|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353 |
Now getting back to the thread at hand...
I do not like any QB not named Mendoza in this draft. I also am not sold on Sanders. I also see absolutely no world where Watson has a future past this year... SO, my only deduction is the supposed QB rich 2027 draft would be the best case scenario.
I have to caution in this way of thinking though....
If we choose to get ammo for 2027 and pass on a player I think could be a cornerstone of the offense in Tate. You don't know that ANY of those QBs will be in the draft, they might all opt for NIL contracts and stay in college. Or, 5 candidates could come out and you might still be out of the running for any of them. All you would have to do is win enough games to not be in the top 5. You could be #6 and if all five teams ahead of you need QBs, they might not take (4) first round picks to move out of a spot to get one.
The best move might be to get the best team possible in your mind for 2026 and if Sanders is terrible, Watson is terrible, you will have a top pick anyway without leveraging your draft in 2026. You will also have the option of trading Myles Garrett to get the most important player on the field, if you need extra first round picks to make a move. At the end of the day, we are picking top 6 after Myles broke a NFL record. Keeping the opponent from scoring too many points doesn't win games if you can't score points either. I am in agreement with 100% of this post. Could have typed it myself.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850 |
The 2025 New England Patriots finished as a top-tier NFL defense, ranking 4th in points allowed (18.8 per game) and 8th in total yards allowed (295.2 per game).
Trading away your top defensive player makes no sense.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,204
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,204 |
I have not studied the receivers.
But Tate, Lemon or Tyson are not Jeremiah Smith or Calvin Johnson.
I don't see receivers in this draft that are in that class.
Drop down from 6 to the middle of the round then get the best guy you can.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850 |
Calvin Johnson was drafted almost 20 years ago. It seems you have gone from elite WR to generational WR's. Tate compares to many great WR's drafted near the top of the draft who turned out to be top five #1 WR's in the NFL.
That's the problem we have been looking at for years now. A failure to invest highly in the draft at the WR position. The only time they tried to invest highly was in 2005 with Braylon Edwards at #3.
That was 21 years ago.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,204
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,204 |
IMO the Browns should trade down in this draft.
There will be receivers in the middle of the first round.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,850 |
Yes just like any other draft. Lower rated WR's.
I'm not promoting that that the Browns draft Tate. Just like you I would prefer a trade down myself. But should they decide to draft Tate I'm fully aware he is worthy of the selection.
To trade down you need a partner to trade with that's willing to give you the proper compensation for that to be possible and make sense. That's simply never just a given.
As such I try to open up the possibility that simply may not happen and look at the other moves that would make sense. Tate is what I would consider to be one such option.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250 |
ID42, I will disagree with your idea of trading Garrett.
Yes, you will get a boat load of players and or picks if you trade Garrett. But, Garrett has a "No Trade Clause" in his contract. That'll limit the teams he will wave the clause for. Assuming he will only accept playoff contenders. It's unlikely that team is trading their QB. You'll potentially get bottom half of round picks. Nice, but, is it worth the price for a HOF edge?
If the Browns were to trade Garrett, they will weaken the defense to obtain draft picks to trade and get a QB. What does that get you? Most likely an above average defense. A QB that will need two to three years to develop. That is of course they are able to draft a QB that is HOF caliber. After all, they are trading a HOF edge and want equal return value.
Duplicate what Philly did to get Hurts and Seattle did with Darnold. I see nothing wrong with QBs like Nussmeier, Klubnik, Allar, or Simpson and let then compete with Sanders. Obviously, these QBs are no where near the level of Burrow or Mahomes. Build a competitive offense around these QBs.
I believe in the end you can't have both an elite offense and defense. It is one or the other. You have a top 5 defense. Create an above average offense. Trading Garrett will simply be robbing Paul to pay Peter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353 |
He didn't say "we must trade Garrett".
He merely said it was an option if that is what is needed for enough ammo to trade up and get a QB we have targeted in the 2027 draft.
And since you said it yourself... "A QB that will need two to three years to develop". What do you think a 35-year-old Garrett will look like??
My bottom line is this: Myles Garrett will not win you a championship. Myles will be 32 going into 2027. If we have escaped yet another year without him having a major injury, the "time is ripe" for exploring the upside of trade assets... if need be.
And lastly... Myles is a lot of fun to watch. He does things I've never seen another human his size do. That has meant virtually nothing in the W/L column. He is not the "nasty" that propels the play of those around him. He's not enough of a "dawg" to pick up others and drag them along. Myles Garrett will not propel you to a championship.
But please understand, I'm also not saying "we must trade Garrett".
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250 |
I'm simply saying trading Garrett is not an ideal solution in creating a contender.
You weaken one side of the football to build the other side. You essentially turn into the Bengals.
I get that Garrett is getting older. That is why I am saying, stop looking for perfection, draw a line in the sand, and build a competitive offense to complement the defense.
Otherwise, you have what the Browns had in the 70s and 80s, a pendulum swing, good defense, good offense, and never a good team.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,353 |
We are 8-26 over the last two years of Garrett playing the best football of his career and "pieces" all around him on defense.
There's only one player on a football team that can be a "pendulum" the way you describe it; that's the fQB.
But you're entirely correct in saying "trading Garrett is not an ideal solution in creating a contender", I don't think that's even arguable.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,250 |
Fate, I think we pretty much agree.
I have been a firm believer that the QB position is overvalued. I'm not saying it isn't an important piece of the offense.
I believe teams can develop an above-average QB by surrounding him with complementary playmakers and play-calling. That is not to say teams can make any QB great. What I am saying is that good teams can draft a "potential" QB and make it work. Good examples are Buffalo, Baltimore, Philly, and Kansas City. All drafted QBs with potential and made it work. Is that saying all were lucky? Maybe. It also could mean they created an environment with a high probability of success.
Cleveland needs an identity on offense. Stefanski started something, but the organization tried to get cute. I understand the gamble, but the loss was substantial. Let's hope they make a more calculated risk this time around.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 611
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 611 |
The 2025 New England Patriots finished as a top-tier NFL defense, ranking 4th in points allowed (18.8 per game) and 8th in total yards allowed (295.2 per game).
Trading away your top defensive player makes no sense. You are leaving out the offense, which in this case is REALLY important: They ranked 2nd in points at 28.8 (Seattle was 3rd at 28.6) and 3rd in total yards 379.4 Cleveland: 31st in points at 16.4 30th in total yards 262.1 I really don't know why you are arguing this point. The Browns offense was deplorable. If we don't fix the QB, we will never win a Super Bowl. Myles is going to be 31 next off season, if you can trade him in order to get the QB you want, then you must do it. Now, if Sanders somehow comes out and shocks me, then all bets are off. You ride the Garrett wave as long as you can.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk NFL Draft 2026 college quarterback prospects
|
|
