan A?
I don't get that sense at all.
Does anyone think Decastro will last to #22?
Quote:
Does anyone think Decastro will last to #22?
No.
And I don't think we'd take a G in the 1st round anyways...
But if he did, I'd love to call up an OL hungry team and get a 1st next year...
Quote:
There was no lying, and if there was and Heck didn't protest, he's a punk.
His protest doesn't have to be public. Just so the right people get informed is enough.
peen, I don't know what went down. No one does and we're likely to never find out unless ten years from now someone writes a tell-all book that includes this chapter.
I don't even care what happened. We did or didn't go after RGlll. We didn't get him for whatever reason. Time to move one from that in my opinion.
It will take a couple more years and by that time we'll see if this "build through the draft" and "not make big splashes to impress the fan base" philosophy proves out.
Until then we all have the right to our own opinions. You, me, everybody.
My main opinion is that this is going to work. At the very least I'm willing to let it play out. Taking our time and building a team is one philosophy we've yet to try.
We have more than a couple of successful members of this team's FO and staff and they all seem to be on board with this method. Now that Shurmur has a year behind him we have 4 head coaches on the staff and Holmgren's another one. Then we have Heckert who was with a team that went to 3 Championship games (just like the Kosar era Browns) and a Superbowl. They have to know something about how it works.
They are not idiots.
Quote:
Quote:
Its entirely possible that we never even tried to get him, and our name was used to get a killer offer from the skins.
I don't believe that simply because in this "good 'ole boy" network that is the NFL once word gets out about a move like that and nobody will ever want to deal with you again.
That's an awful high price to pay for an extra mid-round pick.
I just don't believe it works that way. I'm sure there's a lot of "car salesmanship" going on at all times, but I don't think lying like that gets good reviews from their peers.
The fact of the matter remains that RGIII was in high demand. Our name was out there. So were the names of other teams. I can guarantee that the rams did nothing to dissuade anyone either.
Its about one thing to these guys....bettering your team so you can win. I don't think anyone would fault anyone for their demands for a trade.
The rams don't have to trade their pick...its theirs...they have the right to pick 2nd in the draft. They don't have to do anything. The only thing they did do is to say that they were willing to entertain a trade. They don't have to accept it...they wanted to hear offers.
It doesn't have anything to do with any good ole boy network either. Nobody made the skins offer those picks....they did it themselves.
RGII is the hot commodity with luck all but gone to the colts.
A bunch of teams need a qb...the media does a fine job with the hype....the draft guru's spend all day speculating who will go where.
Maybe we did make an offer...maybe we didn't....I can guarantee that if we did, that they will never admit it. Thats bad business. Its all but saying that you have no faith in the guy you will be starting.
We could have simply called and asked what type of picks they were looking for. The rams might have responded with something, or they might have said make an offer. Why say what you are looking for when for all you know the buyer might offer you more?
Its entirely possible that us doing our "due diligence" and inquiring is the reason that we can say nothing to refute it. Maybe we made a great offer, and the skins said they would better it, but its off the table unless its a done deal now....meaning no going back to the browns for more.
I can see your point if they out and out lied, but i doubt it came to that. Even if it did, if a trade with that team in the future benefits your team, you are still gonna pick up the phone....trades benefit both teams.
The skins wanted RGIII bad...they seem to want everyone bad, and spend like fools to get it...must be something in the water over there near D.C.
My point is that our name was out there...along with other teams...the rams had to do nothing but say, "we are going to take the best offer we get....and we expect some other teams to make offers" The skins could have asked if any other teams inquired about the pick. They could have responded that the browns called. Not that we made an offer....just called...
Now the price is set for the skins...they are in essence bidding against themselves...with time against them, for fear of someone else getting what they want.
I have no doubt that the rams wanted to move fast before the start of free agency too. Every team that gets a qb in free agency is one less that needed to trade. I'll bet they made that clear.
So the skins throw out a crazy deal, and the rams jump on it.
Quote:
Exactly, but some people don't get it or have ZERO ethics. There was no lying, and if there was and Heck didn't protest, he's a punk.
I don't get it? But you do? I see...
You don't know any more than me when it comes to what goes on behind closed doors in the nfl. I'll tell you what....you can handle it. Feel free to be as bent out of shape as you want...
Have fun running the show...i could care less....I have no ethics too evidently.
Was there an out and out lie? I doubt it. There didn't need to be. There was demand for RGIII. All it takes is the perception of bidders. They could have said a ton of things without lying outright. Omission. Speculating. Saying they believe that a lot of teams are going to make offers. Saying they are going to act fast. Saying the browns did inquire. Saying they believe that the browns will make an offer.
I can guarantee that the skins "thought" that the browns were gonna make an offer. And nothing was gonna stand in the way of them getting what they wanted. If anything the rams were thrilled to have a team calling that are the kings of "i want it now".
Who cares? The browns aren't gonna call anyone out. You think heckert is a punk cause he didn't protest on national tv? What would be the point?
What's to protest? This is insane....honestly it really is.
The browns didn't get who you wanted. Get over it.
That don't make heckert a punk, and it doesn't make this front office stupid either.
Quote:
People can be thrilled as heck with plan B and plan C. I'm not.
That's because you're ASSUMING RG3 was our plan A. Maybe we liked him compared to the other QBs in the draft not named Luck so we made a passing attempt...but we weren't THAT enamored with him? It's possible ya know? Our offer has never been "officially" reported anywhere.
Personally I'm ECSTATIC he won't end up being our "plan A". If he WAS I'd have a lot less faith in this FO than I do now.
I swear half the people on this board are acting like the spoiled kid at Christmas who didn't get the toy they wanted over this RG3 thing. It's legit crazy.
Colt McCoy is a solid backup caliber QB in the NFL. Will we ever win a super bowl with him? My opinion is absolutely not. That being said, I only see 2 QBs in this draft who have the CHANCE to change that answer to a yes. Andrew Luck and Ryan Tannehill. We aren't getting Luck unfortunately (though I'd have traded our entire draft for him). We may or may not get Tannehill. Either way I think Colt is our starter for 1 more year. It sucks but it is what it is. I'd much rather have Colt for another year and build the team around him and/or whomever we might acquire in the future than waste all our picks on RG3.
Quote:
Do we need a wide receiver? Yes. Should we reach for one just because he is the best wide receiver available? No.
I agree with this.
Quote:
If Blackmon was in last year's draft would you have drafted him ahead of A.J. Green or Julio Jones?
Ahead of Green is a toss up. Maybe. For our style I like Blackmon's fit better honestly. Ahead of Jones? Yes absolutely.
I don't see drafting Blackmon at #4 as a need based "reach" because I think he IS a #1 worthy NFL WR.
All that being said, any WR is only as good as his QB. So even if we draft Blackmon at #4 and end up rolling with McCoy for another year I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't put up eye-popping #s as a rookie.
Quote:
It's obvious plan A was RGIII. The others, I have no clue since I am not sure the goofs in Berea know what plan B is.
I'm sure they are evaluating a lot of options. I'm sure they know we need much better QB play to win consistently.
NRTU but somebody went off on the notion that we had a "small" investment in Colt because he was a 3rd round pick.. they said we also had 2 years invested in him... I would like to know what our other options were during those 2 years?
We could have sold out in 2010 for Bradford and rumor is that we tried... beyond that, Tebow? Clausen?
In 2011 who knows what we would have had to give up for Newton.. or Locker? Ponder? Gabbert? Dalton?
And who has been available in FA over the last couple years? Rex Grossman? Matt Leinart? DA?
The only QB we might have had for a reasonable price that looks like he might be that good is Dalton.... while I guess there is still a chance for Ponder, Locker and Gabbert... and it's not like any of them went into the NFL draft as a sure thing... People act like we don't have a stud QB yet because we don't want one... what other options have we had?
Quote:
and end up rolling with McCoy for another year I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't put up eye-popping #s as a rookie.
Little had 538 yards as a rookie with McCoy throwing him the ball. That is not eye-popping, but it is very respectable for a very raw player who was in his first year in this offense.
Well Blackmon is certainly more polished and talented than Little so I'd expect better numbers than that if we draft him.
All I meant was to be prepared to hear "the sky is falling" and "this guys a bust" and "see we shouldn't have taken this bum" when he doesn't put up 1000 yards and 10 TD's his rookie year with Colt Frye throwing him the football.
Actually I thought that Little had a decent year. I was very critical of the pick, and did not like drafting a player who got thrown off his team for breaking the rules, and who sat out a year. He proved me wrong to an extent, and I hope that continues.
No news on the Ben Tate front? Last I heard we were at a third rd pick.
If we get him, Tannehill will be the pick. Best
WR@22. Wont make alot of folks happy but I'm feeling strong thats their guy. I also think there'll be calls to us from others wanting the guy.
Quote:
NRTU but somebody went off on the notion that we had a "small" investment in Colt because he was a 3rd round pick.. they said we also had 2 years invested in him... I would like to know what our other options were during those 2 years?
We could have sold out in 2010 for Bradford and rumor is that we tried... beyond that, Tebow? Clausen?
In 2011 who knows what we would have had to give up for Newton.. or Locker? Ponder? Gabbert? Dalton?
And who has been available in FA over the last couple years? Rex Grossman? Matt Leinart? DA?
The only QB we might have had for a reasonable price that looks like he might be that good is Dalton.... while I guess there is still a chance for Ponder, Locker and Gabbert... and it's not like any of them went into the NFL draft as a sure thing... People act like we don't have a stud QB yet because we don't want one... what other options have we had?
These are great points, DC. When you look at it objectively like this, there really aren't a whole lot of things the Browns could have done differently. It could very well be that the Browns thought highly of Luck and RGIII. It seems they made a play for RGIII, but didn't get the pick. That doesn't mean they don't already have their eye on someone else in this draft (Tannehill/Weeden) or next. I'd rather they get the right QB than just get a QB.
Quote:
It seems they made a play for RGIII
...Do you have any evidence to back up this statement?
Quote:
...Do you have any evidence to back up this statement?
No, and I'm not getting into one of the many peeing matches over it, either. I said "seems", I didn't say it was a fact. If that's all you got out of my post, oh well.
Quote:
Quote:
...Do you have any evidence to back up this statement?
No, and I'm not getting into one of the many peeing matches over it, either. I said "seems", I didn't say it was a fact. If that's all you got out of my post, oh well.
I know... That's why I was mocking them... 
Quote:
I know... That's why I was mocking them...
Oops! My bad! The funny thing is, while saying I wasn't getting into a peeing match, I almost got into one!
Was talking about it in the other thread but all the signs point to Tannehill. I realy think the best value at 22 in Heckert's eyes will be Cordy Glenn or one of those corners Gilmore, Jenkins or Kirkpatrick.
Best value at 37 is definitely receivers. Alshon Jeffery and Sanu are steals here.
If we could get that quality RT in free agency, it would really change things.
Seriously Mourg, we all know you have an unhealthy infatuation with Tannehill, but there is no way we take him at #4. Heckert/Holmgren simply do not reach in the draft and the ONLY reason Tannehill could even be considered at 4 is due to a QB shortage, not talent (he isn't a #4 talent). Perhaps if we trade back we might take him, but at 4 there is no way (we likely go Claiborne/Richardson/Blackmon). The only "signs' pointing to us taking Tannehill at #4 are people speculating that because we bid on RGIII (and lost) and because Colt isn't likely a long term answer, that we will automatically take the next QB in line. That isn't how Heckert and Holmgren operate (thankfully). For as many holes/needs as we have, we don't have the luxury of reaching on a project with the #4 pick.
A good post,very concise.
One question,nevermind.After a reread I figured it out.
I agree that Mourg is overstating things a bit. But, we could follow in the strange steps of JAX, Tenn, and Minny last year and over-draft our QB.
I think it will depend on what Miami does if we consider him at #4. If they sign Flynn, then who might draft Tannehill before #22?
Buffalo - possible, but Fitz is making good money and I think they'd try to make it work with him.
KC - again, Cassel is making good money. I think a better chance than Buffalo at drafting Tannehill though.
Seattle - well, Pete Carroll has tried bringing in a QB each year. and they run a WCO. so, it's definitely possible.
If the guy is a success is it over drafting? Mo, Richardson or Blackmon would make me happy but I really think the scramble is gonna be on for Tannehill.
I think we sit pretty right now since the three mentioned above will should be on the board. Good trade op.
I think that our best chance that Tannehill could fall to 22 is if Seattle signs Flynn and Miami signs Manning.
After that I think we might be looking at Drafting Weeden or another later.
Quote:
NRTU but somebody went off on the notion that we had a "small" investment in Colt because he was a 3rd round pick.. they said we also had 2 years invested in him... I would like to know what our other options were during those 2 years?
Never calling Jason Campbell an all-pro, He sure as Hell is better than McCoy, and with Campbell as the seat-warmer, which is what I always envisioned him being, we could have taken several guys who have more tools than McCoy in 2011.
Maybe Orton was available? I don't recall his situation in 2010.
The Vikings seem to be in love with Joe Webb.
There may have been other QB's around as well.
Hasselbeck was available this past year, and looked damned good against us.
Maybe Flynn was available. How about some of the "up and comers" from other teams? Holmgren made nobodies into somebodies at his other stops. He may have been able to do that here.
What would Kolb have done here? Or even Skelton?
The tough part about playing "what if" revolves around having no idea how well a guy would have done in one spot if an event in time did or did not happen.
IF Jason Campbell doesn't have his collarbone broken, the Raiders don't trade a 1st AND a second to the Bengals for Palmer who wouldn't be traded. Or would he? Can't say for sure.
So here's what we KNOW: McCoy cost us a 3rd round pick and two years invested. It's Homgren's job to get a QB. He picked McCoy, and he failed. Is it an easy job? Nope, but he's getting BIG money to sit in the BIG-BOY chair.
Holmgren is supposed to be the QB guru. It's his job to get a good guy. He didn't. He failed. The Browns don't have a QB because of it. They know it. They've tried to get RG3. They will try to get someone else. If they can't, they'll again have failed. The difficulty of it becomes an excuse, not a reason.
The thing is...
As far as I know (correct me if I am wrong) Holmgren has never GOTTEN the guy...
He wasn't the GM in GB when they traded for Favre and drafted guys like Brunell and Hasselbeck...
He was the guy who brought Hasselbeck to Seattle, yes.
I think alot of people have put alot of stock into Holmgren as this guy who can shap QBs into HOFers...
When maybe, he's just been around ALOT of REALLY GOOD Quarterbacks...
I'm not saying he isn't a good HC... But I've never been too sure about him as a FO guy...
He's been decidedly mediocre in that role.
Quote:
Was talking about it in the other thread but all the signs point to Tannehill. I realy think the best value at 22 in Heckert's eyes will be Cordy Glenn or one of those corners Gilmore, Jenkins or Kirkpatrick.
Best value at 37 is definitely receivers. Alshon Jeffery and Sanu are steals here.
If we could get that quality RT in free agency, it would really change things.
Ashlon Jeffery is someone I don't want at all, not even later rounds
bottom line is, QB, WR, RB, if they don't fill at least 2 of those with the first 3 picks, then What is going on?
It can't be about best player available anymore because the offense on the Browns is so subpar. 
I know Ingram, (defender) or Upshaw, (defender) are better " best player availables" than what I think they should get, ... except for LaMichael James.
I just don't want to see the Browns pass on lamichael james in the 1st round and go on to watch him score 14 td's a year for someone else.
Obviously, Blackmon is the best receiver in this draft, but the receivers behind him that could help the Browns, there's like 10 of them, if not 15, geesh, its crazy.
LaMichael James is a special player, I definetly think he's better than Trent Richardson, ( well any doubts I'd have were eaten up by seeing the Browns not get lashwan McCoy when so many were touting him and then seeing the stat line as he ran up all those touchdowns.
This Offense is lacking Playmakers, PERIOD It is easily the first, second, and third problem with the Browns losing all of their division games.
I know Tannehill can get the ball out in the flat over the top and to the oppisite sideline with strength and quick release, and that alone makes him better than McCoy.
That alone is something missing in Cleveland since at least DA .
What I really don't understand is the " were not interested in Flynn" comment.
I think you have to get the Quarterback, with the first overall pick. It's nobody's fault except that the Browns just don't have a quarterback who can win games, period.
Whether it's Tannehill, or Wheeden, or Ryan Lindley, or other , I don't know but I think you have to make sure that Colt McCoy is not the only option.
I don't care WHO you surround McCoy with, he just can't get the ball there.
The Quarterback touches the ball every play.
I really want to see what LaMichael James would, do to electrify this Browns offense. Bottom line is somebody's gonna suit this guy up and if he's scoring som many touchdowns.
Just look at it, He's a game changer, defenses have to watch out for him.
Sure I want to seee Justin Blackmon, not everybody , not every team gets that " great" wide receiver, but the pick would be wasted here if it meant sticking it out with mcCoy. Mccoy is not any better than Jeff Blake was and Blake couldn't win with 2 really good and experienced Wideouts, Darnay Scott and Carl Pickens.
There's a small chance your going to get a sleeper at WR sllide to pick 37 ,
Wheter Sanu, or Flloyd, or Wright, or if they like this Stephen Hill, or Reuben Randall., or even Nick toon or DeVier Posey in later rounds.
Or McNutt or that guy from Applachian state, or Others!
Hey a week ago, Cambpell, Orton, Flynn and RG3 were on the table, now they are off the table. So the Qb commodity stock price has risen.
So they have to get a Quarterback. NOt to be reactionary, but they have to get a Quarterback.
Not to be reactionary but they HAVE to get a quarterback.
Colt McCoy is not a top 40 Qb in the league anymore. Not after this next group of kids enter.
They can get the Offensive lineman in the later rounds,
They have no business using the top 3 picks in this draft on anything other than offensive skilled positions. There is just too much need.
Ben Watson cannot lead the team in receptions again. They have to find replacements for the Rod Windsors of the regular season roster spot.
A team with this makup of a roster has no business looking to draft offensive linemen in the top 3 rounds. or top 3 picks
NO MORE, Jordan Camerons, and Owen Marecic's, they have to take a chance, take multiple chances to get someone who can actually Score Points.
The NFL gives teams draft picks for a reason. So we don't have to watch them franchise tag a Kicker. 
Such a great defensive effort wasted last year because of such a TERRIBLE offense. 
They got , Cozy Colman, Ryan Tucker, Jon Greco, Ross Verba, and many other offensive linemen from places Outside of the draft.
They can't get anyone to come to cleveland as an offensive skilled position player outside of the draft, so they better start using them on them.
They have no Business using a 3rd on an also ran Rb in a trade.
Wow Toad, we finally agree on something.
Quote:
and the ONLY reason Tannehill could even be considered at 4 is due to a QB shortage, not talent (he isn't a #4 talent). Perhaps if we trade back we might take him, but at 4 there is no way (we likely go Claiborne/Richardson/Blackmon). The only "signs' pointing to us taking Tannehill at #4 are people speculating that because we bid on RGIII (and lost) and because Colt isn't likely a long term answer, that we will automatically take the next QB in line. That isn't how Heckert and Holmgren operate (thankfully).
Well if you consider the situation when they drafted Haden, Ward and Asante,
or the situation where they created a lack of abiltiy to field a defensive line, and they drafted Phil Taylor and Jabal Sheard. I'd say that Might Be how they operate.
Quote:
Hasselbeck was available this past year, and looked damned good against us.
I'm beginning to think that Hasselback or Kolb will be on the market soon. One of these two guys could very well be picked up to come here.
If this is Hasselback, I'll be especially pleased. And that's how I see it happening.
Titans get Peyton Manning, release Matt Hasselback and he comes to the Browns.
I have no issue with this at all either.
Ok, I misunderstood the argument then. I was talking about getting a really good QB and you are talking about getting somebody who may have been, hypothetically, marginally better than McCoy for a year or two.. my bad.
But if the Vikes are so in love with Webb, why did they make a reach for Ponder the next year?
When was Matt Flynn available?
Quote:
What would Kolb have done here? Or even Skelton?
Well, they played for a team with a good TE, a legit #1 WR, a decent running back and both put up numbers that are only marginally better than McCoys in a division with 1 good defense.. I'm guessing they wouldn't have done all that well here either.
Quote:
Holmgren is supposed to be the QB guru. It's his job to get a good guy. He didn't. He failed. The Browns don't have a QB because of it. They know it. They've tried to get RG3. They will try to get someone else. If they can't, they'll again have failed. The difficulty of it becomes an excuse, not a reason.
The QB guru is about identifying a quality QB, not acquiring the pick. That's the job of a QM guru.
Quote:
Ok, I misunderstood the argument then. I was talking about getting a really good QB and you are talking about getting somebody who may have been, hypothetically, marginally better than McCoy for a year or two.. my bad.
Maybe you did, maybe you didn't. I interjected into the middle of a conversation, and to be honest man, I was slightly confused by what you'd written. I didn't get the correlation between a "small" investment in McCoy and the "two year investment" comment. So I went with what I thought was the flow.
Gotta love the loss of understanding when you can't look a person in the eye, hear his voice inflections, and read facial expressions. Lost in translation.
Quote:
But if the Vikes are so in love with Webb, why did they make a reach for Ponder the next year?
They did just place a 2nd round tender on Webb, which would indicate they believe he has a chance.
Quote:
Well, they played for a team with a good TE, a legit #1 WR, a decent running back and both put up numbers that are only marginally better than McCoys in a division with 1 good defense.. I'm guessing they wouldn't have done all that well here either.
Maybe...but maybe not. Maybe things would have clicked. We just don't know, which is why I said playing the game of "what if" becomes so dicey.
What if Steve Young never got traded to the Niners? What if the Rams didn't take a flier on some grocery bagger? Predicting the what-if's can't be done with certainty. We can only judge based on what's actually happened, and to that end, we can't give Holmgren a pass because it's not an easy job. He's got like $10 million reasons why he's expected to succeed.
OldColdDawg...that must mean there's trouble on the horizon!
Quote:
Quote:
Holmgren is supposed to be the QB guru. It's his job to get a good guy. He didn't. He failed. The Browns don't have a QB because of it. They know it. They've tried to get RG3. They will try to get someone else. If they can't, they'll again have failed. The difficulty of it becomes an excuse, not a reason.
The QB guru is about identifying a quality QB, not acquiring the pick. That's the job of a QM guru.
Correct you are...right up until the point when he walks into the room and tells the GM he's playing the trump card and orders him to take a QB.
Don't you also think it's funny that it's Holmgren, and not Heckert, who is so emphatically PO'ed and talking about the offer made?
I don't believe for one moment than Heckert made the decision of how much to offer for Griffin. And you know what, 'Dub? Deep down, I don't think you do either.
No doubt it was Homie making the call, but seriously man, Heck wasn't talking because he can't. If a Orangutan who can supposedly finger sign is in the room, Heck is going to defer to the better communicator.
Quote:
No doubt it was Homie making the call, but seriously man, Heck wasn't talking because he can't. If an Orangutan who can supposedly finger sign is in the room, Heck is going to defer to the better communicator.
That's so cold! Man, I missed something, where did he go so bad in an interview, maybe he was distracted, not really important anyway,
if he gets us a Qb and a Wr, things will be looking up, hopefully.
Quote:
It's not a matter of them doing well, they would.
Part of it is keeping them happy, and you can't pay LT money to your RT, and if the guy is a legit LT, he will want to be paid as one. No??
That's it....I want a Ox at RT.....but one quick enough to pass block in most cases..
Well said Ballpeen! Typically, you want a RT that can run block like a John Deere tractor; but today he has to have the athletic feet to pass protect too.
This is a time of year we talk ceilings about complete strangers showing up in mock draft consensuses everywhere. Kalil played OT at 295 pounds and there's varying reports he weighs anywhere between 295 and 308. I don't see an Orlando Pace here that could most likely excel on either side you put him on if need be. I see a kid that probably needs to play Left Tackle and face the best edge rushers an opponent has. Maybe I'm being unfair looking at the frame or maybe a draft guru will argue I don't have the first clue. Ok. I just wonder what makes Kalil the answer to all our prayers at RT up at #4 overall that other RTs can't offer us later in round 1 or even round 2?
I just bought Pro Football Weekly's 2012 Draft Guide. The good news is they seem to think Offensive Tackle is a strong position in this draft giving it a B+. They separate RT and LT and the first RT listed is Cal's Mitchell Schwartz at 6'5" and 320 pounds projected for round 2. BYU's Matt Reynolds and Auburn's Brandon Mosely are projected for rounds 3-4. They also have some LTs I think can play RT.
I can't wait to bring toughness and tenacity to a position that we've longed for.
You Know if they could find any legitimate option to upgrade the Quarterback position that still allowed keeping the #4 pick, then I have got to think that one Glaring shining, Bright Flashing light, of hope would be if Blackmon was still on the board at #4.
If the Quarterback position wasn't in flux, then the obvious , the only obvious solution, so obvious its in Neon lights, Browns take Blackmon! he'd make all the other receivers on the team better.
Richardson isn't going to make anyone else better, I just believe that, he may get his yards, but he won't make players around him better.
I do have to wonder,
How often, does a draft take place where they go 4 picks in with no players from the defensive side of the ball being selected?
And How often are the Browns in position to take the 1st pass rusher in a college draft?
Quote:
And How often are the Browns in position to take the 1st pass rusher in a college draft?
So you think we should take a player with the fourth pick who may not even be worth the 15th pick?
Quote:
Richardson isn't going to make anyone else better, I just believe that, he may get his yards, but he won't make players around him better.
While a RB may not make players around him better, a good running game that the defense has to respect and game plan for would definitely help open up the passing game which would, in turn, help the running game.
Part of the reason our offense looked better with Colt in his first year was because we actually had a running game with Hillis. Teams had to be aware of Hillis and plan for him. Then the next year when Hillis, (and our running game along with him), went down, (complicated by a new offensive scheme with no rehearsal), so did our offense.
The running game should be the easiest of the two to fix. I don't believe it takes a RB picked at #4 either. Actually, I believe that if Hardesty were were both 100% healthy and 100% convinced of it then we have a decent stable of RB's with he, Jackson and Obie. We could pick a RB in the mid rounds that just could become a diamond in the rough. Many have been mentioned on here.
I feel taking Richardson at #4 would indicate two things: 1) A safe pick and 2) A pick designed to please the fans after the uproar of letting Hillis walk.
I hope this FO never does anything roster-wise to intentionally please the fanbase. I would like the fanbase pleased, don't get me wrong. But I would like that because Heckert picked and/or signed players for the right reasons and they became successful. Not for the purpose of good PR.
All valid points, but besides Hardesty's injury history, I haven't seen anything out of him that shows he has any kind of good speed. I'm not saying he has to be a Chris Johnson burner, but he just seems plodding to me at times (in the 8 minutes of playing time that I've seen from him).
I don't think it really would have anything to do with pleasing the fan base.
There are points for either.
The offense functions as a unit. It rarely can succeed and rely on only one facet (passing or running). Eventually the team you are playing will take away your strength, then its over.
Last year we couldn't pass or run consistently. You can say it was the qb, the recievers, the line, or the lack of running game.
Heck, you can even say it was no offseason, a new scheme, and inexperience across the board.
We suffered from inadequacy in all facets of our game.
We do need a true number one receiver. A guy that can get open by running good routes, and catch the ball. Between the inexperience, and injuries throughout the season, we were in bad shape.
Our running game suffered from injury, and inexperience too. Losing Hillis leaves a void. One could argue that even if he stayed there is a void, because our 1 and 2...and even our 3...have injury issues.
Our qb suffered from inexperience, and was affected by the problems with the running game and receivers. One can argue that he's limited throwing deep. Who knows.
The inexperience and injuries on the line didn't help any of the above.
I can sum up our offense from a "team" point of view. Someone...be it the qb, the line, the recievers, or the runningbacks, was either limited by inexperience or injury, and the result was failed plays.
We could use improvement across the board.
Looking at our pick, from an offensive pick perspective...
qb...luck or RGIII at 4.....neither will be there.
Blackmon...is this guy a true number 1? I've read arguments both ways on this board. If he is...then take him...if he's not, then thats a reach for a need.
Richardson....from what i've read this guy is the best rb to come out in a long time. While we need a receiver, we also need a runningback. In our offense there is alot of checking down. That means the ball in this guys hands in space. This will open up the intermediate passing game. If this guy is the bpa at 4 you pick him, because he is in essence a receiver too...especially in this offense.
With hillis walking i think its the pick. Unless claborne is graded lights out better at his position.
Any way you slice it, we have a choice between, the best receiver, runningback, or corner in the draft.
The Jaguars have Maurice Jones Drew, who is everyhing I'd hope to see out of Trent Richardson, and the 32nd ranked offense last year.
According to them, they want receivers and or a Quarterback to improve, alot of them want to fire their GM, Their roster looks Abysmal, I wouldn't trade it for the Browns roster for nothing. They have no talent.
The Browns have so much talent on this team, it's pathetic they aren't getting at least 7 wins each of the last 4 or 5 years.
The biggest problems are Coach, Quarterback, and becuase of the Quarterback and bad offense, the receivers. I read on here, how someone said the tv commentator said the Browns hadn't run a route downfield all day.
You can bring in Trent Richardson, or Adrian Peterson or Emmit Smith, or Barry Sanders, Whoever you want to put in this backfield. If the Browns don't improve in the verticle passing game, the Rb is going to be catching passes behind the line of scrimmage.
And Any good team in the NFL can stop that.
So what I"m saying is, Sure, RG3, might be a game changer for the Redskins, but in Cleveland he would be a Brady Quinn clone, because they'd ruin him.
Trent Richardson might go to the Bengals, or Vikings, or somewhere and be a really good back, but in Cleveland, he's not going to change the dynamics of this offense.
I hate to say it, but it seems like the opponent is out X'ing and O'ing the Browns week after week, and the Browns can't take advantage of the players they have.
Maybe adding Childress to the mix will help that.
Hillis had a good year, then a bad year, well Lawrence Vickers was around for the good year. Just saying.
They can pick Trent richardson it's just another 1st round pick not invested in the passing game again. We've seen that for years. As much as I want to believe in a good outcome for a Trent Richardson on the Browns, I have difficulty thinking he will be any more than Jamal Lewis was for the Browns in 2009. ( I think it was 09,)
Coaching is fine and we do have talent. #1 need is a QB, #2 RT, #3 RB, #4 FS, #5 OLB, #6 WR
Quote:
Coaching is fine and we do have talent. #1 need is a QB, #2 RT, #3 RB, #4 FS, #5 OLB, #6 WR
Mourg, I like your post and you bring good arguments to the debates here, but I can't believe that you really believe that Cribbs should be a starting WR, because at the end of the year, that's exactly what he was for us.
We haven't had a passing game since 2007 and even that was iffy at best.
We have been one of the easiest teams in the League to defend, because of our lack of a vertical threat in this a passing League. We might have other needs, such as you mentioned, but our receiving threat is almost null and void and we haven't been able to address that deficiency in FA either.
I think that with experience, that we can win games with Colt McCoy, given that we surround him with better talent and weapons then he has had to work with and yes we have no other option then to fill the RT position by either moving Pinkston over or via the Draft, but we already know that we will not go another season banking on Pashoes. Something has to happen there.
Do we need another RB? Yes I believe we should not put all of our eggs into what we currently have ... Do we need to spend a 1st round pick on one? No I don't think that any team does.
Do we need a #1WR and threat? Yes ... Can we fill that void after the 1st round? I have strong doubts that we can find more then the complimentary types that already fill our roster now.
No talent is no talent.
What we need to do is draft the best player available. That's either going to be a receiver, running back, or corner. That's just from who the experts say will be available.
A receiver will surely help our offense. Personally i wanted a veteran receiver...someone who can step right in and not have a learning curve like a rook.
A running-back will help this offense too. We were screwed last year. Our 3rd stringer out right before the season started. A rookie at fullback. Then hillis gets hurt. Then hardesty.
When you have a guy off someones practice squad starting on a few days practice you have problems.
My only point was that if Blackmon doesn't grade out as an elite receiver, and Richardson grades out as an elite running back, then you take the bpa. You don't reach for the receiver.
We need a good running back too.
You seem to think that this offense is stifled because we can't throw deep. You might be right, but I would be more willing to bet that inexperience plays a bigger role than anything.
When this team starts to get manageable down and distance on 2nd and 3rd down consistently, then you will see the results that you want.
Long passes are low percentage throws. We couldn't even complete high percentage throws half the time. Take your pick, poor blocking, bad throws, or dropped passes.
When we are in a position to get the first down consistently with a run up the middle, or a pass into the flat, a quick slant, or an intermediate pass.....then you will see the playaction, or the double move that will get those guys open deep.
When Hillis came back towards the end of the season our offense looked better because we were in better situations.
In this offense you can throw it deep...and you succeed at doing it when the defense doesn't know what to defend....the run or the pass. Inside or outside. Short or intermediate. Helps when the line can block it too. We struggled on some 3 step drops last year...7 step drops would have been a joke.
Defending us consisted of confusing our rookie guards, or going around the RT. Play the run on the way to the qb. Linebackers flood the short to intermediate. Safeties clean up.
Take the bpa whoever it is, and for the love of God....let these kids learn the damn system. All of them....
QB #1 speaks for itself. Top priority until you have an elite or atleast an elite prospect.
#2 RT right now all we have is cousins so that makes it huge. Really huge.
# 3 RB right now hardesty would be our #1
#4 FS it is an empty hole back there. young and hagg ???
#5 OLB Fujita is to slow and Maiva can't tackle
#6 WR We need one but Cribbs improved down the stretch and Mo has actually had time to recover from his concussion as has Norwood. We atleast have something at the position. The other positions listed i consider bare.
I'd rather they stick it out with Ogbonnaya for 2 more years, than stick it out with Colt McCoy for 2 more years.
Why?
well, they got Hillis outside of the draft in a trade. They can't get a Quarterback outside of the draft to save thier life.
They got Reuben Droughns outside of the draft for a year and a half. they can't get a QB outside of the draft to save their life.
Jamal lewis, same thing.
The only RB they got IN the draft was, William Green, or Lee suggs and a few others of little consequence. ( Forgot, Jerome Harrisson)
The only RB they took 1st round was William Green, and though I loved him as a Brown, most on here hated him anyway.
I don't understand the lack of interest in ?" Matt Flynn" or " anyone else?" in this offseason of quarterback musical chairs.
The only way it would make sense, is if the Browns, thought, Flynn was too tall, or too familiar with the WCO offense, and too much of a pocket passer.
And those 3 things are precisely what they NEED to find, so, it doesnt make sense that the Browns weren't interested in any of these Qb's .
Is there really any excuse why the Browns can't throw the ball downfield?
Do we really have to suffer through another year of dump offs?
Can anyone really make an excuse for this team that does not get the ball downfield.?
They have to get a real Quarterback in here, and if there is no other way to do it than to do it by REACHING in the draft, then they have to REACH, they just have to. bottom line.
Well, they can continue to go 4-12 every year. It hasn't stopped them yet.
Quote:
#6 WR We need one but Cribbs improved down the stretch and Mo has actually had time to recover from his concussion as has Norwood. We atleast have something at the position. The other positions listed i consider bare.
When I say that WR is a big need I don't mean the whole group but as a group I don't think we have a #1 and that also effects the others in this group.
Moe has not showed me that he plays with fire and desire on every down and he seems to be out in left field on many plays unless he is the number one option. He is a liability in the running game too and you can't be successful in this league without your (both or all ) WR blocking down field. He has virtually no YAC ability what so ever. I just think that he is a better fit in say a Daboll offense, but not the WCO, but TJMHO.
I don't think that we can take a step forward on offense without a significant play maker from this position and quite frankly I can live with Colt McCoy for another year, without an option for an upgrade there.
RT has to be upgraded by default.
There are other options to RB, not excluding a trade.
LBers and FS can be found in the middle rounds and I would still like to bring in a veteran FA LBer (I don't believe we are finished here) Woodyard is one that I like, because I think that he can be a 3 down LBer.
If we Draft another CB (very likely), then perhaps we can move Brown to FS, killing two birds with one stone.
It comes down to options and BPA.
Justin Blackmon is rated as the #5 prospect by NFL Draftscout, Richardson the #6 and Claiborne #4, so I don't think that Blackmon is a reach at #4.
I know that others here think that, but it's just not true and if you believe in the philosophy of not drafting a RB in the top 10 picks, then it's logical to assume that Blackmon and or Claiborne should be the choice at #4. Given the current state of this Franchise. I think taking Claiborne over Blackmon would be setting this current FO up for a fall from grace and I believe it would be a gutsy (borderline arrogant) call to go defense with that selection.
Quote:
The only way it would make sense, is if the Browns, thought, Flynn was too tall, or too familiar with the WCO offense, and too much of a pocket passer.
Is this an attempt at some sort of quasi-reverse psychology...?
Maybe, like most, they weren't interested in signing a guy who hasn't really shown THAT much, and in the long run, may not be THAT much better than McCoy?
I know the thought of everyone being able to break out their recently put away #10 jerseys was nice... But isn't a viable reason...
Flynn was a fast forward on McCoy, what McCoy is going to end up being some day if he fulfills his entire potential. I think we missed the boat on not signing him, but it's not as big as missing on...others.
Quote:
Flynn was a fast forward on McCoy, what McCoy is going to end up being some day if he fulfills his entire potential. I think we missed the boat on not signing him, but it's not as big as missing on...others.
So if we sit McCoy for 4 years, and then start him after we win the Super Bowl... He'll be good...?
And by YOUR argument, If Flynn is McCoy in the future... Why pay Flynn.. When we already have McCoy?
Because there is no guarantee that McCoy ever fulfills his potential.
Quote:
The only RB they took 1st round was William Green, and though I loved him as a Brown, most on here hated him anyway.
What, exactly, was it that you loved about Green? Was it his lack of production, his incredible absence of dependability, his lack of brains, or his character issues off the field?
He was arrested for drunk driving and drug possession while driving around with only one shoe and one sock on. His fiancée stabbed him in the back. He got ejected from a game for fighting ...... before the game even started.
He also had exactly one decent year, rushing for 887 yards. He never broke 600 yards in any other year. In 568 carries he had only 9 TDs. He averaged only 3.7 yards/carry for his career. (Hillis, by comparison, has 20 TDs ruhing in only 512 carries)
Quote:
I don't understand the lack of interest in ?" Matt Flynn" or " anyone else?" in this offseason of quarterback musical chairs.
Because exchanging crap for crap just gives you a different pile of crap? Maybe McCoy improves a little in his 3rd year. Maybe not. Flynn wasn't highly though of when he came out of college, and now, after 4 years and a couple of games, people want to make him out to be some All Pro, sure fire hit at QB. He wasn't a good QB when he was drafted. he's done nothing since being drafted. Now maybe he's developed via osmosis ..... but I kinda doubt it.