|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
OK...lets make a few assumptions here....
The Browns will Go Offense with their first Pick...
Blackmon and Richardson are both available with that first Pick...
Note I say our first Pick and not the #4 pick in the draft....(we can stew on that some if we want too)
what is the better pick??? and why???
I am inclined to think Blackmon and going after the Boise RB or Wilson for Florida later in the draft as we are implementing the WCO which uses the pass as a run and is very receiever oriented. Blackmon would thrive in this offense if we can execute it. However, one of our issues is not being able to give our QB any time. We had no running game and a running game can go a long way in giving the QB an extra second or two in the pocket. Richardson could accomplish that and satisfy many run first oriented people...Hey Stephen Jackson carried the load for Shurmer in St. Louis....But by getting Richardson (who is a beast) we ignore a position that has plagued us for decades....the #1 receiver position. Even if we address with some of the receivers later...they probably will not be the #1 caliber we need.
I know there are some draft threads out there, but I wanted to narrow the focus here....so what is your choice and more importantly why??? Blackmon or Richardson????
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Can Blackmon be a true #1? I love Richardson and Jackson thrived in the same O as you said. I lean toward him at this point.
If Blackmon were A.J.Green it'd be a no brainer...but he aint.
Tough call still.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
difference between WRs >> difference between RBs (IMO)
that's why I go Blackmon #4 (or Claiborne, no problem with him)
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
Are we to leave Claiborne out of this discussion? I'm assuming so.
With that being said, I am 100% in line with you in that this is a really tough decision. I love what Blackmon brings to the table. Then again, I'd love to have a stud RB for years to come as well.
From watching Blackmon a bit in college, it seemed he was pretty used to catching those quick slants or other quick hitters that a WCO would pride itself on. Can he be that effective in the NFL? Well, that's what we have to ask about every rookie.
I only saw Richardson in the two LSU/Alabama games, and he didn't impress me as much there. However, I am certainly not going to base my impression of him on those 2 games. People who are way smarter than me have him highly touted. I think having a top tier RB helps this team a lot, too.
In the end, if it was down to either Blackmon or Richardson, it would almost be a coin toss for me. I'd be ecstatic of we got Blackmon just because I'm a big fan of his, but I would have not one iota of an issue with taking Richardson.
In the end, I think we take Richardson. I don't foresee this FO putting that much reliance on Hardesty.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Pete, you tried to narrow it down, then turned around and made us all think because you suggested trading down is a possibility.
My pee-brain can't take the complexity of the situation. 
I go against what I (perhaps wrongly) perceive to be the prevalent opinion of the fans on this board who like Blackmon by saying Richardson is the smarter move.
One of my gospels in the NFL states WR's rely far more on QB's than the other way around. Sure, one can then say RB's rely on offensive lines, but the entire offense rely's on the line, including the QB's and WR's, so that negates the logic of that argument.
I would also argue that Richardson, along with Kalil, are the two players in this draft who are truly can't-miss guys. They are going to come into the league, start from day one, and play at a pro-bowl caliber level. Can we say the same for Blackmon? It's a helluva lot harder.
Furthermore, we need to look at the current level of skill at their respective positions. Sure, we need another receiver, but Little showed tons of promise for a guy coming from his situation. What do we have at RB? Hardesty? Ogy? Do we know what we have in Jackson? We can plug Richardson in as a true three-down back and forget about spending any more money or draft picks on the position.
Don't mistake this as me giving Blackmon a thumbs-down. I like him as a player and if we draft him I've got no problems with the pick. However, I think we solve more problems for this team if we take Richardson, and we take much less risk with our draft pick.
Richardson is a sure thing who has the ability to give us as many catches as Hillis did two years ago. He can do more and has less risk. For me, the choice is easy.
If you want a little icing on the cake, I believe we can drop down a couple of spots and still land him. I don't believe that about Blackmon. Do you? 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
You have some good points but don't you think it is easier, or would be easier, to find a quality back that can fit the system in later rounds?
To answer the original post I really think that wideout would be the direction to take.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
It is absolutely easier to find RB's. No doubt about it.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 121
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 121 |
Understanding that the point is to choose between Balckmon and Richardson, I would take Blackmon and never look back. For one, RB is such a devalued position in todays NFL to spend a pick that early on RB, you better get AP level talent in return. Now, I understand that some have Richardson close to that level, but it seems that similar to the QB position, someone comes out every year at RB that is a "can't miss." I mean, just a year ago, Mark Ingram came from the same school with a far superior resume and was not nearly as touted as this Richardson. Pardon me if I don't see what makes Richardson so special... For our RB needs, I would look to LaMichael James. When I watch him play, I think of LeSean McCoy. A great fit in the WCO, dynamic with the ball, shifty and good in space. My rommate actually played a year with McCoy at Pitt and recently during one of our discussions agreed that James is the closest he's seen a player of McCoys calibur coming out. IIRC, the knock on McCoy coming out was that he was too small and not durable enough to be an every-down type back. After consistently putting up numbers, I think he has proven that wrong. Also, let's not forget that Heckert was in the FO that chose him in Philly. Going this route allows us to wait to draft that dynamic RB AFTER we have addressed a few other needs with earlier picks. Now, as for why Blackmon, my impression of him is made on his ability to take short passes and make them long gains. I'm no FB guru, but my understanding of the WCO is that it is built upon this very ability. He's good at slants, unafraid to go over the middle (at least in college) and uses his body effectively to adjust and get the ball when need be. I appreciate his power and explosiveness when the ball is in his hands. I don't put too much stake into collegiate awards, but I do feel that he is far and away the most polished WR coming out this year. His capability to trust his hands and process where he needs to be is almost uncanny. In this instance, where the Browns have painted themselves into a corner, so to speak, Blackmon gives them the most flexibility to fill needs later in an effective manner and still give the fans something to be excited about. Draft Blackmon at 4, pick up your RT of the future at 22, then I trust Heckert and co. to do what they get paid for and find us studs. As long as that includes bringing the new King James to Cleveland! (lol) 
"If you need two yards, I'll get you two yards. If you need four yards, I'll get you two yards!" Ron Wolfley, Special Teams Madman
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
The reason I put that last part in is I didn't want the "I don't think he is worth a #4" argument come into the discussion for either player...
I understand you points concerning Richardson....You make a great argument...The question is(to play devils advocate) Could we also get some of that same production from the kid from Boise or the kid from Florida, etc...while at the same time grabbing Blackmon...
Personally I can't see how taking Richardson would be a bad pick...just as you spelled it out...I don't know however if Blackmon combined with one of the other RB's would be a better pick...especially in a pass oriented offense...
Because I honestly think Blackmon is going to stud out....There is a fire in that kid to want to be the best....and he has the physical talent to be there....Is he a freak like Megatron and AJ Green....no...but he us not that type of a receiver...I see him and I can't help but think of Michael Irvin...not the biggest...not the fastest...but was one of the best when you put him on the field because he very talented and he wanted it it more than the other guy.
Then you have Richardson....possibly the most NFL ready player in the ENTIRE DRAFT!!!!...Like you said...Possible Pro-Bowl Quality from the opening Bell....
I have to say...I am leaning slightly towards Blackmon...but I by no means am decided in either direction....
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Both are quality players and true no1 workload kind of players at tehir positions...I think most would agree with that
Now it comes down to value and my pick would clearly be Blackmon...why?
Well, he is pretty much the only true no1 WR I see left this offseason, despite a deep WR draft class (lots of decent no2 specs and speed-slot WR) ..otoh, there are still a number of workhorse RBs left to be aquired in FA/trades and the draft...simple math: Blackmon + mid round RB > Richardson + mid round WR
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,857
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,857 |
My guess is Claiborn at 4 and a RB or Receiver at 22 and a RT and in the second round..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Claiborne is not an option under the assumptions.....that isn't what the discussion is about...
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
One has to consider too that a RB can get better b/c of his o-line.... If the RB is getting solid holes.. then any RB should do.. well not any.. but you get the point.
Another back I wanna throw out in the mix is Chris Rainey... If Hardesty is our big back.. why not get Rainey to add some speed and elusiveness, especially on screens since we run them so well. I think Rainey could do what Sproles and LeSean McCoy bring to the game..
The same goes for LeMichael James..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
IMO... I'd rather see WR then a RB. I've seen far more successful teams who have subpar RBs than I've seen successful teams that run with a sub-par passing game.
I think Blackmon opens up the offense more than Richardson.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753 |
Toughie.
RB touches the ball ~25 times a game, WR will be targeted ~10. Based on touches I give the nod to Richardson.
I personally think there are very good backs that will be available in round 2 and 3, and there is a steeper drop off of WRs outside of round 1. Based on that, I give the nod to Blackmon.
If it were me though, and it was between those 2 guys, I'd take Richardson, then Stephen Hill at 22.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
RB touches the ball ~25 times a game,
MJD had more touches than anybody else in the NFL this year and he was barely over 24.. I hate to split hairs but I think the average is probably closer to 21-22..
However, your premise about touches is right, the RB is going to touch the ball at least 3x as much as the WR.. however the WR has the capability of getting you as many yards in 10 touches as the RB does in 22...
Assuming you view them as equally talented at their respective position (and the point is not to debate that here).. you need to look at the non-touch plays... the RB needs to pick up the blitze, serve as a decoy on play action, etc.... the WR needs to block, draw the defense to him to open up other things, provide that threat to stretch the field to pull the LBs and safeties back, etc...
So in the end, I think a good WR/QB combo is more important and does more to hurt a defense than a good RB option...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753 |
the tilde meant "about", so I meant about 25 touches. Add in receptions - average of 3-4 per game for a RB, and it is between 20 and 25. Close enough
You are correct on yardage, no question. That was a draw for me, so I decided to not even mention it. And valid points on blocking, blitz pickups etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Quote:
It is absolutely easier to find RB's. No doubt about it.
However, I think it is much more difficult to find a running back of Rirchardson's ability than a wide receiver of Blackmon's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
To that end, I'd say Blackmon is over-valued at #4 because of his not-so elite size and measurables. Richardson is perhaps under-valued because of the common view of RB's.
Taking Pete's question a step further within my interpretation, if we're going to go into a season with McCoy at QB, who is going to have a greater impact, Blackmon or Richardson?
I think Richardson is a QB's better friend.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165 |
Perhaps, but I'd say that a WR of Blackmon's ability buys a team more than a RB of Richardson's ability... especially in the offense we're going to be putting that RB in.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
It is absolutely easier to find RB's. No doubt about it.
However, I think it is much more difficult to find a running back of Rirchardson's ability than a wide receiver of Blackmon's.
I would prefer we go Blackmon and then David Wilson or best RB available provided its not too much of a reach at 22... Would I be upset if we went Richardson and then Wright at 22 provided Tannehill is not the guy? Not really.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Perhaps, but I'd say that a WR of Blackmon's ability buys a team more than a RB of Richardson's ability... especially in the offense we're going to be putting that RB in.
That presents an interesting question.
Set aside McCoy's fear leading to all his checkdowns. Are we going to run an old-school WCO where the back is going to catch 60-80 footballs, or are we going to a different iteration where the back won't see as many footballs?
I don't have the answer to that question. If I did, it'd make a decision between the two easier.
While I'm an advocate of Richardson, there isn't a true wrong answer here. I do view Blackmon as a higher-risk guy because receivers are harder to evaluate, but he's the best receiver in this draft and I don't believe it's very close.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
To that end, I'd say Blackmon is over-valued at #4 because of his not-so elite size and measurables. Richardson is perhaps under-valued because of the common view of RB's.
Taking Pete's question a step further within my interpretation, if we're going to go into a season with McCoy at QB, who is going to have a greater impact, Blackmon or Richardson?
I think Richardson is a QB's better friend.
I agree with this...and at the same time it's my biggest fear...if we cotton candy McCoy with a top RB and decent D he can manage us into Seahwaks land, as in 7-9 wins annually with no shot at drafting the top 2 or even 3 best QBs
No, I do not prefer Blackmon over Richardson because it could make McCoy look "worse" in 2012...I prefer him because he makes more sense long term for the Browns (we haven't considered the AVG career length of RBs and WRs yet...another factor when it comes to RBs)
This FA AGAIN shows clearly that there are more workhorse RBs available than no.1 WRs...and they're cheaper too...the WR position has more value than RB and I don't see Richardson being THAT MUCH better than Blackmon
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418 |
I would like to think that Holmgren and Heckert are smart and astute enough to know when a QB is part of the answer, and when he is part of the problem.
They tried to give far more than most posters on this board thought was reasonable (although I still would love it if we had been able to get the #2 pick) for a QB to replace our current guy who they "like".
I bet that they try again next year ..... the question will be whether or not we'll have a trading partner, and enough ammunition.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447 |
Ah, the joys of being Old ( Me )  .. Give me a Mack & and an Ernest and I'll show you how to get your moneys worth ( and wins ) out of the RB position ! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
I'd guess Richardson has more Pro-Bowls than Blackmon.
But given this limited choice, I'd go Blackmon. We need a true #1 more than a RB. Blackmon, Little, and Cribbs might, I stress might, turn out pretty good. We can get a good RB prospect later.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165 |
Take Blackmon and don't look back.
Blackmon, Little, Norwood, Cribbs + whomever is left over plus UDFA's is WAAAAAY superior to anything we've had since Braylon, JJ & Winslow.... and anything prior to them as well (4 deuces, I'm looking at you).
Imagine if those WR's were up-to-speed on the offense by the start of spring mini-camps (minus Blackmon) - which they *should* be at this point.
That's a bunch of guys, plus a WR's coach that can now help teach Blackmon the offense, PLUS - Blackmon only needs to initially sweat learning one role as the other guys can take care of the others.... that group can be every bit as good as BE, JJ & K2 was.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Quote:
To that end, I'd say Blackmon is over-valued at #4 because of his not-so elite size and measurables.
What do you consider elite size measurables? He's 6'1 210 and runs a 4.4 40yd dash. He's a strong kid, known for breaking tackles and stretching the field. He is ideally suited for WCO with all the slant routes and his ability to run after the catch.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
... that group can be every bit as good as BE, JJ & K2 was.
Seriously? Seriously? 
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
OK...lets make a few assumptions here....
The Browns will Go Offense with their first Pick...
Blackmon and Richardson are both available with that first Pick...
Note I say our first Pick and not the #4 pick in the draft....(we can stew on that some if we want too)
what is the better pick??? and why???
I am inclined to think Blackmon and going after the Boise RB or Wilson for Florida later in the draft as we are implementing the WCO which uses the pass as a run and is very receiever oriented. Blackmon would thrive in this offense if we can execute it. However, one of our issues is not being able to give our QB any time. We had no running game and a running game can go a long way in giving the QB an extra second or two in the pocket. Richardson could accomplish that and satisfy many run first oriented people...Hey Stephen Jackson carried the load for Shurmer in St. Louis....But by getting Richardson (who is a beast) we ignore a position that has plagued us for decades....the #1 receiver position. Even if we address with some of the receivers later...they probably will not be the #1 caliber we need.
I know there are some draft threads out there, but I wanted to narrow the focus here....so what is your choice and more importantly why??? Blackmon or Richardson????
As for me there is 'no' real debate here.
My choice is Blackmon, because I wouldn't even take the great Jim Brown at pick #4 in this day and age.
Nothing against Richardson, because I think he will be a fine RB, but this is a passing League and a scoring League the way the rules are today. If we want him then trade down for heaven sake.
Look no further then who got all the action in FA. The WR's hands down.
I don't get all the negativity towards Justin Blackmon on this board ... He is a football player and not even Green had better numbers in College. He's a beast and who ever drafts this kid won't be sorry.
He is the only clear cut #1 WR talent in this draft and perhaps Floyd too, but he is not the runner after the catch that Blackmon is and will be. There is no doubt in my mind that this kid will be a stud receiver, because he is a natural football player and not just an athlete playing the position.
I only wish we had a great QB to pair with this kids talents. Perhaps we will get him soon too, but should we pass on a talent such as Blackmon, because we don't have a franchise QB? No ... That's just silly talk imo.
It didn't matter last season or the season before who we had lined up at), because we usually saw 8 in the box and why wouldn't we? We have no vertical threat for a defense to be concerned with no matter who was at QB.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
It is absolutely easier to find RB's. No doubt about it.
However, I think it is much more difficult to find a running back of Rirchardson's ability than a wide receiver of Blackmon's.
Maybe so. I personally wouldn't take either one. But to play the devil's advocate, one could argue that the team needs a WR of Blackmon's ability more than a RB of Richardson's ability and be convincing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165 |
Quote:
Quote:
... that group can be every bit as good as BE, JJ & K2 was.
Seriously? Seriously?
lol, seriously.... they can rock it out for one year, get our hopes up, then fall apart.
It's the Cleveland Way
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
To that end, I'd say Blackmon is over-valued at #4 because of his not-so elite size and measurables.
Quote:
What do you consider elite size measurables? He's 6'1 210 and runs a 4.4 40yd dash.
I consider "elite" measurables to be something greater than "solid" measurables.
And let's be factually accurate here. Blackmon was measured at 6'1 207, and on a fast track during his pro-day he was clocked at 4.45-4.5 on his first run and 4.41-4.46 on his second.
There isn't anything elite about any of those.
I'm not gonna do the legwork, but if you wish to go through the the last decade of the draft, top-10 WR's are all almost all bigger and/or faster than Blackmon. For a guy going top-5, he's actually not even average, he's below-average in measurables.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It is absolutely easier to find RB's. No doubt about it.
However, I think it is much more difficult to find a running back of Rirchardson's ability than a wide receiver of Blackmon's.
Maybe so. I personally wouldn't take either one. But to play the devil's advocate, one could argue that the team needs a WR of Blackmon's ability more than a RB of Richardson's ability and be convincing.
Convincing...only if you spun it that way.
I can make a convincing case that we don't have a RB on the roster who possesses the talent level compared to his piers that Little has compared to his.
Like I said, I can nod if we take any one of four offensive players and one defensive player at four and go "Yeah, I get that." I said Richardson would be my choice based on the reasons I explained, but I could make a case for Blackmon as well, though I feel he's more of a risk, if for no other reason than the position he plays. It's easier to project a RB.
Richardson, Blackmon, Claiborne, Kalil, and Coples. If we took any of those guys I'd nod my head.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Measurable's ... that's a hoot. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Measurable's ... that's a hoot.
Yeah...you're right.
I can't believe the NFL has a combine and pro-day's, and that all 32-teams have reps that go to the former, or that any reps even bother with the latter. What a bunch of hocus-pocus...
Incidentally, what's it like to be stuck back there in the 50's? What are you gonna tell me next...that burning witches at the stake should be brought back?
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Quote:
Quote:
Measurable's ... that's a hoot.
Yeah...you're right.
I can't believe the NFL has a combine and pro-day's, and that all 32-teams have reps that go to the former, or that any reps even bother with the latter. What a bunch of hocus-pocus...
Incidentally, what's it like to be stuck back there in the 50's? What are you gonna tell me next...that burning witches at the stake should be brought back?
Let's be honest, Toad. The fact that Calvin Johnson is 6'5", 235 pounds with a 4.35 40-yard-dash time and 45" vertical contributes nothing to his success.
It's entirely his route-runnning and hands.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
I think we all know my thoughts I think in this case, you go for the talent. Why reach for a WR and hope, when you can have the Best RB on the board? Isn't that what we all want? The best players we can get?
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: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Burning witches at the stake is underrated, IMO.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Quandry.......
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
