You lose points by taking Garrett because he is not a "need" plus you used up a future first so they ding you on that as well.
To get more points you need to not use future first round picks that you started with. It's ok to use the ones you trade for. You also have to get lucky enough to be able to draft a+ players that fill a need highlighted in green. It's very hard to consistently do that.
going fs after trading back, then using the new first rounder to gain Derek DE, then trub if he is there or trading back a little to get marlon CB always seems to net lots of points.
I often try to trade away late round pick to move up because getting an A+ on late round picks is a crap shoot at best.
You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
I wouldn't mind a draft like this especially if I could swap watson for trub ^^
You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
IF we don't want Myles Garrett, we should look at Taco Charlton. He's the best run defender as a defensive end in this draft. He's a guy we could land at 33. Takk McKinley is another.
I'd rather draft Garrett then waste #1 over all on a second round or wrose quality QB.
Honestly they can't be that dumb. It's probably being said to lure a team to make a trade to move up and grab a QB. We could easily land another first round pick AND end up with Garrett at #2 or #3
You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
First off, I think everyone should read the entire article. That first line is a bit deceiving. He talks about finding the best player later on.
I did find this paragraph interesting from the article:
Quote:
"If you can't stand in there in snow and elements and throw the ball, then it's tough. If you can't process information, because the defenses are so good, Pittsburgh and Baltimore and Cincinnati, then it's hard to play. So those are things that are non-negotiable for me.''
Why in the hell would he bring in RGIII [who can't process information quickly] and Kessler [who can't throw a football though a piece of wet paper] if those are the qualities that are non-negotiable?
First off, I think everyone should read the entire article. That first line is a bit deceiving. He talks about finding the best player later on.
I did find this paragraph interesting from the article:
Quote:
"If you can't stand in there in snow and elements and throw the ball, then it's tough. If you can't process information, because the defenses are so good, Pittsburgh and Baltimore and Cincinnati, then it's hard to play. So those are things that are non-negotiable for me.''
Why in the hell would he bring in RGIII [who can't process information quickly] and Kessler [who can't throw a football though a piece of wet paper] if those are the qualities that are non-negotiable?
I was thinking the same thing. Seems like he's almost learning on the job, perhaps learning from his mistakes?
First off, I think everyone should read the entire article. That first line is a bit deceiving. He talks about finding the best player later on.
I did find this paragraph interesting from the article:
Quote:
"If you can't stand in there in snow and elements and throw the ball, then it's tough. If you can't process information, because the defenses are so good, Pittsburgh and Baltimore and Cincinnati, then it's hard to play. So those are things that are non-negotiable for me.''
Why in the hell would he bring in RGIII [who can't process information quickly] and Kessler [who can't throw a football though a piece of wet paper] if those are the qualities that are non-negotiable?
Don't take what I'm saying as gospel, but I think Hue wants a guy like Deshone Kizer.
First off, I think everyone should read the entire article. That first line is a bit deceiving. He talks about finding the best player later on.
I did find this paragraph interesting from the article:
Quote:
"If you can't stand in there in snow and elements and throw the ball, then it's tough. If you can't process information, because the defenses are so good, Pittsburgh and Baltimore and Cincinnati, then it's hard to play. So those are things that are non-negotiable for me.''
Why in the hell would he bring in RGIII [who can't process information quickly] and Kessler [who can't throw a football though a piece of wet paper] if those are the qualities that are non-negotiable?
I was thinking the same thing. Seems like he's almost learning on the job, perhaps learning from his mistakes?
There's no "seems like" about it. He's definitely learning on the job. The questions is, with statements like that, is he really learning, or is he just lip flapping? Because his actions with QBs last year certainly don't back up this statement, and it makes you wonder, how in the hell could he not know that to begin with? So if he is indeed just figuring this out, then he needs to get it right. If his love for smallish Watson, the turnover machine is true as advertised, and he intends on drafting him and trotting him out in this division, we're screwed.
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski
"Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield
I'd feel bad if I didn't post this. I am close to the Lebeau family, but this is not coming from him, his teams scouts or the family. Do not take what I'm saying as gospel please. None of it's really Earth shattering though. This is just coming from a personal source I trust:
Quote:
1. Scouts are convinced Njoku goes before OJ Howard.
2. Corey davis is rated over Mike Williams by a good margin by scouts.
3. 49ers even without a GM in place are sending signals that they are looking to trade back. Supposedly, jed york has contacted multiple teams himself in a very sloppy way as other teams are hearing about it already. Will drive down the price.
4. Browns are desperately hoping leonard fournette is at 12 or they will trade up from 12 to get Fournette.
5. Browns have spent more time with Kizer than any other prospect. That includes Myles Garrett.
I'd feel bad if I didn't post this. I am close to the Lebeau family, but this is not coming from him, his teams scouts or the family. Do not take what I'm saying as gospel please. None of it's really Earth shattering though. This is just coming from a personal source I trust:
Quote:
1. Scouts are convinced Njoku goes before OJ Howard.
2. Corey davis is rated over Mike Williams by a good margin by scouts.
3. 49ers even without a GM in place are sending signals that they are looking to trade back. Supposedly, jed york has contacted multiple teams himself in a very sloppy way as other teams are hearing about it already. Will drive down the price.
4. Browns are desperately hoping leonard fournette is at 12 or they will trade up from 12 to get Fournette.
5. Browns have spent more time with Kizer than any other prospect. That includes Myles Garrett.
That is all around disappointing. If we pass on Garrett or Allen and draft Kizer and Fournette I will have some teeth pulled and move to Pittsburg.
I'd feel bad if I didn't post this. I am close to the Lebeau family, but this is not coming from him, his teams scouts or the family. Do not take what I'm saying as gospel please. None of it's really Earth shattering though. This is just coming from a personal source I trust:
Quote:
1. Scouts are convinced Njoku goes before OJ Howard.
2. Corey davis is rated over Mike Williams by a good margin by scouts.
3. 49ers even without a GM in place are sending signals that they are looking to trade back. Supposedly, jed york has contacted multiple teams himself in a very sloppy way as other teams are hearing about it already. Will drive down the price.
4. Browns are desperately hoping leonard fournette is at 12 or they will trade up from 12 to get Fournette.
5. Browns have spent more time with Kizer than any other prospect. That includes Myles Garrett.
That is all around disappointing. If we pass on Garrett or Allen and draft Kizer and Fournette I will have some teeth pulled and move to Pittsburg.
I am not sure if I can imagine a worse scenario of drafting Kizer and Fournette.
He is not a three-tool back like Zeke. His drive is questionable.
I have said this before and I'll say it again..........I would not draft him w/in the first three rounds. I understand he'll get drafted way higher than that, but I just would not want him on my team.
j/c.. I think very key in that scouting list is the fact that the 49ers are looking to trade down.
If we take Garrett and 49ers trade back so somebody can jump up to take Allen...possibly the QBs will be dropping back. Where a Kizer might be our pick at #33.
Not too big at taking a RB...but if that is who we are targeting at #12 but then are we that obvious??? Do we have a need there... I couldn't believe it when the NFL Network guys listed our NEEDS, #1 QB, #2 OL, #3 RB. The last two I thought are not needs.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off! Go Browns! CHRIST HAS RISEN! GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
1) Garrett is a slam dunk, why spend a lot of time with him? Especially considering we have 3 months. 2) We're looking at Kizer if he falls into the late 1st. I would guess we'd trade up from 33 into the first to allow for an extra year on the contract.
This being said, I agree with you, that would be so disappointing if that was how #1/#12 played out.
With the talk of Kizer & Fournette, here's a draft that gives us both and still lets us take Garrett with the #1. There are no trades, and I tried to go BPA/need after Kizer.
If we're intending drafting anyone #1 I sincerely hope we do more than enough due diligence including but not limited to interview, personal visit, workout,dinner.. ..I'd ask Garrett to also clarify his comment about playing in the cold.
This regime will succeed or fail by this offseason and draft IMO. It'd be insane not to do everything possible to mitigate any risk or question.
1) Garrett is a slam dunk, why spend a lot of time with him? Especially considering we have 3 months.
That's how we end up drafting a GIlbert in the top 10
Except Garrett's been in the spotlight for 3 years, and it is hard to find a bad word about him.
I'd at least interview him, but I don't think there appear to be too many potential issues (any really) that will require extensive digging.
Joe Thomas agrees. We can not pass on a better defensive talent for a gamble on a QB at #1. At least the with a defender, you will get something in return.