DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2017 NFL Season 2017 NFL Draft Myles Garrett....

Funny because allen is lauded far above donald as a prospect. Interesting how people forget.

Are we comparing Allen to Donald the prospect or Donald the NFL player?

My original comment about leonard williams was as prospects. I don't really think hes even Donald prospect wise. Not to down him and i understand as a prospect donald wasent as highly touted I was just very high on both donald and williams. I like allen alot and I think he's as safe as it gets because of his drive. He will not fail. I just don't think his ceiling is worth top 3.

And for the person who said williams isn't as good a player....he was the most complete DL in the league this year. Donald is amazing as a pass rusher but williams is right behind him and much better against the run.

j/c

Someone was recently saying that although Garrett is the most highly rated player in this draft; the combination of Allen/(best available DE after Garrett) is greater than the combination of Garrett/(best available DT after Allen.)

I get that argument and have been thinking about it. If we (the Browns) were looking at being in contention in 2017, then that argument would make sense. But we really aren't close to contention. It will take us another 1-3 years before we can truly compete. We need the best possible talent where we can find it rather than taking a lesser talent for the sake of more even distribution of talent. We have time, and other avenues than the draft, to accumulate more talent.

Take Garrett, the best talent in this draft, and continue to build the team with the best available talent where ever we can.

Here's an idea, how about giving Allen his own thread.

My reason for wanting Allen is both due to the depth at edge rusher and because I have similar grades on him and Garrett.

If Hue Jackson believes on the Qb in this draft is a franchise QB, a QB he can win games with, then you take him and the hell with what the media thinks.

you can't win in this league without a QB and Garret is not going to put W in the win column, but a Qb most certainly will.

Personally, i'd try to trade down to 3-4 and take Watson or Trubinsky. Watson has a lot of what Hue likes in a QB, he is very smart, and he is very talented. Our D isn't actually that bad, we have some good talent there, but we have nothing at QB

if Jackson thinks our Qb is in this draft, ya take him period...a franchise Qb alone is worth 8-9 wins, and 2-3 wins without one and Garrett.

if we take Garret im fine with that too, but if Jackson believes our Qb is there, ya take him, even if that means picking him over Garrett

I'm not sure Hue gets that kind of Faith...he hasn't really shown he can pick a QB better than anyone else we have. Just about every single analyst and former GMs, many who know what they are talking about say there isn't a franchise QB in this draft and that Garrett is far and away the top talent... I think if Hue picks a QB at one anyway and he doesnt pan out, he's gone, take the safer pick

Since that someone was me I'd like to thank you for taking notice of the argument even if you disagree.

I get where you're coming from. I love watching Garrett play. I will be thrilled if we draft him. Just so we are clear on that point of agreement =)

I feel almost as strongly about Allen though. I really, really like Allen. I love the style of player that he is. He is pure smashmouth football bursting with POWER. I think he makes the perfect DT next to Danny Shelton. I think the combo of those two ramming it up the middle will have far more total effect than Garrett rushing from the edge every play especially if we are truly moving to a 4-3 defense base. Pressure up the middle is very key in a 4-3 defense and you really need two stud DT that both require double teams. A combo of Danny and Allen could be the best DT combo in the game IMHO.

To me it's not always about the best player available. Sometimes is about the BPA that has the greatest impact on the team. I honestly don't know which player does that best for us. Garrett or Allen? IF and that's a big IF, we can get a good trade value for moving down a few spots and still land Allen then I think that tips the scales towards Allen.

So long as, Garrett or Allen is our first pick of the draft then I am happy either way. Everyone knows I love Jimmy G. but even he is not worth losing out on one of these two guys IMHO. I am dead certain that none of the QBs of this class even remotely come close to giving up on Garrett or Allen.

Alright.....I gotta know. Is he trolling or serious? I just read a couple of his other posts, including one on the Pryor thread, and man!!!!!

I don't think Knight is trolling. The problem is that IF Hue thinks there is a QB in this draft that can save him then he is not the coached he is billed to be.

Read the Pryor thread. He's trolling.




Or we know nothing and he is right.

I don't know if I'm missing something or what, but just got done watching some tape on Derek Barnett, specifically the Alabama game and to me it seems like they paid more attention to Barnett then they did to Garrett. Saw more double teams, chipping, and running away from his side then I did in the A&M game. Brings up some added questions for me. Does he have more of an impact in the pass game then Garrett? He's not the athlete Garrett is, that you can see but is he the better pass rusher, right now. He's not the #1 pick but at 12? Maybe someone who has a little more time to watch tape then I do can either confirm or deny this.

Are you mac's son?

He's really solid technique wise. In fact, he has the best technique in this class. I gotta give it to the kid, because I thought his numbers were inflated last year and he wasn't really bringing the heat. But this year, he proved me wrong. He's good. I think someone on here said that he reminded them of Tamba Hali. I'd have to say that's a fair assessment. I think he's a guy who can come in and rush the passer, anchor the line and do his job. I just question if he will be there at 12. That's a pretty big leap of faith. I think there's probably 15 great prospects, immediate impact starters and 3 average QB's in this year's draft. I just wonder who will still be left at 12.

Also, I wouldn't look to far into Saban's game plan. I think Garrett was recently injured and came back for that week.

Agreed. He's a good player at an important position.

Lots of good prospects in this draft, so he very well might be. But it's real hard predicting where people will go. All that has to happen is someone in 2-11 to have him real high on their board.


That's why you can't get cute. If we're picking at 1, we've gotta pick the best player, because we have no idea if a guy like Barnett will be there at 12

Even if we admit that Barnett is the better player now, Garrett is clearly the better prospect long term. Barnett is, at best, a marginal athlete. Garrett is an absolute freak of nature physically.

It is a lot easier to teach technique like Barnett than to teach the physical ability like Garrett. I think they will both have long NFL careers but Garrett will shine brighter.

How would Saban know just how injured he was? Would still think that so long as he played he'd have the same game plan, at least until he figured out he wasn't 100%. And Barnett was better against Alabama then Garrett was, even with the more attention. That has to say something.

As far as being physical gifted, Garrett definitely is, but I don't want a roster of gifted athletes I want a roster of good, smart, athletic, FOOTBALL players. I'd take a good football player over the best athlete any day. Not saying Garrett isn't, I'm just not 100% on that yet.

I watched the Alabama/Texas A&M game. Bama ran away from Garrett on almost every single play he was in the game. Not sure what you saw, but I think your analysis is incorrect.

Charted the game, counted at least 12 times they ran directly at Garrett, And while he had 3.5 tackles for loss all came against the guard, TE, or running back, as did his 1 pass pressure. Bama also singled up Garrett with either a RB or TE at times with good success as a whole. For the most part he was singled up with Robinson. He did nothing against Robinson. Nothing. Not sure what you saw.

Charted the Tennessee game. Ran directly at Barnett only 6 times, and one of those was a reverse. He had 2 tackles for loss and a sack which he beat Robinson on. He was able to put more pressure on the QB against Robinson then Garrett. He was able to dip under Robinson a few times. He was chipped and double teamed far more often then they did against Garrett.

I'm not saying Barnett is the better prospect, he isn't, just saying that by the tape he clearly had a more of an impact then Garrett. And if Saban is gonna pay more attention to Barnett then maybe we should. Now I don't know how much the ankle bothered him in that game either. And I understand that.

Don't know what that means. Just you being you,I guess.

He probably just looked at the injury report lol Dude suffered a sprained ankle 3 weeks before the game, didn't play the immediate game after the ankle sprain. Nick probably saw Garrett walk into the stadium with a boot on his knee too. I wouldn't doubt Saban's intelligence like that.

That's all speculation. What I'm saying is if Garrett is the player everyone says he is then if he was on the field then Saban would have had a game plan for him. Regardless of whether he was injured. Again at least until he saw he wasn't 100%. The game plan would have been in place long before the kid walked into the stadium.

And I don't see where I doubted his intelligence.

I guess I touched a nerve with a few of you, not trying to offend anyone.

It's hardly speculation. It's not like we do not know that Myles Garrett played with an injury during the middle half of his campaign. He was held out of games before and after the Bama game. Here's a pic of Garrett in a walking boot a week after the Bama game, a month after his original injury

There's no speculation here, Garrett played while banged up against Bama. Nick Saban and Lane Kiffin knew that and didn't fear a 70% Garrett as much as they do a 100% Barnett. If you want to think that tells you something, then so be it. Just remember, searching for clues is a great way to come up with a narrative. But it might not reflect the truth.

Yes It is speculation on what you say Saban and now Kiffen knew, and what they game planned for or didn't. That's what I was referring to. I liken to believe that once they saw him playing in the game they game planned for him, unless you're saying he really isn't the impact player who everyone says he is. Which I'm sure you are not. Coaches don't always buy what's in the injury reports. Never said he wasn't hurt just that this injury didn't effect Saban's game plan. He's suppose to be a great, big impact type of player, coaches game plan for that regardless if they are injured or not. Saban gave more attention(respect) to Barnett then he did Garrett, that's all I'm saying.

It's literally not speculation. Dude was injured. Said it, didn't hide it. Said he was at 50% during the Tennessee game. I don't know why you're arguing against the fact that Myles Garrett literally sprained his ankle and Kiffin/Saban knew about it. Do you think they drew up their plays in August and just filed them away until tax season? No, they finalized their gameplan that week after seeing how injured Garrett was. Not to mention, that their gameplan included a bunch of extremely quick passes, not allowing Garrett the time to get into the backfield (This is pretty similar to the gameplan KSU had against Garrett as well). I think you're trying to draw some conclusion that quite frankly just don't go together. Did you consider A&M's defensive schemes into consideration of Garrett being double teamed? Here's what Saban has to say about trying to block the A&M ends, "“And they’ve got a good scheme on defense that makes it hard to try to help on those guys. And they move them around, do some stunts with them that everybody’s going to have to block them.” Maybe that's why a healthy Barnett got more double teams aimed his way than an injured Garrett.

it's almost like some are bashing Garrett because he's obviously the BPA, and more than likely our pick. So if for some reason he doesn't pan out they can bash the FO and say I told you so..Its funny what lengths people are trying to discredit the best player in the country...comparing a consensus #1 overall against a guy who's barely top 20

It was well known the guy took a cheap shot against Arkansas and wasn't up to speed. That is why Saban went at him.
"Lets find out".

Saban was ready to run away if need be.

Quit saying you aren't 100% convinced. If you aren't by now, you won't be, and that's cool with me. Just don't make it sound like you are trying to be convinced.

Just say it, you like someone else.

We are drafting Garrett. It's the safe pick. You don't want to pass on him and him stud out when everybody except you and Mac see him as the top prospect. If he doesn't, it's hard to blame them that we drafted him....everybody else would have.


I sometimes think Mac and guys like you go against the grain just in case you can say I told you so. If it doesn't work out the way you want, you go away for a while, and leave just enough in your comments so you can say you thought he was a good prospect.

I am tired of that, so yes or no, do you what him or not?


Simple question.


Don't be like Mac and go away for a few days and pretend to not see the question.


Edit....leadtheway lead the way. I just saw his reply that mirrored mine, or I should say, mine mirrored his.

Some people care more about being right than us winning.

Never said he wasn't injured, read what I wrote. But watching the tape other then a couple of stunts Garrett lined up and rushed from his RDE spot, was never moved around. Went against Robinson for probably 90% of the plays and was stoned by him most of the game. Yes he was injured, I understand that, again. And it is speculation when you are speaking for Saban's game plan on a guy unless you're part of his staff. You don't have any idea what he planned for.

All I said is that good coaches will game plan for great players even if they are injured. Garrett had an ok game against Tennessee, why wouldn't Saban think he'd be getting better from his injury? He was two weeks removed from it. Saban had no way to know just how bad the injury was, whether he was improving on it, or how he'd be with it in the game. Maybe he took a risk that he was still very injured and didn't game plan around it, the truth is I don't know but if coaches start planning around injuries that way they will end up regretting it.

Went back and watched the 2015 game, basically the same game plan, when he wasn't injured. They only doubled him a half dozen times, used TE, RB, singled up on him for about a dozen plays, The guard for a couple plays, then most of the rest of the time it was Robinson man up. He had 2 tackles for loss and 1 sack. A decent game but against single blockers you'd think he would dominate a little more. The guy has great get off and speed but needs to use his hands much better to disengage.

For comparison Barnett doesn't have Garrett's get off or speed but has the best I've seen in awhile at using his hands. Like I said before Garrett is the better prospect but Barnett is more ready for the NFL right now. JMO

I really don't know why so many people are so defensive about Garrett. It's just my take on the guy, I don't see why I have to defend or justify it, I'm not asking anyone to justify their take on him. And to set the record straight yet again, I've never said anything that even remotely has insinuated that he will be a bad pick.

I don't know what Saban's game plan was, he may have done that, I don't know and neither do you.

I'm not 100% convinced about the guy, never was, but have never been 100% convinced about any player in any draft.

I like Allen, I've said that in other post topics.

Chances are we do draft Garrett, I agree. I think he is the top prospect, I have said that all along, I do not think he is the safe pick, and IMO I think the Browns need a safe pick, I would give that to Allen. But that's just my opinion, which like yours amounts to nothing.

Never been the type of person to say "I told you so". Don't care who the Browns take so long as they pan out. Even if I don't like the player. The only person I judge whether I'm right or not against is myself. I'll look back at past drafts and the players I liked coming out and see if they are producing or not. I like watching tape on the draft prospects and making my own judgement on the guys, sometimes I don't agree with the experts and the media.

If I was the guy in charge, I'd strongly consider Allen, I think he's safer, I think he offers more versatility, I think he helps in the run game more while still offering pass rush, I think this draft is got more chances to get an edge rusher at 12 or later in the second round.

Does this help, and I think you've got me pegged wrong, I'll tell you whatever you want to know. And I'll admit when I'm wrong, and do not go around gloating when I'm right. I just really like the scouting part of the game.

I agree, his first step is his best asset, but IMO he relies on it too much. Most of the time it's enough. Would like to see him use his hands more, like I said against Robinson when Robinson got his hands on him he struggled.

I would argue that a relentless attitude is almost as important.

Not insinuating that Garrett doesn't have that, just thinking back on all the great pass rushers thru the years, they all were relentless pass rushers. Never allowed themselves to stay blocked.

It's because you keep posting false and misleading information over and over and over. It's as if you are on some sort of mission to discredit the guys.

Stop posting misinformation and we'll stop debating your position.

And having a great first step keeps him from staying blocked.

never heard someone say that a player relies on having a quick step too much.