Your top 4? - DawgTalkers.net

Manziel
Bridgewater
Clowney
Gilbert

If you do not need a Franchise QB its a different 4:

1. Bridgewater
2. Manziel
3. Clowney
4a. Robinson
4b. Watkins

Well you said 4 not 5 so did the a. b. thingy...lol

but got them right there neck to neck pending on the team needs.

jmho

Bortals
Bridgewater
Manziel
Sammy

Quote:

4b. Watkins

Can't believe you put a WR at #4, eo...

Good is good.
It all depends on who is gone. Who I'm targeting. But I've talked well of Watkins since his Bowl game. I knew then the kid is special.

Now if #6 Falcons...lol

wanted Watkins bad and trade up to #4 to beat out the Raiders or us for that matter and they gave us their 2nd rounder...Hello #6

Hey Roddy White should be retiring soon and so did Gonzalez and we all know how important WR is to winning championships...

Quote:

...we all know how important WR is to winning championships...

. Certainly not when we can get a good one at #26 or 2nd round...

Quote:

Quote:

...we all know how important WR is to winning championships...

. Certainly not when we can get a good one at #26 or 2nd round...

I agree. It is a deep receiver draft, and we are drafting our #2 receiver. I don't think you want to get your #2 guy with the 4th overall pick. I may not even want to get him with the 26th pick.

1. Teddy Bridgewater
2. Greg Robinson
3. Sammy Watkins
4. Jadeveon Clowney

The only thing worse than not having a franchise QB is wasting a top 5 pick to take a QB who doesn't turn out to be a franchise QB.

The Browns top four (not the same for all teams):

1. Bridgewater
2. Watkins
3. Clowney
4. Bortles

Clowney is a hard case to figure. The NFL environment is much different than college. The player is a highly paid employee. The coaches are paid to get the players to reach their potential. The locker room breeds great peer pressure. If Clowney taps his true potential watch out.

Quote:

and we are drafting our #2 receiver. I don't think you want to get your #2 guy with the 4th overall pick.

Would it make a difference if we draft Watkins with the plan for him to be our #1 Wr and for Gordon to be #2?

j/c

One thing I find to be funny.......

So many people claimed that Gordon would end up screwing up again and being suspended for at least a season or longer.

Now suddenly, he's our #1 guy and we're set at the #1 WR position. I guess time changes everything.

That or maybe the fact that they want a QB SO BADLY they simply have decided to forget mentioning what they felt so strongly about not so long ago.

I think if Bridgewater is gone and Clowney is there, the Browns will have a tough time passing up on him, but it would log jam a unit full of pass rushers.....

1. Teddy Bridgewater
2. Jadeveon Clowney
3. Johnny Manziel
4. Blake Bortles

That's mine as of 10:25a today. I'm sure it will change by noon.

Quote:

That's mine as of 10:25a today. I'm sure it will change by noon.

...and what trouble do you expect Clowney to get into in the next 1-1/2 hours?

Quote:

Quote:

That's mine as of 10:25a today. I'm sure it will change by noon.

...and what trouble do you expect Clowney to get into in the next 1-1/2 hours?

Anything is possible.

But regarding Clowney, I keep thinking would it be worth to draft him if the QBs are gone (or OUR QB is gone), or would trading back be better? He's a talent, no question. But can he take it to the next level or can we cash in while his value is at it's highest...perhaps get a future first rounder to play the franchise QB game in 2015....I know, I know.... No one wants the hear that.

But more or less, I mean my thoughts about Manziel vs Bortles. I flip-flop on them a lot, mainly because I like Bortles' frame and potential upside while sitting behind Hoyer. I also think he did himself a service by throwing at the combine. I think in a combine world where top QBs elect not to throw or do anything really but interview, by Bortles opting to, it shows competitiveness and desire to improve his status. I like that. And I think he earned some extra points IMO.

I've thought about Robinson/Matthews, but I don't see the Browns taking someone at #4 to be the RT....even if it's the heir apparent to Joe Thomas. I think you get a game changer at 4. Filling the RT position doesn't do that for me.

Watkins would fall into that game changer mold, but with the draft class deepest at WR, the #2 can ultimately be found later.

Bortles throwing at the combine may have impressed you, but I doubt it makes a hill of beans to NFL GM's.

There's nothing new about top prospects not throwing at the combine. Now if you're ranked 3rd or 4th in the QB rankings, you may decide to throw at the combine. Which is exactly why I believe Bortles decided to throw there.

The film is what makes or breaks your draft status as a QB. All GM's interested in seeing these QB's throw, will see them all throw. The only thing the combine accomplishes is media and fan exposure to cause a media and fan buzz that doesn't exist in draft rooms.

Quote:

... or would trading back be better?

If our QB is not there at #4, I'm thinking a trade down is best, possibly the best CB (Gilbert?). No further than #8 or #10 though...

I'm really having trouble with my top 4.

And yeah, I meant this as a Browns-perspective top 4...

I think I definitely have Clowney as the #1 guy. I don't know if you factor that in with our needs, but I don't know how you can pass on him either.

After that, I just don't really know. I would probably put Watkins, because I feel the strongest about him being good, and I think QB is tougher to judge from college to NFL... Watkins is going to be special.

Manziel is a risk, but so is Bortles and Bridgewater. None of these guys are sure things. In fact no player is, but I think QB has greater consequences...

1. Clowney
2. Manziel
3. Watkins
4. Bridgewater

1. Bridgewater
2. Bortles
3. Matthews/Robinson
4. Gilbert
5. Watkins

Of course the film is what matters most. And the physical act of throwing is not necessarily what I'm referring to because I don't think he "wow-ed" anyone with his arm strength or accuracy. Nor did he drop the ball.

Teams go to the combine to learn more about the character of a player just as much as confirming certain measurables. By going against the grain and deciding to throw lends to the character of the player and not taking the easy route, I think.

For a top three QB, it's "safe" not to throw. I think Bortles was attempting to stand out as a QB who wants to prove something. I value that. I think teams will as well. Not to the extent that it will skyrocket him to the indisputable #1 pick, but I think it will be a decent piece in the overall puzzle of determining what type of NFL player Bortles will be. Others may not think that way, and that's fine.

Since I do believe he is the 3rd rated QB in this draft, I believe it was certainly his intent to set himself apart from the others.

I just believe that NFL GM's understand the business side of things and the standard operating procedure in terms of top QB's not usually throwing at the combines.

If you believe the media, Bortles has risen up the draft boards a lot since mid way of the season. I certainly don't feel he hurt himself by throwing at the combine. I'm certainly not saying that someone or some consider it a positive. But how much of a positive is anyone's guess.

As far as changing anyone's draft board, I certainly don't feel that type of impact was made.

# 1 Clowney DE

#2 Robinson LT

#3 Matthews LT

#4 Bridgewater QB

BPA not the Browns board .

If I leave out need then
1. Evans
2. Clowney
3. Watkins
4. Jake Mathews
5. ha ha Clinton Dix
6. Anthony Barr
7. Greg Robinson
8. Derek Carr
9. Teddy Bridgewater
10 timmy jerrigan

WOW? Evans #1? No Mack in your top 10? ha ha Clinton Dix in the top 5???? Carr ahead of Bridgewater?

Our lists are far far apart from each other.

Mack isnt in there because, I just havent seen enough of him.

I feel Evans hasnt even scratched the surface of his talent. big fast, fantastic hands and just plays the game violently as a receiver. people ripped manziel for just throwing it up for grabs, I applauded him for being smart enough to give Evans a chance to make a play.

Ha Ha is no joke, lol I think he is very similar to earl thomas. Plays much faster than he timed at the combines. Reacts quickly to whats in front of him and goes after the ball. he is gonna be a good one. I was hoping for him at 26 but i think he will go early.

Carr's big arm is the difference. I worry that Bridgewater just wont be as effective in the cold windy afc north. he puts so much touch on the ball and a lot of air underneath it. If the Browns were a dome team, then he would be #1 on my board.

Carr also throws a very good short to mid range ball and I see the potential for a very good deep ball thrower. I think the same of Bridgewater, good in short to mid and room to grow with the deepball.

1st, you should watch Mack hihglights.

I can definitely see Evans in the top 10. Top 5 is a little high.

I don't see HA HA as the playmaker type safety. I see him as more of a mid to late 2nd kind of guy. With as deep as this draft is … I think that he should go 3rd round. JMO

I don't like much about Carr. I see him as Weeden 2.0 more than anything else.

I was wondering where Mack was too. That guy is a stud. With DQ gone, I would love to get him at 4 if they aren't sold on any QB.

Seriously.

my top 4

Clowney
Robinson
Mathews
a. Watkins
b. Mack

since I only think Browns, and we don't need a WR as a #1..I Move Mack into my top four.

Mack and Jackson play completely different positions. If we want to draft a linebacker to replace Jackson it would C.J. Mosley and he is not worth the 4th overall pick.

Quote:

Quote:

I don't think Mingo is considered a "wasted" pick yet...

And by your point, we've "wasted" picks on QBs before, so does that mean shouldn't take one now?

We invested the #6 pick on a backup. Don't get me wrong, I love Mingo. I think he's fantastic, but I don't see him being anything more than a backup with Sheard and Kruger playing. I just don't see how adding Clowney to this mix will be any better. I love Clowney, but I just don't see it helping us at all.

I don't disagree with you totally but 2 years ago Seattle had Clemmons and Irvin but still upgraded their pass rush by adding Bennett and Avril. You can never have to many players that can get to the QB. If I remember correctly isn't Sheards contract up after this season? That would be one thing to consider. If we draft OLB at 4 we could potentially move Sheard for a 2nd or 3rd.

My top 4 would be:
1. Bridgewater
2. Watkins
3. Trade back
4. Gilbert
5. Robinson

BPA:

Clowney
Mack
Watkins
Robinson

Browns:

Clowney
Watkins
Bridgewater
Robinson

Clowney - even with the concerns of his motivation - has the highest ceiling of anyone in the draft. You can't pass it up. I can't see Houston not taking him, not only do you have JJ Watt to pair him with, you have JJ Watt to kick his a$$ and keep him honest and motivated. . . . . Bridgewater might be going up my board. If I thought Mack could play inside, he might be 3rd or 4th on the list.

Quote:

Quote:

and we are drafting our #2 receiver. I don't think you want to get your #2 guy with the 4th overall pick.

Would it make a difference if we draft Watkins with the plan for him to be our #1 Wr and for Gordon to be #2?

Heck yeah, if Gordon gets suspended the back seat drivers will be yowling that they should have seen it coming. Little and Bess? Whats with the Browns and drive killing receivers that can't catch?

Quote:

Would it make a difference if we draft Watkins with the plan for him to be our #1 Wr and for Gordon to be #2?

Yep...good call...lol

for those who need that justification process. Gordon was only a 2nd round pick so He can be the Number 2...

Maybe they could be 1a and 1b? Question; doesn't the WCO refer to receivers as X, Y, and Z, without reference to which one is considered "better" or more important? Or, why not just have Gordon as what we used to call "Split End" and Watkins can be our "Flanker". In any case, its a really good thing to have two really good WR's.

I know it's just pre-draft talk that will change 50 times before May, but after some of the stuff I've read, I am starting to believe that Jacksonville is serious about Manziel at 3.

I really don't see Houston or St. Louis taking him, I believe it will be the Jags or us.

i think houston might be in for either teddy or clowney, i think more clowney.

st. louis is going with bradford for at least one more year, so they might target Watkins or a OL, probably an OL.

i hope jax takes manziel, cause if teddy is on the board at 4...thats a no brainer, and i would be furious and farmer passes that up.

Ok, see that this was supposed to be a Browns top4, not an overall one. That changes things a bit for me.

(1) Teddy Bridgewater
(2) Johnny Manziel
(3) Sammy Watkins
(4) Greg Robinson

The more I look at Bortles, the more concerned I get about him. He seems like a slightly better version of Jake Locker. Now, that could mean he'll end up being a good QB, but there will be alot of growing pains along the way. And, I don't have Derek Carr as a 1st round QB. So, there's that.

That leaves Sammy Watkins, Greg Robinson (monster RT at #4? people may complain about value, but if Kyle likes Mitchell at LG and we get Geoff for RG, while re-signing Mack, we'd quite possibly have the best OL in the NFL). I tried to consider Evans too but would prefer to trade down if we wanted him (he's about even with Lee for me, so if we traded down and got either, then I'd be happy).

I wouldn't complain about Justin Gilbert (CB, OkieState), but think we could trade down for him too.

My thoughts:

Houston - Trying to decide between Clowney and Bortles

StL - Trade down to 4 to 6 targeting Robinson or Matthews. Possibly Watkins.

Jax - If both available tough choice between Clowney and Bortles. If both gone - ?. They could go with Manziel or Bridgewater. Or one of the OT's

Browns - if it's me deciding, I go Teddy. Without hesitation, regardless of who else is available. If TB is gone I probably look to trade down a few spots. I consider Watkins but probably go Mack. That would likely mean Sheard or Krugar move inside. I also consider Manziel and Bortles if available but not sure that I am sold on either of them. That could change closer to the draft but I doubt that I will do much more evaluation. If Farmer et al like one of these two then I would be happy with the pick because I have seen enough promise to be happy with the pick but haven't seen enough to advocate either.

I have no idea what Farmer is thinking.

I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying. I think Clowney to Houston is going to happen. He's the best prospect in the draft, and I think Bill O'Brien will target a QB in round 2 or some kind of a trade up back into the late first...

I definitely think St. Louis would trade out. They'd probably love a tackle to protect Bradford, but also see the possibility to fatten up. Does anyone at 2 really help them immensely if Clowney is gone? I don't think they go QB either...

you guys need to stop filling my head thinking that Teddy is a possibility.

Quote:

The more I look at Bortles, the more concerned I get about him. He seems like a slightly better version of Jake Locker. Now, that could mean he'll end up being a good QB, but there will be alot of growing pains along the way. And, I don't have Derek Carr as a 1st round QB. So, there's that.

The one thing about Bortles going to us is that I think it would be beneficial for him to sit behind Hoyer. I think he needs a year or at least most of the year to groom in an NFL system... I think the game might be a little fast for him, whereas I think Johnny and Teddy seem like they might be OK out of the gate...

It's easy to fall in love with his vitals, because he's built like Big Ben and Joe Flacco, but so have so many other guys... I've seen a few games of his, and the potential is there, but I think there is a lot of work to do, and I'm not sure if Mike Pettine is the right coach for him...

We will find out a lot about Teddy's league wide value if he doesn't go first overall, because if he is as good as the majority on here thinks, then there should be some heavy bidding for him at #2, especially if the Rams are looking to trade down.

I'm saying this because there are so many QB needy teams picking in the top 10. If Bridgewater is there at 4, it would also mean that half a dozen QB needy teams, for whatever reasons, don't think very highly of him. Keep in mind that we as fans don't have access to some infos GM have, medicals, character, dedication, intelligence etc.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here....if he's there at 4, I'll scream his name along with you guys

, but the draft nerd in me would have some reservations as to why there was no stronger market for him considering the set up of the top 10. You can say one or two GMs missed on him, but half a dozen GMs in need of a QB would make me go "hmm".

That said, prospects like Garoppolo and Murray would fit Shanny's system too and if they have a close enough grade to Teddy because of it, I could see a new and inexpierenced GM like Farmer outsmart himself...he would not be the first or last GM to do so. I especially fear Kuharich whispering in his ear. His Saints needed a QB forever and never picked one high, as far as I remember.

1. Clowney
2. Bridgewater
3. Robinson
4. Watkins

1. Robinson ( cleanest prospect)
2. Clowney ( tremendous upside)
3. Matthews
4. Barr

Quote:

1. Robinson ( cleanest prospect)
2. Clowney ( tremendous upside)
3. Matthews
4. Barr

I like Mack better than Barr. Mack is just one of those guys who produced and produced. He was ALL OVER Ohio State, which was their biggest game. I guess I understand the "upside" aspect of Barr, but Mack is just plain better right now IMO

Quote:

Quote:

1. Robinson ( cleanest prospect)
2. Clowney ( tremendous upside)
3. Matthews
4. Barr

I like Mack better than Barr. Mack is just one of those guys who produced and produced. He was ALL OVER Ohio State, which was their biggest game. I guess I understand the "upside" aspect of Barr, but Mack is just plain better right now IMO

I can see that too.

I don't list any QBs in top four b/c of flaws and bust potential. Watkins could be a top 4 too. Who the Browns select should/ could depend on free agency. I like Jimmy G. at the top of round 2 and if Robinson is sitting at 4 stick him at guard or trade down.
Mack's return in far from a done deal. There better be a center on the board for the 4th round in that case.

Quote:

I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying. I think Clowney to Houston is going to happen. He's the best prospect in the draft, and I think Bill O'Brien will target a QB in round 2 or some kind of a trade up back into the late first...

If we get our QB at #4, I would be OK trading #26 to Houston if we can get their first next year out of it.

Quote:

you guys need to stop filling my head thinking that Teddy is a possibility.

I really think Johnny and/or Teddy will be there at 4. I don't think 2 QB's go before our pick.

The problem is that many, including myself don't see it as an "either and or" scenario.

I would take Teddy in a heartbeat but have come to a firm opinion I wouldn't touch Johnny Football with a ten foot pole at #4.

Quote:

Quote:

Would it make a difference if we draft Watkins with the plan for him to be our #1 Wr and for Gordon to be #2?

Yep...good call...lol for those who need that justification process. Gordon was only a 2nd round pick so He can be the Number 2...

My thought is that if we bring in Sammy, the only one who will be focused on #1 or #2 Wide Receiver will be the opponents and the media. Based on what the opponents do with coverage will determine what we do.

Quote:

The problem is that many, including myself don't see it as an "either and or" scenario.

I would take Teddy in a heartbeat but have come to a firm opinion I wouldn't touch Johnny Football with a ten foot pole at #4.

I love Johnny, but I have questions about him like everyone else...

I just think it's too hard to figure out how a QB will turn out at the next level....

My one question with him is when a team on particular plays is able to take away the scrambling ability, can he sit back there and get the ball where it needs to go?

It's a stupid question, because that's the biggest question of all of these guys. I don't think the demand to do that in a college game is anywhere near what it is in the pros. The guys aren't as wide open, and the pressure is coming bigger and faster... So how can we say if a guy can or can't make those reads?

I do think Johnny could scramble at the NFL level. I think he will be smart enough about getting down early enough to avoid hits.

Manziel doesn't need to be perfect in the pocket, just enough where teams have to respect it. I hope the Browns can figure out if he or any of these other QB's are up for it.

What my biggest concern is deals with his patience in the pocket and going through his progressions. Also his tendency to scramble when it isn't a "need". He also holds the ball away from his body when he scrambles.

I have seen no such concerns with Bridgewater. While he doesn't have a rocket arm, it's plenty strong enough. He does go through his progressions well and has an uncanny ability to feel pressure.

I believe what can be done is to look at what prospects do well that will be necessary requirements of an NFL QB. I believe Bridgewater fits that mold much better than Manziel.

I've simply looked at both their games and I don't even see it as being close between the two. But I don't feel badly towards people who see it differently than I do.

I get a feeling that most of us are holding our cards close to the vest on Johnny Football. Our worst fear is that we all are the smartest guy in the room, and we educate everybody on "pocket presence" "slim frame and taking hard shots" "gunslinger decision making" "loosely handling the ball" etc...

And then the guy ends up being a phenom for Jacksonville, Raiders, etc....

At that point some of us may consider jumping out the 10th story window.

EO is right. The guy is an incredible football player. Who doesn't want someone who trancends the game?

Who knows what the NFL team that gets him is going to get? Nobody.

Very high risk, very high potential reward.

For the Browns I think it should be something like this:

1 - Bridgewater
2 - Clowney
3 - Trade down picking up multiple picks and target C.J. Mosley
4 - Khalil Mack (if no trade partners)

Quote:

We will find out a lot about Teddy's league wide value if he doesn't go first overall, because if he is as good as the majority on here thinks, then there should be some heavy bidding for him at #2, especially if the Rams are looking to trade down.

I get that, but just think back to Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. Heck, we can even throw Tom Brady in there. Why did so many teams pass on all three of those guys?

Size.

We passed on Rodgers for Leon. Jax took Matt Jones. Miami took Ronnie Brown. Detroit took Mike Williams. There were more stupid picks. Rodgers fell to #24.

Drew Brees lasted until the top of the 2nd round. We took Big Money. The Bears took David Terrell. The Rams took Damione Lewis. The list goes on.

We all know about Brady's story.

Why did all three fall? Two were a bit too short. The other was too skinny. Teams are sometimes just as dumb as the fans and the media types.

If Teddy falls, it doesn't mean squat other than that his lack of girth caused him to fall. We drafted Weeden. That was stupid. We traded up for TRich. That was stupid. We passed on guys like Brees, Brady, and Rodgers because they did not possess ideal size.

Let's hope the new FO isn't as stupid as our past leaders.

Yeah, I need more than size as an excuse.

The only bad thing people had to say about Wilson 2 years ago was that he wasn't big enough... Didn't hear too much about his smarts, or his arm strength... I have to admit I got caught up in that too. I watched most of his games at UW... He had everything else.

That's what scares me about Johnny. If we pass on him or just don't do what we have to do to draft him, and he becomes another Wilson, then what? It's Groundhog Day.

I think Johnny comes with a few more ?'s than Wilson did, but I still think he has potential to be great.

Great point about Wilson. Man, I am so mad at myself for never pimping him that year. I watched him at NC State and Wisconsin and always liked him. Stupidly, I dismissed him because of how short he was.

While I like Wilson I wonder what kind of success he would have here. Wilson has a coach that made a system around his strengths and has the benefit of a great run game and a good OL. Something we don't have here. I think if we would have taken him he wouldn't have the same success. I could be wrong though.

IMO we need more of a playmaker at QB. I know you weren't saying we need a Wilson, just making the size comparison but I thought I would throw that out.

I do hate how scouts, media, fans place too much emphasis on measurables and not performance. Bridgewater and Boreland are good examples of guys that could drop because of their size.

Does Wilson have the same success in Cleveland than he does Seattle? No way. We aren't Super Bowl champs with him...

He's good, but he's also part of a great team. If you ask me, I still think Cleveland would be happy with him though. I think he would have done enough to show us that he could be the guy. I don't think he's some result of a system or anything like that.

Agree I don't think Wilson is a product of the system. Just that the coaching staff was able to tailor an offense around him. We have yet to see that here. Seems like we (and a lot of teams) want to change players to fit their system, not change the system to fit the players.

Wasn't trying to knock Wilson if that's how it came across.

A QB's ability to be a franchise NFL QB isn't predicated on what school they went to or what conference they played in. It's about their ability, the system they play in and their supporting cast.

Wilson just fits Seattle perfectly...

They have a strong run game, an elite level defense...

Their WR group is good but not legendary... They ask their QB to buy a little time, and maybe pick up a first down here or there with his feet... It's just a really perfect fit.

I don't know what we're going to ask of our guy, but with Gordon, Cameron around, we don't necessarily need a guy to buy extra time (although it would be nice)

You always need a QB that can buy extra time.. whether he is a threat to run for 40 yards is less important but a guy has to be able to move out of the pocket and have the athleticism to extend plays. You can't count on the next Peyton Manning coming along...

1) Watson
2)Bridgewater
3)Robinson
4)Mathews

1. Watkins
2. Bortles- I think he will make a good NFL QB but I think he'll need a 1-2 year learning curve.
3. Bridgewater
4. Trade ...want nothing to do with Clowney. We have a good, deep DL. Would rather trade the pick, drop down a few spots, and fill a couple needs instead.

Quote:

1. Teddy Bridgewater
2. Johnny Manziel
3. Sammy Watkins
4. Mike Evans

This is what I said two months ago.

Now my top 4 are: Johnny Manziel, Mike Evans, Khalil Mack, Sammy Watkins

Watkins
Mack
Bridgewater
Robinson/Matthews ( the guy that fits best for the offense)

Watkins and Mack most likely carry a higher grade as pure players but I
would take Bridgewater in a heart beat.

Ideally I would like to get both Watkins and Bridgewater. That to me is very possible. Take Watkins at four and come back for Bridgewater say at 19.

The only guy I do not want at four is Manziel. In my mind he is not a first round talent. In addition I am not big on Carr.

1. Manziel
2. Mack
3. Watkins
4. Bortles

This is assuming Clowney is not there, I see no chance in hell he goes past #3, the other guys I could all see being there at 4.

1. Vontae Mack (no matter what)
2. Ray Jennings
3. Bo Callahan (think he's gonna be a bust)
4. Trade Brian Drew and top pick for Ryan Mallet

1. Bortles
2. Mack
3. Clowney
4. Manziel

30. Ted Ginn, whoops I mean Percy Harvin, no it's Tavon Ausin, wait, what's his name? Oh yeah, Sammy Watkins

Quote:

1. Vontae Mack (no matter what)
2. Ray Jennings
3. Bo Callahan (think he's gonna be a bust)
4. Trade Brian Drew and top pick for Ryan Mallet

I wouldn't have Watkins in my top 5.

Is he AJ Green good? No.

Is he Julio Jones good? No.

He'd be the third WR taken in that draft. He is like Santonio Holmes compared to those two guys.

My top 4 for this team would be:

1. Bridgewater
2. Manziel
3. Clowney
4. Mack

1. Clowney - you simply don't pass on once in a generation talent at an impact position

2. Watkins-the best receiver of this talented class. He's a playmaking gamechanger.

3. Evans - Having this beast opposite Gordon makes me smile. He's a bigger Little with good hands.

4. Bortles (and hope that Hoyer can stay healthy all year) Many of the draft boards say that he has the best skillset and most upside. If we're hell bent on taking a qb at 4, I'd like him.

Quote:

Is he AJ Green good?

Potentially, yes. Possibly even better. (and, I admit that's saying a lot)

Is he Julio Jones good?

Yes, probably even better.

Can't believe all the love for Bridgewater in the top 4... no upside and I don't think he's great to begin with. To enshrine my draft prowess...

1. Manziel
2. Watkins
3. Robinson
4. Mack

I think that is ridiculous but that's my opinion. I think he is Santonio Holmes plus.

He is not in the class of those guys. What you're essentially saying is that he can be better than Josh Gordon. I cannot see that being true.

I think there are two elite level players, one perenial pro-bowler, and a bunch of Occasional Pro-Bowlers in the top 10 or so picks.
1. Clowney(Elite)
2. Watkins(Elite)
3. Greg Robinson(Occasional Pro-bowler)(I think Mack is the 3rd best player, and will be a perenial pro-bowler, but he doesn't fill a hole, so I don't want to draft him at 4)
4. Mike Evans(Occasional Pro-bowler)

Honestly, I wouldn't be totally upset with Manziel. I have him as my 5th highest target(7th best player overall) in the draft behind the 4 listed above + Jake Matthews at 5. I really like Mack and Ebron, but I don't think either would be enough of an upgrade to justify using the #4 pick.

Quote:

I think that is ridiculous but that's my opinion. I think he is Santonio Holmes plus.

He is not in the class of those guys. What you're essentially saying is that he can be better than Josh Gordon. I cannot see that being true.

Wakins has all of the tools to be a top 5 WR... his only drawback is that he's 6'1" and not 6'4".. but he has the hands, the speed, the YAC ability, it's all there. If he's not a 1400 yards/season guy on a regular basis I'll be surprised.

I would also add that we don't know how good Josh Gordan can be.. he's only played 2 years and most of it with crappy to below crappy QB play.

Quote:

Quote:

I think that is ridiculous but that's my opinion. I think he is Santonio Holmes plus.

He is not in the class of those guys. What you're essentially saying is that he can be better than Josh Gordon. I cannot see that being true.

Wakins has all of the tools to be a top 5 WR... his only drawback is that he's 6'1" and not 6'4".. but he has the hands, the speed, the YAC ability, it's all there. If he's not a 1400 yards/season guy on a regular basis I'll be surprised.

I would also add that we don't know how good Josh Gordan can be.. he's only played 2 years and most of it with crappy to below crappy QB play.

In a re-draft with Gordon, Green, Jones and Watkins.

Watkins is the last player called, no question. That's all I'm saying and it's just my estimation.

Quote:

Watkins is the last player called, no question. That's all I'm saying.

Still, the fact that we're talking about him in that group, and we have the opportunity to put two of those 4 guys on the same team -- It's a little intruiging.

Quote:

Quote:

Watkins is the last player called, no question. That's all I'm saying.

Still, the fact that we're talking about him in that group, and we have the opportunity to put two of those 4 guys on the same team -- It's a little intruiging.

Don't argue with that, but we're trying to win a superbowl, not our Fantasy football league.

Knowing what we know now? Absolutely.. but prior to any of them taking an NFL snap, Watkins goes ahead of Gordon and is mixed right in with Green, Jones, Fitzgerald and all of them go after Calvin Johnson...

Slice it and dice it however you want, 5 years from now when Green, Jones, Gordon, etc are discussed, Watkins will be in the conversation.. and I'll take that at 4.

1. Clowney
2. Robinson
3. Mack
4. Matthews

The problem here is that none of those players fill any of our immediate needs. While taking the best player available is a great strategy in an ideal world, we are not living in an ideal world. We are deep at the position that Clowney and Mack play. And we have Joe Thomas at left tackle, meaning if we draft a left tackle we are immediately devaluing them by moving them to a less valuable position.

I think the most viable option is to trade down (unless our front office and coaching staff thinks one of the QBs is a franchise QB). By trading down we pick up more picks while moving to a spot where we can take a player who is more valuable to our franchise.

It would be great if we could trade down to the 9-12 range and pick up the top corner. We would then have ammunition to move around throughout the draft and pick up pretty much any player we want.

If forced to pick one of my top four players I would take Robinson. He has the most value to our team as he can probably play at a high level at both right tackle and/or right guard.

Quote:

Knowing what we know now? Absolutely.. but prior to any of them taking an NFL snap, Watkins goes ahead of Gordon and is mixed right in with Green, Jones, Fitzgerald and all of them go after Calvin Johnson...

Exactly. Not saying he's better than Gordon but he did more in college with less at QB. He times as well and is a couple inches shorter and has similar (though less) drug history.

Quote:

I wouldn't have Watkins in my top 5.

Is he AJ Green good? No.

Is he Julio Jones good? No.

I'd say fitzgerald or MegaTron are the top 5 type WR. But I agree with you, I'd prefer Green or Jones to Watkins.

I love speed, but I'd rather have a massive catch-radius. The guy that can win the jump ball, haul-in a wild throw or wrestle the ball away from a defender. In this draft, I'd take Evans over Watkins. But neither at #4.

A lot of people went nuts for Watkins after that OSU game. But the Buckeyes defense was terrible and banged-up. They matched a freshman against Watkins on some plays, with no help.

1. Manziel
2. Matthews
3. Mack
4. Watkins

Quote:

I think the most viable option is to trade down (unless our front office and coaching staff thinks one of the QBs is a franchise QB). By trading down we pick up more picks while moving to a spot where we can take a player who is more valuable to our franchise.

My position since January

And, I was ripped for it.

"If we don't pick a quarterback now the sky will fall" No matter what we must pick a quarterback NOW!

Hey, I'm all for it -- if a quarterback who can potentially lead us to the Super Bowl is available.

I made this a month ago and my top 4 now sits at:

1. Manziel
2. Bridgewater
3. Mack
4. Clowney

The more I think about Watkins, the more I want to pass. Someone put a graphic up somewhere (maybe on Twitter) that receivers drafted high that are under that 6'2"-6'3" mark have not fared well in the NFL. I love his talent. He runs like a halfback. He dishes out as much as he takes... I just think it's too risky at 4.

I can't sell myself on Bortles. I just can't do it. He has potential but I think taking him at 4 is just a bad idea. And to go along with my thinking, I would not take him at 26 either. Mostly because I think he needs to sit a year.

I don't want any tackles either. We have Joe Thomas, we signed Mack to big money, and I am not giving up on Schwartz just yet. I'd rather get a primo guard at 26.

I know we went OLB last year, and we signed Kruger to big money but if JFF and TB are gone, I'd have no problem taking him. It's a BPA pick and that's just fine. I think he's going to be really good. I've never questioned that, I just think we need a QB more than another OLB.

IMO the deal with Sammy is he has loose hips, in addition to hands, speed, and baller attitude. Sammy has moves. He may be a little shorter, but his movement makes him very hard to cover and tackle.

He has looked good in every game I've seen him play. Not just the bowl game.

I'm not saying we should absolutely draft him with our #4. But, I have a feeling that if he has a quarterback that can get him the ball, he will be a very good, dynamic wide receiver.

Its his loose hips that allow me to put him right up there with AJ, Julio and Josh. I think he moves better. This allows for separation which I predict he will excel at. Julio is great -- going straight ahead.

We will see.

Quote:

Knowing what we know now? Absolutely.. but prior to any of them taking an NFL snap, Watkins goes ahead of Gordon and is mixed right in with Green, Jones, Fitzgerald and all of them go after Calvin Johnson...

Slice it and dice it however you want, 5 years from now when Green, Jones, Gordon, etc are discussed, Watkins will be in the conversation.. and I'll take that at 4.

I don't see him as being on par as those guys as a prospect before they were drafted. I just don't.

He's Reggie Wayne or Santonio Holmes. Good maybe even very good, but not game breaking elite. Been wrong before, so won't be a shock if I am again, but I don't see him being an elite player at the next level.

I would take Reggie Wayne all day long.

Quote:

I would take Reggie Wayne all day long.

Reggie Wayne is not Reggie Wayne without Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck.

Get the QB.

Personally, I see more Percy Harvin in his game. Difference here is the one knock on Harvin...his size and Sammy is bigger. Sammy is 6'1 205 lbs, not the biggest guy in the world, but compared to the 5'11 185lbs Harvin it's a noticable size difference. They are both blazing quick(both run 40's in the high 4.3s-low 4.4s). Both are elusive in the open field and have a knack for making a play on the ball even when it's a bit off target.
Another comparison I see in him is to Roddy White. Watkins is an inch taller and 5lbs lighter, so the size comparison is on par. The biggest difference I see is in the speed. While they have a similair style of play, Watkins is faster.
So if I told you that you could have Roddy White, with Percy Harvin's speed would you take it? I would in a hear beat. Watkins is the second best player in this draft(with Mack as a close 3rd) and he is the best player that is legit target for us that will be an impact from day one.

Yeah, I can smell what you're cooking. I could be on board with calling him a bigger Percy Harvin type. That's a pretty good comparison.

Where you lost me was asking about Roddy White and Percy Harvin. We do not have a Matt Ryan on the roster, which brings me full circle, we don't need a freaking WR. We're not going to be transformed into a 12 win team by adding Percy Harvin. The Seahawks needed him for exactly one game, which they won in a landslide anyway.

We need a QB, badly. So badly, desperately. Unless he is AJ Green or Megatron, we need to PASS and just muscle up and take our QB. If this FO wants to play the patsy and "wait" until 26, they will regret it.

Quote:

I don't see him as being on par as those guys as a prospect before they were drafted. I just don't.

That's fair.. we can just disagree.. I just watch him with his speed and he is definitely a deep threat, has great hands on the slants and crossing routes, and the second you back off him he catches a bubble screen and runs better than anybody on the list.. The only thing he lacks is the height to be a jump ball threat... fine, we'll throw those to Gordon and Cameron.

Before we jump to hastly into saying we need a QB at 4, let's think for a minute. I personally believe the best QB from this draft in 5 years will not be Bridgewater, Bortles, or even Manziel. I believe it will be Zach Mettenberger. If the FO agrees with me(and let me point out, there is 0 indication that they do) and they wait untill the 2nd round to take Zach(which honestly, many mocks have him falling to the 3rd) then the "No (enter QB name here)" argument doesn't work. I like Hoyer, and would like to add Mettenberger as "insurance" and a "future" policy.
With someone like Watkins paired with Gordon, Cameron, Hawkins, and to a lesser extent Nate Burleson Hoyer would have a field day, and IF(and this is a big "if") Hoyer does dud out or gets hurt, you have Mettenberger to step in.
Let's not forget Mettenberger was considered by most to be a top 10 pick before he tore his ACL. After watching his pro day, I have no questions about his ability and health. If he was a running QB, then yeah it'd be a question. However, Mettenberger is Big Ben 2.0 and I would bet the farm that it will in no way hender his performance.
Bridgewater has admitted he struggles throwing a cold ball, and he was my front runner of the "big 3". However it gets mighty cold in Cleveland and I don't want to use the #4 overall pick on someone with that big of a ? on him, in addition he's a bit frail to be taking hits from defenses like the Bengals, Ravens, and Steelers especially in the cold. TBdub will probably be a decent QB somewhere, but I don't think Cleveland is the right fit for him(and remember I used to be a huge Bridgewater pimp)
I could never sell myself on Bortles. I just don't see it. I said the same thing about Weeden and I'm saying it now. Beware the late riser. Bortles has potential, but potential doesn't win football games, and I simply don't see Bortles being elite. The fact that he's a late riser tells me that he was not looked at highly prior to his rise, and there's a good reason for that. He lacks pocket presence IMO and sturrgles with accuracy at times. I'm telling you the dude is going to be a bust.
Manziel IMO would be the most likely of the 3 and has the most upside of ANY of the QB's. He's a play maker and a gun slinger. These two things are good, but there are other sides to those coins as well though. He is a play maker, but he's also small. The way he makes plays is by playing wreckless. If you're 6'4 and 230lbs, that's a good thing. When you're 6'0 205lbs, well that's a liability. I don't think Manziel will have a very long career in the NFL. Add that to the fact that while we all love our gunslingers when they are throwing TD's, gunslingers also tend to do something else, and that's throw interceptions. Manziel to me is most comprable to Tony Romo(though he's 2 inches shorter and 15lbs lighter). A smaller Tony Romo IMO is not worth the #4 overall pick, especially when you consider that you can get a Big Ben for a second rounder.
I won't even waste my time on Carr, that's a joke.
So you can take any of those guys at 4 and hope the questions about then are wrong...or...you can take Watkins at 4, add him to what is already a solid WR core and give Hoyer and/or Mettenberger great weapons.

Sorry, I must be in a bad mood today because I had to stop reading at Zach Metternberger. I need a nap I'm cranky.

Here's my wild speculation....it'll change by tomorrow.

The Browns are targeting either Manziel or Watkins at #4. If they can't get either of them, they'll try and trade down. If they can't trade down, it's Khalil Mack.

I think the targets are Mack and Watkins. If they are both gone then trade down. I really don't think they value any QB at #4. But I've been wrong before

Quote:

I think the targets are Mack and Watkins. If they are both gone then trade down. I really don't think they value any QB at #4. But I've been wrong before

I would agree with this, and would even take it a step further and say that if they cannot trade down, they take one of the tackles.

I think one of the T's would be a good choice. Not sexy but decent.

Does who they brought in for visits or saw pro days (not many) influence their choices? Looking at the presumed Top 5 players (no QBs) which seem to be: Clowney, Robinson, Mathews, Mack, and Watkins. Which of those did our FO actually scout - only one I can think of is Mathews as they attended A&Ms pro day, which Johnny did not participate. Perhaps, they are leaning toward taking Mathews with that 4th pick, then QB with their second 1st round pick which they may have to move up to get the one they want (Carr, perhaps) in the mid-teens.

Not sure if this counts but Pettine went to Mack's proday

Quote:

Does who they brought in for visits or saw pro days (not many) influence their choices? Looking at the presumed Top 5 players (no QBs) which seem to be: Clowney, Robinson, Mathews, Mack, and Watkins. Which of those did our FO actually scout - only one I can think of is Mathews as they attended A&Ms pro day, which Johnny did not participate. Perhaps, they are leaning toward taking Mathews with that 4th pick, then QB with their second 1st round pick which they may have to move up to get the one they want (Carr, perhaps) in the mid-teens.

I'm sure private visits/workouts are HUGE. Maybe not quite as big as their college game tape, but to get them in your building 1 on 1 is important. I can't see how with an early pick that you take a guy that you don't bring in...

Quote:

... if they cannot trade down, they take one of the tackles.

I'd take Robinson at #4, even if I could trade down, so...

1) Robinson
2) Trade down and select Gilbert CB (#10?)
3) Sammy
4) There is no fourth choice at #4 in my book...

Clowney
Robinson
Manziel
Mack

# 1 Clowney
# 2 Mathews
# 3 Robinson
# 4 Gilbert

jmho... I'm on board with you about Mettenburger,an I hope he's still there when we pick @ 35

My Top 4 would go:

1) Clowney
2) Watkins
3) Mack
4) Robinson

Although, since this is the Browns and we're running a 3-4, I'd probably move Clowney down the board a bit and bump Matthews in to the top 4.

Teddy was in my top 4 originally, but has done nothing to impress since the season ended. If we do draft a QB at #4, I'm hoping it's because the front office has done their homework, brought their guy into private workout sessions and deemed him to be worthy of a top 5 pick.

However, I get the feeling all the QBs are grading out to be mid-teens, twenty's type prospects, and I don't think that's something we should be reaching for at #4. Get an elite guy there or trade down and get a QB later. I have a feeling one of the "big 3" is going to drop to 26 anyway, so we can get one of them there ... and I also think that one of the second round QBs will have just as much chance at success if we surround him with the right talent and give him time to learn the system.

Quote:

The only thing worse than not having a franchise QB is wasting a top 5 pick to take a QB who doesn't turn out to be a franchise QB.

Amen Brotha!

Quote:

Quote:

The only thing worse than not having a franchise QB is wasting a top 5 pick to take a QB who doesn't turn out to be a franchise QB.

Amen Brotha!

You can't win the lottery if you don't play.

I would like to revisit my top 4 with 2 scenarios....

If no QB is taken prior to 4:
1)trade down preferably 6-10
-if still no QB taken 1)Robinson 2)Gilbert 3)trade down 4a)Manziel 4b)Teddy
2)Mack(only if trade present for Sheard)
3)Robinson
4)Gilbert

If any QB is gone before 4:
1a)Manziel 1b)Teddy
3)Mack
4)Robinson

Hopefully my first scenario is possible. I have no idea what to believe on the state of the QB in this class.

I can't believe so many people want to trade down. I really think the media may be right about Browns fans being way too obsessed with draft picks.

Well, that fanspeak draft simulator thing can't be helping... people think we can trade down and get sammy watkins and manziel and justin gilbert and Zach Martin and wait until the 4th to get skov, hyde in the 5th...

I think that thing is rigged to let good players fall so people will keep doing it and posting their results.

1. Clowney
2. Watkins
3. Mack
4. Robinson

Straight forward.

1) Tie: Clowney / Mack
2) Trade Down into top 10 - 15
3) Tie: Robinson / Matthews
4) Watkins

I agree.

It's a waste of time if you have done it more than once.

Quote:

I can't believe so many people want to trade down. I really think the media may be right about Browns fans being way too obsessed with draft picks.

I agree. We are trying to ad some age to this team. We have 10 picks. I doubt we end up with 10 drafted players. My thinking is we are going to be trading up a few times and end up with 5-6 drafted players.

Quote:

I can't believe so many people want to trade down. I really think the media may be right about Browns fans being way too obsessed with draft picks.

I can't speak for any other dawg that is strongly pimping trading down. But, once you start getting into the area of sabermetrics, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that trading down and aquiring picks is the most successful thing you can do in any of the sports.

Trading down and aquiring picks wouldn't be my first choice if Luck or Griffin were available. If the players that are available in the top 5 aren't surefire gamechangers, and aquiring picks is a real strong strategy, then....

We HAVE to look at it.

We have said we are going to start building our team through the draft. We are "going to be like the steelroids" blah, blah

I value extra picks over the players that are available at 1-5. I don't understand the guy who says we have to draft a QB now, when the QB's are Teddy, Derek, Blake, Zach, AJ, etc.... My thinking is, we really need to draft a QB now if one that can take us to the Super Bowl is available. If not, then it is a stupid decision. Stupid. I really don't want to imply that anybodies ideas on this board are stupid, but I do think that this idea, like many of the decisions the Cleveland Browns have made since the day our expansion was announced, is stupid.

I think trading down and aquiring picks is the best route to go. I like Manziel, Mack, and Sammy. But, if I can trade out and get a #1 next year -- the deal's done. If we draft Teddy or Derek or Blake or whomever, I will be behind them 100% hoping for their success and hoping they prove me wrong. I just don't see how any of those three are going to reach an NFL Elite status, I don't see how they are going to walk up to center, as an Elite NFL Quarterback and lead the Browns to mulitiple playoff victories. I don't think they have enough of "it". Manziel is a different story, but his emotional maturity is a big enough question mark to make anybody worry.

You can't win the lottery if you sell your ticket. A ton of people (myself included) were excited to trade down with Atlanta.

What a terrible mistake that was. Phil Taylor isn't half the player Julio Jones has been.....oh and Brandon Weeden was our consolation prize.

I don't think you can say the ATL trade was a failure because Weeden sucked...

But I would trade Weeden, Phil, and Little for Julio no questions asked...

Not that ATL would..

Quote:

You can't win the lottery if you sell your ticket. A ton of people (myself included) were excited to trade down with Atlanta.

What a terrible mistake that was. Phil Taylor isn't half the player Julio Jones has been.....oh and Brandon Weeden was our consolation prize.

Just because our FO was horrid with their picks doesn't mean it was a bad trade. It was a great trade. Who's to say we even wanted Julio? I had 5 guys I wanted before a trade down. The only one left was Watt, bummer. Heck I wanted Cameron Jordan where we took Phil. I'd trade Julio for him all day then you want to give me and extra second and 1st?? Suuuure I'd love Justin Houston and in 2012? Why not Michael Floyd and Harrison Smith? Hey thanks Atlanta for making us great brought to you by Preds draft board. I'm gonna go cry in a corner now.

What's the saying, sometimes the moves you don't make are the best ones. Absolutely applies in the NFL draft.

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

That's obviously true to some degree, but the prevalent thought (according to the Sirius "experts") is that the opposite is true, in fact...

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

That's obviously true to some degree, but the prevalent thought (according to the Sirius "experts") is that the opposite is true, in fact...

If that were even remotely true guys like (insert any scrub since Kurt Warner and before Carson Palmer) should look good. Andy Dalton should be a world beater!

Did Weeden look good when Gordon was breaking records last year? Absolutely not.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

That's obviously true to some degree, but the prevalent thought (according to the Sirius "experts") is that the opposite is true, in fact...

If that were even remotely true guys like (insert any scrub since Kurt Warner and before Carson Palmer) should look good. Andy Dalton should be a world beater!

Did Weeden look good when Gordon was breaking records last year? Absolutely not.

My point was that a good QB will make a so-so WR look better. I'm not certain what point you are making, BpG...

The Cardinals have Larry Fitz..

But between Warner and Plamer.. EVERYONE looked like crap...

Because great WRs don't make crappy QBs good...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

That's obviously true to some degree, but the prevalent thought (according to the Sirius "experts") is that the opposite is true, in fact...

If that were even remotely true guys like (insert any scrub since Kurt Warner and before Carson Palmer) should look good. Andy Dalton should be a world beater!

Did Weeden look good when Gordon was breaking records last year? Absolutely not.

My point was that a good QB will make a so-so WR look better. I'm not certain what point you are making, BpG...

I thought you were agreeing a great WR makes a QB. My mistake.

Quote:

Because great WRs don't make crappy QBs good...

Perhaps I mis-read your inital post. Am I correct in saying we're all on the same page?

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Only if you had a Top 5 RB...

Oh, draft pick wise doesn't count? Dang..

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Only if you had a Top 5 RB...

Oh, draft pick wise doesn't count? Dang..

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Exactly Steve. Receivers have never made the QB better. They can make them look worse, but can't make them better.

I myself think it would be foolish to spend a high pick on a WR this year. I might consider one with one of our 4th rounders.

At the Moment:

Clowney
Robinson
Watkins
Evans

Quote:

At the Moment:

Clowney
Robinson
Watkins
Evans

I see your board....at least top 3....I could include Watkins on mine since he is maybe 4-5-6 on mine.

Evans.....not sure. I think he rode Johnny Footballs coat tails. Yep, he's a big guy who can catch the jump ball, and he did.

Hard to say.....I might not make him a 2nd rounder. I am not saying that to call you foolish....you aren't. You are a friend, but no way could I call him top 4......but i am sure you and others can tell me why Johnny Football isn't either......all's cool bro.

I've always thought this is a fun parallel..

You think Johnny Football made Mike Evans, and I think Mike Evans made Johnny Football....I think it's somewhat crazy if both people had them both listed top 5.

I similarly don't like Derek Carr much, but love Davante Adams.

On a generic teams board, I wouldn't have Evans at #4 here - I think he's a great fit for the Browns though, because we already have two tall matchup problems at WR. WR is an attacking position, so you should try to create similar matchup problems with all your guys.

I don't understand teams that say "well, we have Vincent Jackson, so we need to compliment him with Tavon Austin" - I'd much rather complement Jackson with a guy like Mike Evans -- make another teams smaller CB line up against either Jackson/Evans and you're going to have a matchup problem all game.

1. Johnny Manziel
2. Teddy Bridgewater
3. Mike Evans
4. Sammy Watkins

I flip flop between Manziel/Bridgewater at 1/2 and Evans/Watkins at 3/4 though, depending on my mood at the time.

I will say this. I find a way to add Davante Adams to this team. He's a guy I've focused on and he's a real good football player. He creates separation with his body better than any WR in this draft. He's got a little Michael Irvin in him. Last second seperation wise. Great hands. I like him and Abbredaris quite a bit. Abbredaris reminds me of Derrick Mason. Like how is this dude always open. Are you kidding me?!?

This draft is the deepest WR draft I can remember in 30 years. Guys who will be very good in the NFL going well into the 2nd and into the back end of the 3rd. That's why when people pair the Browns and Watkins together I really don't get it. I'd probably rather draft Dennard at 4 than Watkins. But that's because I believe Dennard compares favorably with Haden. Haden is in his final year so there's that. And nickle 5DB formations are 50% of defensive snaps. And do we need Watkins at Z? Really? We need two good corners from this draft. Not one. And Dennard is good. Really good.

But I'm with you on Adams. I don't feel the Lavonte David thing with him (First Team All-Pro 2013). But I do feel like he has "it" and will be an incredibly reliable WR in the NFL. Very productive. 10 year career and a probowl or two guy depending on his QB.

My Top 4 for the Browns:

1. Johnny Manziel
2. Blake Bortles
3. Jadeveon Clowney
4. Darqueze Dennard

1a. Derek Carr
1b. Johnny Manziel

I don't need to go past that.

I've completely changed my tune on Carr. The more I watch, the more I think he and Manziel are the two franchise guys in this Draft.

Carr really is easy to love. He throws the ball better than everyone else. But I can't watch that USC game and feel anything but a really bad feeling.

Manziel or bust for me. I trade to #2 and give up 26 if it was me at GM.

If forced to do it I draft Bortles and give Hoyer 3 games. Tell Bortles to get ready for Week 5.

If Hoyer surprises he gets more time. If he looks inept with the Browns at 1-2 or 0-3 then the rookie starts. I do that with Manziel too btw.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Exactly Steve. Receivers have never made the QB better. They can make them look worse, but can't make them better.

I myself think it would be foolish to spend a high pick on a WR this year. I might consider one with one of our 4th rounders.

Randy Moss and Chris Carter didn't make Culpepper look better? Kurt Warner wasn't a great QB except for when he had Holt/Bruce with Rams or Fitz with the Cards. Did you notice the drop in numbers when Cutler left Marshall in Denver, then the numbers rised again when Marshall came to Chicago. Do I even have to mention how much better Gannon looked with Rice/Brown with the Raiders vs the rest of his career?
Let's not kid ourselves. A WR needs someone to get him the ball, but the QB needs someone to get open AND catch the ball. Wasn't it Brady's wife who said something like "My husband can't throw the ball AND catch it"?

Bortles is the one guy that'd make me sick if we took him. I really hope he's not even on our Draft board at all.

Quote:

Quote:

The argument was, why take the WR when we didn't have a QB to throw to him..

I always figured a great WR could make an average QB (look) better, but that's just me..

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

What you did there. I see it.

Quote:

I similarly don't like Derek Carr much, but love Davante Adams.

Adams was by far the better of two decent receivers on Fresno State's squad. He drops too many passes, though, and his penchant for giving up yardage to try to make the big play is going to bite him in the butt in the pros.

Isaiah Burse is horrible until the ball is in his hands. Terrible, lazy route runner who doesn't help the QB out when he's extending the play.

Josh Harper is good, but he missed the last three games of the season with an injury.

Still, all three of those guys topped 1,000 yards and Adams was second in the NCAA with over 1,700 yards.

A shocker would be if they figure out a way to get both Manziel and Evans.

Quote:

Quote:

What if you had a pro bowl WR, a Pro Bowl TE, and 2 Pro Bowl OL? That would probably make your QB look awesome.

Exactly Steve. Receivers have never made the QB better. They can make them look worse, but can't make them better.

I'd argue that first round picks Winslow and Edwards, made Derrick Anderson (a 6th round pick btw) a Pro-Bowler.

And reaching for a QB in the first round ... even if he's not worthy of the position, just for the sake of getting a QB because you can ... doesn't get you anywhere either. As evidenced by Weeden and your above example.

Checking in for this topic one more time before draft day tomorrow....

My top 4...

1. Manziel
2. Mack
3. Clowney
4. Evans

How I think the Browns top 4 looks..

1. Clowney
2. Mack
3. Robinson
4. Watkins

my top 4

1. Clowney
2. Mack
3. Robinson
4. Dennard

Top 4 :

1. Carr
2. Manziel
**Flip those two depending on my mood lol**
3. Clowney
4. Robinson

Top 4 QBs (Round prediction)

1. Teddy Bridgewater (1)
2. Johnny Manziel (1)
3. Aaron Murray (3)
4. Blake Bortles (1-2)

Top 4 WRs (Where I would take them)

1. Mike Evans (1)
2. Sammy Watkins (1)
3. Odell Beckham Jr. (1)
4. Jordan Matthews (2)

Top 4 LBs

1. Khalil Mack (1)
2. CJ Mosley (1-2)
3. Chris Borland (2)
4. Max Bollough (3-4)

Top 4 CBs

1. Justin Gilbert (1)
2. Darqueze Dennard (1)
3. Kyle Fuller (1-2)
4. Keith McGill (2-3)

Top 4 RBs

1. Tre Mason (3)
2. Carlos Hyde (3)
3. Charles Sims (3-4)
4. Bishop Sankey (3-4)

Quote:

1. Teddy Bridgewater (1)
2. Johnny Manziel (1)
3. Aaron Murray (3)
4. Blake Bortles (1-2)

This is the QB mentality on this board I cannot understand.

You think Murray is the better QB than Bortles, but you'd draft Bortles 1-2 rounds earlier? Why? Because that's what the talking heads have said they're projected as?

Quote:

Quote:

1. Teddy Bridgewater (1)
2. Johnny Manziel (1)
3. Aaron Murray (3)
4. Blake Bortles (1-2)

This is the QB mentality on this board I cannot understand.

You think Murray is the better QB than Bortles, but you'd draft Bortles 1-2 rounds earlier? Why? Because that's what the talking heads have said they're projected as?

Basically QBs I put where I think they'll go. Other positions where I'd take them. My bad.

I know Hyde and Mason are probably ganna be gone before the 3rd, but I wouldn't take a RB before then. Even though I love Mason as a RB...

Bortles is ganna go in the first probably, But I like Murray better as a prospect, and we could easily get him in the top of the 3rd IMO.