|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Browns Stun Draft -Take 5th rated QB over Consensus No 1 Pick Courtney Brown
NFL Draft Year 2000 - ROUND 1
SEL # TEAM PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 Cleveland Browns Spergon Wynn QB SW Texas St.
2 Washington Redskins LaVar Arrington OLB Penn State
3 Washington Redskins Chris Samuels T Alabama
4 Cincinnati Bengals Peter Warrick WR Florida State
5 Baltimore Ravens Jamal Lewis RB Tennessee
6 Philadelphia Eagles Corey Simon DT Florida State
7 Arizona Cardinals Thomas Jones RB Virginia
8 Pittsburgh Steelers Plaxico Burress WR Michigan State
9 Chicago Bears Brian Urlacher MLB New Mexico
10 Baltimore Ravens Travis Taylor WR Florida
11 New York Giants Ron Dayne RB Wisconsin
12 New York Jets Shaun Ellis DE Tennessee
13 New York Jets John Abraham LB South Carolina
14 Green Bay Packers Bubba Franks TE Miami (Fla.)
15 Denver Broncos Deltha O'Neal CB California
16 San Francisco 49ers Julian Peterson OLB Michigan State
17 Oakland Raiders Sebastian Janikowski K Florida State
18 New York Jets Chad Pennington QB Marshall
19 Seattle Seahawks Shaun Alexander RB Alabama
20 Detroit Lions Stockar McDougle T Oklahoma
21 Kansas City Chiefs Sylvester Morris WR Jackson State
22 Seattle Seahawks Chris McIntosh T Wisconsin
23 Carolina Panthers Rashard Anderson FS Jackson State
24 San Francisco 49ers Ahmed Plummer CB Ohio State
25 Minnesota Vikings Chris Hovan DT Boston College
26 Buffalo Bills Erik Flowers DE Arizona State
27 New York Jets Anthony Becht TE West Virginia
28 Indianapolis Colts Rob Morris LB Brigham Young
29 Jacksonville Jaguars R.Jay Soward WR USC
30 Tennessee Titans Keith Bulluck LB Syracuse
31 St. Louis Rams Trung Canidate RB Arizona
What I KNOW... is that NO ONE one knows. fixed ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
They must have not stunned the draft since no one else took him in the first round! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,357 Likes: 1351
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,357 Likes: 1351 |
If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1. I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the Browns brass could think there is a legit chance they can land both. I think it's is easier to draft Garrett #1 and then trade for Trubisky than to draft Trubisky and trade up for Garrett. I think the Browns love Garrett but recognize they accumulated enough assets to move up still and get Mitch. Essentially, to have your cake and eat it too. My thoughts exactly, Brent....: The Browns own enough draft capital to land Garrett AND a top QB prospect. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.
Tackles are tackles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,549 Likes: 1328
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,549 Likes: 1328 |
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
The NFL likes drama.
The Draft is a TV show.
You don't want the premier of it to be a known fact.
Just a thought.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Not even a little surprised if Sashi and Hue clash on what to spend on a QB .... QB's NEVER fit well into moneyball or analytics ... hopefully I'm wrong here and Sashi gives in ... there's proof from FA he is willing to do that ... NO WAY Zietler or Trottier made moneyball or analytical sense ... NO WAY .... thats a good sign ... U can also throw the offers to the safeties that were the best out there and the offer to Pryor witch we think was the best out there ....
Those are GREAT SIGNS .... now we just gotta pray they can evaluate talent ... I don't think analytics plays nearly as big a role in this as many believe. It's like you and others have said before, baseball is one thing, football is another. In football each and every player plays a vital role in determining the success or failure of each play. You can't just look at a player in isolation, add up his stats, look at them a little differently and calculate his value to the team. Do I believe the Browns are more focused on analytics than before, yeah. But are analytics playing a huge role in calling all the shots, I don't think so. If we had hired anyone else to fill his role besides DePodesta, then analytics would not even have been a talking point. But since we hired the "Moneyball" guy who was featured in a book and a movie everyone jumped up laughing that the Browns are going to try to win football by the numbers. yuk yuk yuk Although there have been some Moneyball strategy tendencies, especially in the beginning, clearing costs and changing the culture for instance, I think the things you've noticed that don't make moneyball or analytical sense is just business as usual. When it's all said and done, if the Browns do become a successful perennial contender, still, no one will know how they did it because they've been too focused on analytics. Teams will try to copy it, but it won't work because they'll rely too much on analytics thinking the Browns did that. Is this me being the chief FO defender? haha NO. This is me giving my opinion on dividing up the use of analytics and real world football. Why am I talking about this?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
They shoulda forced him to change his name to Spergon Lost.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 8,105 Likes: 346
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 8,105 Likes: 346 |
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/fkjZc8B/Bull-Dawg-Sig-smaller.jpg) You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Me too now, but it took me a couple minutes to get it. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 595
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 595 |
For what it's worth, I saw this article come accross my Twitter feed and it was suggesting that we trade #1 and a second next year for AJ McCarron, #9, a second rounder this year and their first rounder next year. That has to be 100% BS. There are so many unsourced tweets and articles. It is all speculation, rumor milling and fabrication to stir up interest and excitement in the draft. By swapping 2nds, you're basically saying McCarron is the cost to move from #9 to #1. Which means they (basically) think AJ McCarron is worth the #5 pick overall. K. Just to clarify the trade would look like this: CLE #1 2017 Second round pick 2018 CIN McCarron #9 2017 Second Round pick 2017 First Round pick 2018 So it wouldn't be McCarron for to move up, it would be McCarron and a first rounder next year (assuming the second round picks wash). It is definitely not even a rumor, just speculation, but I'd be very tempted, IF Hue says McCarron is his guy.
Last in, first out, the sign of a true champion!![[Linked Image from i301.photobucket.com]](http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn59/Stetson1376/c8f5fed9-fc01-4b87-bda3-b2b53f0b16cb_zpse708e05e.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 595
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 595 |
the idea of staying at 1, passing on Garrett, and taking Trubisky makes me ill I mean, if they view him as the answer at QB. Sure shot, franchise guy ... then you take him at #1 and don't risk anything. What if you trade back to #4 and the Jets jump you? Or trade back to #3 and the Bills jump you? IMO, you don't trade back to take Trub (or any QB) You wouldn't trade until the team you were trading with was on the clock. There would be no jumping. If your guy is still left and your trade partner is on the clock there's nothing anyone can do. (Other than the league vetoing the trade for some reason.)
Last in, first out, the sign of a true champion!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1. I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the Browns brass could think there is a legit chance they can land both. I think it's is easier to draft Garrett #1 and then trade for Trubisky than to draft Trubisky and trade up for Garrett. I think the Browns love Garrett but recognize they accumulated enough assets to move up still and get Mitch. Essentially, to have your cake and eat it too. They are dumb if that is what they believe. If there is a QB available who you think is worth a top five pick, then you don't screw around. You take him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,357 Likes: 1351
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,357 Likes: 1351 |
If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1. I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the Browns brass could think there is a legit chance they can land both. I think it's is easier to draft Garrett #1 and then trade for Trubisky than to draft Trubisky and trade up for Garrett. I think the Browns love Garrett but recognize they accumulated enough assets to move up still and get Mitch. Essentially, to have your cake and eat it too. They are dumb if that is what they believe. If there is a QB available who you think is worth a top five pick, then you don't screw around. You take him. I understand your reasoning, and I know I've said that before about certain QBs and draft situation. I don't think that's applicable based on what they have in assets to move up, if they want to. Assuming SF and CHI aren't drafting QBs, #4 gets a bit curious. Hell, even if teams wanted to move up to draft #2 or #3, guess who is getting a call to see if they are interested to trump the deal based on their assets?...its absolutely unbelievable the flexibility the Cleveland Browns have this year.
Tackles are tackles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1. I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the Browns brass could think there is a legit chance they can land both. I think it's is easier to draft Garrett #1 and then trade for Trubisky than to draft Trubisky and trade up for Garrett. I think the Browns love Garrett but recognize they accumulated enough assets to move up still and get Mitch. Essentially, to have your cake and eat it too. They are dumb if that is what they believe. If there is a QB available who you think is worth a top five pick, then you don't screw around. You take him. I understand your reasoning, and I know I've said that before about certain QBs and draft situation. I don't think that's applicable based on what they have in assets to move up, if they want to. Assuming SF and CHI aren't drafting QBs, #4 gets a bit curious. Hell, even if teams wanted to move up to draft #2 or #3, guess who is getting a call to see if they are interested to trump the deal based on their assets?...its absolutely unbelievable the flexibility the Cleveland Browns have this year. I think our front office values draft picks too much to move up from 12 to 4. Everything they have done points to gaining more draft assets, not giving them up. Also, I've seen the Bears linked to Trubisky quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
I would believe just the opposite. Hue wants a QB and the FO wants Garrett. I hope we get Garrett.
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180
You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow
#GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
The fact that the rumor is our "analytical" FO wants to over draft a QB is hilarious.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
The fact that the rumor is our "analytical" FO wants to over draft a QB is hilarious. It just leads me to believe the whole thing is made up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809 |
If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1. That isn't true. That makes no sense. It isn't like we would be wasting our time with Garrett. Maybe we want both. We have Garrett. Now it is time to find a way to draft Mitch. I seriously doubt any team before the Jets would take a QB with the talent on the board. If they do, so be it, it wasn't meant to be. I agree about trading with the Titans at 5. I have read they are looking to trade back. There are a few value charts out there. On one the value of the Titans pick is 1700. The value of our pick at 12 is 1250. A 450 point difference. Our pick in the 2nd, at #33 is worth 580 points. Our pick at #52 is worth 380, so it is out of play. If it was all fair and square, we swap first rounders, give the Titans our first 2nd rounder, and the Titans give us a later pick, but it would probably work out that we would have to swap 1sts, give up #33 and maybe a 4th
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98 |
Question: Who in the Browns Organization (Not the Media) said that they were contemplating taking Trubisky over Garrett at number 1? ... NFL Network is ripping the Browns a new one tonight for even thinking of such a thing ...
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,621 Likes: 587
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,621 Likes: 587 |
Question: Who in the Browns Organization (Not the Media) said that they were contemplating taking Trubisky over Garrett at number 1? ... NFL Network is ripping the Browns a new one tonight for even thinking of such a thing ... It's only going to get worse between now and the draft. Slow / No news means the media fills the void with complete speculation..... Get ready for more "It's rumored that ..." -- "It's being speculated that ...." -- both of which then lead to .... "It's being reported that .... "
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
About time to put the blinders on because there's so many conflicting reports, it's hard to keep up with them lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,915 Likes: 16
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,915 Likes: 16 |
I heard on NFL that Hue wants a QB and FO wants Garrett. I hope we take Garrett and then at #12 take OJ Howard, unless Fornette is there of course  But if Hue wants a QB and he's sure of his guy, we have to get that QB. It's Hue's ass if the guy doesn't work out..... He better be sure... It is very likely that this is all bull anyway.
Last edited by Spiritbro77; 04/12/17 07:59 PM.
#BlackLivesMatter #StopAsianHate
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899 |
Maybe all of this nonsense and speculation is really to cover up a trade with NE > #1 for JG? I mean, if Hue BELIEVES the guy is a franchise QB for 10+ years then you would use the 1, right? If there was a rookie they felt was worth #1 they would choose him over Garrett. Maybe, they feel that way about JG? On a side note....imagine NE with Garrett? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809 |
Could be, but I don't trade Garrett for JG.
I don't see JG Elway'ish or Manning'ish.
I do see Garrett Selmom'ish or Smith'ish.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104 Likes: 1
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104 Likes: 1 |
The closer we get, the more I think we're about to trade down for Fournette or Trubisky. Then again I'm hoping this is just all smoke screen
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809 |
I am sure we have a standing offer to the Pats for JG. Possibly this talk about Mitch is to help nudge them into taking our deal.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
I just want to throw out what I heard on ESPHN Radio the other morning about the Browns:
The guy said:
"do not thing the Kirk Cousins trade if off the table even for a minute. The Cousins to Browns trade makes 100% sense. the Red Skins can get a high draft choice, and the Browns can get a franchise QB. The Browns have the pockets to pay Cousins the big longterm deal he is after, and its crystal clear Cousins won't be a Redskin after this year if he stays. Washington stands to lose him with no compensation. That simply doesn't make sense. As we inch closer to draft day, it wil become more apparent to Washington that they run the risk of losing Cousins and being left empty handed. Its for these reason i won't be suprised if Washington moves Cousins. Trades like this don't usually happen until draft day, but Cousins to the Browns makes the most sense for both parties. Don't be suprised to see Cleveland trade the #1 overall to Washing for Cousins. He has been on of the best Qb in the league the last 2 years in the overall superior NFC conference. He is a difference maker day one for Cleveland. We will just have to see if the deal happens. I'd say talks have been going back and forth for sometime, but teams generally keep these things quiet till draft day"
Nothing is off the table until the Browns actually make the pick or trade....they are def entertain offers and making calls...i think if they can get Cousins i think they use #1 instantly and don't think twice about it....im looking forward to see what happens on draft day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,718 Likes: 174
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,718 Likes: 174 |
I would believe just the opposite. Hue wants a QB and the FO wants Garrett. I hope we get Garrett. I hope we get Garrett too. April 27th can't get here fast enough!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
I would not trade the #1 pick for Cousins even if Garrett wasn't in this draft.
#12. Maybe. Eh. If you twist my arm.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,526 Likes: 809 |
I agree. I don't want anybody over Garrett in this draft. None are good enough.
To me it is kind of like trading LeRoy Selmon or Reggie White for Joe Flacco.
Flacco is a nice QB, but come on!!
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899 |
I wonder how much of this Cousins rumor is to try to get NE to play ball with us? OR, how much is simply that the journalists have nothing better to write about so they are stirring the pot to get people to click on the article.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
I wonder how much of this Cousins rumor is to try to get NE to play ball with us? OR, how much is simply that the journalists have nothing better to write about so they are stirring the pot to get people to click on the article. The Cousins rumor is not a rumor. It is a thing a random person said on the radio. Also, journalists have nothing to do right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899 |
I wonder how much of this Cousins rumor is to try to get NE to play ball with us? OR, how much is simply that the journalists have nothing better to write about so they are stirring the pot to get people to click on the article. The Cousins rumor is not a rumor. It is a thing a random person said on the radio. Also, journalists have nothing to do right now. Well that "thing a random person said on the radio" is now being picked up across the web and becoming a rumor: http://sports.yahoo.com/video/browns-could-trade-no-1-132446782.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
The Cousins rumor is not a rumor. It is a thing a random person said on the radio.
Also, journalists have nothing to do right now. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 Likes: 26
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 Likes: 26 |
#1 pick and pay a guy 100m dollars. Nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
I agree. I don't want anybody over Garrett in this draft. None are good enough.
To me it is kind of like trading LeRoy Selmon or Reggie White for Joe Flacco.
Flacco is a nice QB, but come on!! I'm not saying I disagree with you but that's a very extreme way to try to make a point. It's definitely not like that. Like trading a 5% chance of Reggie white for a 1% chance of Dan Marino or something? Sure. There's way too much uncertainty and odds with prospects to make such a statement. Perhaps I'm just nitpicking though. Personally I would say it's more like trading cameron wake for Flacco. Both could be roughly equally better or worse than those players. It's impossible to know that now. So the mid point of what they could be is where I look. Wake is clearly far superior but they play different positions.
Last edited by predator16; 04/13/17 09:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,899 |
Lets say they are not convinced of Garrett for some reason. What if they LOVE Malik Hooker and decide he is there #1 guy in a position that we are horrifically bad at. BUT, they don't want to draft him at 1. THEN they trade the 1 with Tenn or NYJ and we move down and take Malik and the draft picks we get from the trade.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98 |
Lets say they are not convinced of Garrett for some reason. What if they LOVE Malik Hooker and decide he is there #1 guy in a position that we are horrifically bad at. BUT, they don't want to draft him at 1. THEN they trade the 1 with Tenn or NYJ and we move down and take Malik and the draft picks we get from the trade.
Just a thought.
That is the scenario I believe is very possible ... The Browns seem to really like Hooker and would pick up a 1 next year and another 2 this year + getting what may very well be their top guy in Hooker ...
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
^I've been saying this for a while. Imo hooker is not far off the specimen as a safety that myles is an edge. It doesn't even have to be that they dislike something about myles. If the value of trade compensation exceeds the difference between 2 prospects you desperately want you take the higher value. If hooker(or anyone really)+picks>myles you trade imo.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2017 NFL Season 2017 NFL Draft Draft rumors flying about #1.
|
|
