|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
OP
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
The Cleveland Browns select....
Not who you want, but who you think will be picked. And why.
Maurice Claiborne.
Heckert won't go all in on Tannehill, Richardson is not really needed if (big IF) Hardesty is healthy, and there will be another receiver and needed RT at 22/2nd round pick range.
I wish it was Richardson/Blackmon, but I don't think so.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
I don't believe we will take a receiver that high, it just isn't in Heckert's nature to do so. At 22, Kenny Wright or STephen Hill makes the most sense and we did bring both in for a look as well. WR at 22
I don't believe we will take a RB at #4, especially when you consider all the running backs we have brought in that are in the 2nd and 3rd range. RB at 37
I believe Heckert probably loves Claiborne but he feels he must address the offense early and often.
Browns will select Ryan Tannehill. Been saying it for months and no reason to change now. Bringing him in and going down there for a private workout combined with the fact we have really scouted this kid hard are facts taht can't be ignored.
He also comes from a similar offense. He has everything you want in a QB except for experience and i believe the QB gurus (Holmgren, Shurmur, Childress) are chomping at the bit to mold this kid into their franchise QB.
Browns need a franchise quarterback and if this regimes believes Tannehill can be the guy they will take him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
I'm bracing for Richardson. I'd take Blackmon because I think his playing style is perfect for the browns but it sure sounds like they're taking Trent. I don't really think they have a realistic interest in tannehill. Everything they've been saying and doing (including offering three first round picks for griffin) makes it seem to me that they prefer sticking with McCoy to taking tannehill high.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Heckert loves CBs, and he feels that you can never have enough.
I think that we'll go Claiborne if we stay at 4.
I would go Richardson, but I think that he'll look in 2-4 for a RB.
I think that we might even go RT at 22. I really think that Heckert likes the WRs we have, and doesn't see the position as being as bad as some fans do. It would not surprise me at all to see us pass on WR until the 2nd at the earliest. (and maybe even the 3rd)
Tannehill was a late 1st/ early 2nd before the big Redskins trade .......... and I believe that's where he should be picked. I don't see Heckert panicking and taking him at 4. I don't think that's in his nature. I do think that we'll look at Weeden in the 2nd if he's still there.
I do think that Heckert will try to trade down from 4, and up from the 4th round. I think that this is a tear he can maximize his picks as far as turning them into upper round picks.
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: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663 |
I don't think we will be picking at 4. I think there will be a trade and we will drop back some, but not much.
Going on the assumption that we stay at 4, I think Richardson is the pick. We have a huge hole at RB now and there are some very good options at WR later.
I think the whole Tannehill thing is a trade catalyst and will eventually take place, if not with us, then someone else.
KeysDawg
The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. - Carl Sagan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683 |
My heart says Blackmon, but I think it will be Richardson.
The Browns need some offensive production, and there is no plausible running back.
I would prefer to trade back and pick up another second or third in reality, even with 13 picks, it is going to be an interesting year.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
I can't speak for what we will do ... It would be speculation, so all I can do is speculate on what I would do.
#4 WR, Justin Blackmon Take an OT here? No too high. Take a RB here? No! "We think can find some good ones later in the Draft" < Lip serves? CB? Pick for a team who already has something to work with on offense or a team void of anything at the position. We need help on the offense this year, not next year.
Trade down? Perhaps if the price is right.
#22 OT, Johnathen Martin Pass on an OT for a WR here? No! Day one starters can't be found later in the Draft.
#37 QB, Branden Weeden Pass on him here for a WR or RB? No! He wont be there in round 3 (he wont get past KC in the 2nd round). and "we really like him"
Also I would pagage some picks to move back into round 2 and target either a LB (DL) or a RB (James/Polk).
I would also take another WR later in rounds 4-5 (Rainy).
Rounds 4-7 LB, DT depth and DB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
I think it will be Trent Richardson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
It's impossible to know, even with picks 1 & 2 FOR SURE being known...
Minnesota is pretty much slotted with Kalil, but if someone (aka Miami) jumps us to grab Tannehill, then I think there is NO WAY we are staying at 4, why would we pass up even a small ransom that we'd get for Kalil? Or an extra 2nd + that we might get for Blackmon or Claiborne?
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
My heart says Blackmon, but I think it will be Richardson. The Browns need some offensive production, and there is no plausible running back. I would prefer to trade back and pick up another second or third in reality, even with 13 picks, it is going to be an interesting year.
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Subtract Hillis and add Richardson ... just how much better does that make our team from last years team.
Not much!
[purple]But hey we can always draft a Robo or a Quincy Morgan later  [/purple]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
Quote:
I think it will be Trent Richardson
Agree, I think Holmgren wants his Shaun Alexander. I see eerie similarities in their running styles (and of course alma mater). Claiborne would be my 2nd guess. As was said above, Heckert loves him some corners. And if Herckert has a track record of doing something quite well that would be find very talented later half 1st round/top of the 2nd round Wr's.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 602
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 602 |
I think we have more possiblities here than we have had in a long time and I beleive this puts us in a GREAT position. Whether or not we trade back a few places (no lower than the 8th spot), I think (Hope) these are our three options: 1A- Claiborne 1B-Wright or Randle 2-Doug Martin 1A-Richardson 1B-Wright or Randle 2-Best OL or DE availble 1A-Blackmon 1B-OL or CB (maybe Jonathan Martin or Dre Kirpatrick) 2-Doug Martin I have also listed them in my prefered order, although the 1st and 2nd are very close. I just beleive are options our not as good if we take Blackmon with our 1st pick. I believe we could possibly even trade back to 6 or 8 and still get Richardson, get some extra picks and trade back up in the 1st round to get Floyd at WR. Then go best OL or DE with our early pick in the 2nd. I also beleive that we won't spend anything higher than a 3rd, possibly 4th on a QB. Then maybe a flier on Cousins or the kid out of Tenn-Chatt. Its just in Holmgrems MO to try and develop a late bloomer and I think we have a need to see Colt with a full offseason and some more play-makers around him. Again, as per usual, I am just rambling out loud and none of those three options will probably happen. JMHO, let me know what you think. 
Last edited by ncdawg; 04/07/12 07:43 PM.
Born and breed with OSU, App. State alumni, but bleed orange and brown.
Go ARMY......Beat Navy!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
I think it's going to be Richardson as well, maybe not at #4, but if we trade back to #6 and let the Rams have Blackmon, I think TRich is a lock.
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
I think we have more possiblities here than we have had in a long time and I beleive this puts us in a GREAT position.
I've said it a few times, that if we actually STAY at 4 and take someone, I'll be dissapointed...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Man, I really don't know who we WILL take at 4, if we take anyone at 4.
I've been leaning towards Claiborne for a while, but the thought of taking Richardson has grown on me more, and they are pretty close to even. The reason I lean towards taking Claiborne is RBs always seem to fall, and you can get some very quality backs in round 2. The level of talent from the top CB to the ones you start seeing taken in round 2 drops off. So my strategy would be to take Claiborne, then a WR at 22, then a RB in the second.
I'd be happy with any of the 3 sitting there for us, but have more of a preference for Claiborne and TR.
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Assuming we stay at 4 and Kalil is off the board at 3 - I will say Claiborne.
I think the chances of us staying at 4 are under 50% however.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I think we will stay at 4 and we will pick Richardson.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Quote:
My heart says Blackmon, but I think it will be Richardson. The Browns need some offensive production, and there is no plausible running back. I would prefer to trade back and pick up another second or third in reality, even with 13 picks, it is going to be an interesting year.
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Subtract Hillis and add Richardson ... just how much better does that make our team from last years team.
You speak as if our ONLY pick is at 4.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
My heart says Blackmon, but I think it will be Richardson. The Browns need some offensive production, and there is no plausible running back. I would prefer to trade back and pick up another second or third in reality, even with 13 picks, it is going to be an interesting year.
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Subtract Hillis and add Richardson ... just how much better does that make our team from last years team.
You speak as if our ONLY pick is at 4.
I think there is an argument to making every pick as if it's your LAST pick...
You don't KNOW who is going to be there at your next pick, or even if you'll have one (if someone makes an offer you can't refuse)
I guess that's the BPA philosophy technically, because if you think Richardson is the BPA, but take something else, "knowing" you can get an RB later...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Hillis signed a nothing-contract a weak into free agency - it is pretty obvious that we had zero interest in resigning him.
Hardball had nothing to do with it.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 04/07/12 09:14 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Hillis signed a nothing-contract a weak into free agency - it is pretty obvious that we had zero interest in resigning him.
Hardball had nothing to do with it.
We offered him a 3 year deal worth like 17 million, I don't care how it was structured, He decided to take a 1 year deal to be a BACKUP some where else...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226 |
Quote:
I hope we will stay at 4 and we will pick Richardson.
fixed it for you.
I expect that we will trade back I would like us to get Blackmon.
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
If we stay at pick four I think it will be Richardson.
Or Claiborne.
But definitely not Tannehill.
Or Blackmon.
We could also trade back.
What I'm saying is, I really have no clue what we are going to do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
Quote:
If we stay at pick four I think it will be Richardson.
Or Claiborne.
But definitely not Tannehill.
Or Blackmon.
We could also trade back.
What I'm saying is, I really have no clue what we are going to do.
I'm with you there. I would love for us to pick Richardson; however, this FO has been throwing up so many smoke signals to pull a trade down that nobody outside the organization can truly tell what is going to happen come draft day. As much as the suspense is driving me (and I'm sure most of you too) nuts, it sure is interesting and fun to watch unfold.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Hillis signed a nothing-contract a weak into free agency - it is pretty obvious that we had zero interest in resigning him.
Hardball had nothing to do with it.
That's BS ... We played hardball with him all of this last season and imo why he coped his attitude. I don't agree with it, but I think that was a two way street.
Interest says nothing about our building process of addition by subtraction.
This time last year Hillis was a folk hero of sorts.
A year later we are talking about selecting a RB with the 4th selection.
What a waisted opportunity to add talent at another position of NEED for forever.
Makes me sick to my stomach to be stuck in the mud for all these years.
It's high time we traded in our club for a trebuchet. Imbeciles! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Because we created a hole there by not signing Hillis and playing hard ball.
Hillis signed a nothing-contract a weak into free agency - it is pretty obvious that we had zero interest in resigning him.
Hardball had nothing to do with it.
That's BS ... We played hardball with him all of this last season and imo why he coped his attitude. I don't agree with it, but I think that was a two way street.
Interest says nothing about our building process of addition by subtraction.
This time last year Hillis was a folk hero of sorts.
A year later we are talking about selecting a RB with the 4th selection.
What a waisted opportunity to add talent at another position of NEED for forever.
Makes me sick to my stomach to be stuck in the mud for all these years.
It's high time we traded in our club for a trebuchet. Imbeciles!
I think some people look at 2012 and think Peyton Hillis was some kind of Pro Bowl RB.
Was I fan of him in 2010? Yes of course.
Is he over stated a little bit sometimes? Yes.
He had what, 8 solid games? He burst on the season (ask Dawan Landry) in Baltimore, ran over New England, and then proceeded to fumble ALOT and get hurt...
If Packers fans hadn't been voting AGAINST Aaron Rodgers he never would have had the Madden Cover..
He had alot of bad luck in 2011, some of it was self created.
I think he enjoyed being a Brown, and the Browns fans, but felt slightly disrespected by the FO.
IMO he wanted big RB money when he hadn't really shown that he deserved it.
He's gone now though, and maybe he busts out in KC and gets a big deal there or somewhere else, or maybe he's out of the league in 2 years.
Hes gone now, and I think even if he was here we'd still consider drafting Richardson.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
I really think it'll be Claiborne even though Richardson is getting all the buzz.
- Heckert has historically gone DL/WR/CB early. 2/3 of his 1st/2nd rounders with the Eagles fell into those categories. The only time he went RB at all in 1/2 was Shady McCoy in the late 2nd and that was for a "replacement" for Westbrook. He needed a RB desperately but let Moreno, Brown and Wells go off the board before getting his man. Plus, I know he hasn't shown crap yet and looks like a mega bust, but we still have a Heckert RB on our roster in Hardesty. He may want to get a supplemental speed guy to his power style rather than flush the pick after a couple of years and admit the miss.
- There's no DL worth taking at #4. If he's debating between Blackmon/Claiborne, Claiborne will probably end up having the higher grade and be the pick because of BPA. If anything, I think he's weighing Richardson vs. Claiborne right now since Richardson is a nice talent but just doesn't fit in with his tendency to draft BPA considering positional value. In the end though, I think his love of DBs wins out... he's even said that he doesn't anticipate taking defense but that Claiborne would be really hard to pass. I think he was being honest.
- His wheelhouse area for WRs seems to be late 1/early 2. I'd guess one of those picks is a burner WR instead of reaching for Blackmon at #4 with the other being an offensive tackle since it doesn't look like he values RB incredibly highly. The tackles are getting pushed up the board and I don't think Heckert would be comfortable risking not getting one vs. the plethora of RBs, especially because whoever we take needs to be good enough to start. That's not likely coming from the 4th/5th etc.
- The wildcard in it all is QB but I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that someone jumps later guys like Weeden and saves us from ourselves (and drafting 29 year old rookie QBs). I would be stunned, floored, flabbergasted if we took Tannehill at #4. I think he's Miami's.
If I had to guess right now, I'd say that barring a trade down out of 4 (which I think Heckert would love to move down a couple spots), we'd go.
1a) BPA (Claiborne)
1b) WR
2a) RT
2b) (trade up from our 3rd rounder with our extra late picks just like he did with Hardesty) RB
A quick mock just based on guessing Heckert's kind of players and where they may fall.
1a) CB - Morris Claiborne, LSU
1b) WR - Stephen Hill, Georgia Tech or Kendall Wright, Baylor
2a) RT - Bobby Massie, Ole Miss or Mike Adams, OSU
2b) RB - David Wilson, Virginia Tech or Lamar Miller, Miami or Doug Martin, Boise St. (Martin will likely be gone but you never know... also if we don't/can't trade up, guys like Pead and James are on the table)
I know there's way too much reading of the tea leaves going on here and Richardson could ultimately win out, this is just how I see things going down right now and it could easily change in 3 weeks. If Blackmon goes 3 like Schefter said is possible and we're able to trade down with St. Louis to give them Kalil and us the leftover between Richardson/Claiborne along with an extra pick... drool.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Hes gone now, and I think even if he was here we'd still consider drafting Richardson.
That would be a waisted 4th selection of Biblical proportions ... As it is it will still be a waist to pick any RB in the top 10 let alone the top 5.
With our track record with RB's, he will most likely be gone after his rookie contract anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
I truly believe that national media has us taking Richardson because it makes the following picks make good sense.
I'm assuming Luck, RG3, Kalil.
If we pick Blackmon it fouls things up for the Rams.
If we pick Claiborne it fouls things up for the Bucs.
If we pick Tannehill it fouls things up for the Dolphins.
If we don't pick Richardson people think he may fall to the middle of the first round.
And that's a minor reason why I don't think he'll be the pick.
I continue to believe it's Tannehill. Too many things make sense with it.
1. Holmgren, Heckert and Sherman need to find their QB. If they pick Tannehill now then they declare their guy and mold him into the starter from 2013 and beyond.
2. Tannehill has a huge leg up on understanding the scheme.
3. He has the athletic ability to be one of the top QBs in the NFL.
4. He has the smarts in spades.
5. He's a big dude. And I think we can count on him holding up in the AFC North.
Do I think HH&S select their QB of the future in the next draft? Not a chance.
They saw what happened when they offered three first rounders this year. Guess what that got them?
Nothing. Plus egg on their face.
They are picking their QB of the future this draft. The best prospect available to them is Tannehill. I believe he'll be the superior pro to RG3.
He's got all the skill set you need. Pull the trigger and make it happen.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
I think they should draft Ryan Tannehill at 4, or 6 if they trade back for a 2nd.
I think they should draft either Kendall Wright, or Mohammed Sanu at Wr with the 22 pick.
I think they should draft LaMichael James with the 37th pick.
At least I'd like to see them be able to draft those skilled position players in those spots.
With their 4th pick being a 3rd rounder, there will be some OT available.
and I hope they DON'T draft Mike Adams OT from Ohio State.
Last edited by THROW LONG; 04/08/12 01:21 AM.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
Hes gone now, and I think even if he was here we'd still consider drafting Richardson.
That would be a waisted 4th selection of Biblical proportions ... As it is it will still be a waist to pick any RB in the top 10 let alone the top 5.
With our track record with RB's, he will most likely be gone after his rookie contract anyway.
So if in 2007 we had picked a spot later, and Joe Thomas had went right before us, you wouldn't have jumped at the chance for Adrian Peterson?
Hell I thought we might take him OVER Thomas...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hes gone now, and I think even if he was here we'd still consider drafting Richardson.
That would be a waisted 4th selection of Biblical proportions ... As it is it will still be a waist to pick any RB in the top 10 let alone the top 5.
With our track record with RB's, he will most likely be gone after his rookie contract anyway.
So if in 2007 we had picked a spot later, and Joe Thomas had went right before us, you wouldn't have jumped at the chance for Adrian Peterson?
Hell I thought we might take him OVER Thomas...
AP went #7 and I would take him over Richardson if all things where equal,
any year.
I wasn't even concerned with AP in 2007. We made the right choice taking JT.
If we don't like our other options, then we should trade down and not compound our bad luck (losing out to the top QB's) by wasting a 4th selection on a RB.
Some say this isn't the whole draft, but the rest of the draft isn't blue chip talent either ... Big difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
I know were never going to see eye to eye on this but...... Quote:
If we don't like our other options, then we should trade down and not compound our bad luck (losing out to the top QB's) by wasting a 4th selection on a RB.
And......... Quote:
Some say this isn't the whole draft, but the rest of the draft isn't blue chip talent either ... Big difference.
If we drop down, then chances are we can take TR at 6-7-8. We still get blue-chip. If we take the CB, we get blue-chip, But if we drop down & pass on TR, Then you just defeated your purpose, As you said big difference. No Bluechip here! 
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: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
I know were never going to see eye to eye on this but...... Quote:
If we don't like our other options, then we should trade down and not compound our bad luck (losing out to the top QB's) by wasting a 4th selection on a RB.
And......... Quote:
Some say this isn't the whole draft, but the rest of the draft isn't blue chip talent either ... Big difference.
If we drop down, then chances are we can take TR at 6-7-8. We still get blue-chip. If we take the CB, we get blue-chip, But if we drop down & pass on TR, Then you just defeated your purpose, As you said big difference. No Bluechip here!
That's if you think that Richardson is the only blue chip talent ... I don't.
Posters on this board crack me up.
It's like another poster posted about folks putting the draft into a neat little picture frame with the top 6 selections.
Kalil to the Vikings at pick 3.
Richardson to the Browns at pick 4. Ugh!
Claiborne to the Buc's at pick 5 and
Blackmon to the Rams at pick 6, because he is such a reach at pick 4 
Yet a WR's value is much higher then that of a RB. Just look at the FA signings out of the gate.
If the game was a dinner course, then RB would be a side dish. Should we pay full price for a side dish? NO!
Ingram is a bluechip talent and could go as high as the 7th pick.
Mark Barron is another bluechip talent, but he plays SS and I don't see anyone projecting him to go in the top 15 picks.
DeCastro is a bluechip talent, but like Barron and Richardson, his position is not of high value.
Floyd is another bluechip talent, so yes I think that we could still get a blue chip talent with a trade down ... Just not too far.
My Pet peeve with this FO and how they helped create dissension with Peyton Hillis and created a hole that wasn't there.
Exhibit #1 ... Folks like to use the body of work as a crutch in the defense of the FO for not wanting to resign Hillis with his limited body of work (2010) yet we resigned Gocong to a new contract after the same body of work and of lesser production then Hillis was to the team.
One step forward and two steps back.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 04/08/12 10:25 AM.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
We will swap with STL and draft Tannehill.
I like Richardson though for my pick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
You know the draft better than I do, so I'll take your word for it. However I think PH brought this on himself, so I'll give the FO the benefit of the doubt. If we would have given in to him, then we would have to give in to every other malcontent that came along. Plus, I've been of the opinion that TR brings alot more to the table than PH, so no, it's not a wash. Happy easter, by the way 
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: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
You know the draft better than I do, so I'll take your word for it. However I think PH brought this on himself, so I'll give the FO the benefit of the doubt. If we would have given in to him, then we would have to give in to every other malcontent that came along. Plus, I've been of the opinion that TR brings alot more to the table than PH, so no, it's not a wash. Happy easter, by the way
Happy Easter to you and yours.
As far as TR being much better then Hillis , well that remains to be seen.
I have my doubts that this offense will look any different then the pathetic looking pup it has been and no RB in recent years has made any difference for us.
TR will not find the holes with this team that he had in College with Bama, so he could break tackles against DB's on the lose.
Logic (conventional wisdom) says that you don't draft a RB in the top 10.
Emotion says to some ... Gotta get a RB, Gotta get a RB. Meh! He's the next skinny object after losing out on Griffen.
The Media jumps on that bus too, because the Browns will forever be an after though and are destine to stay with the bottom feeders of the League.
Whereas with the Rams ... Now that's a team who needs a legit go to WR for their young QB. Never mind the fact that Fisher is a neanderthal and would take a RB over a WR any year. Just ask any Titan fan.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 04/08/12 11:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663 |
I disagree with the whole concept that a good RB hasn't had any effect.
Look at the difference in the offseason approach this year vs. last. Last year we were coming off a season where there was hope because Hillis had a good year. There was optimism that we would improve even more, because now we had a actual weapon in the backfield. And if we had gotten a RT and WR last year that could actually do something, we could have been pretty good.
Of course, then there was the lockout that killed the transition in coaching staff and set us back a year. Hillis didn't play like he did the year before, when he wasn't sick/hurt/pouting.
A weapon, any weapon on offense that can be consistent will be a good thing. I personally prefer a RB first, and a WR second. With a definite RT somewhere in here before the end of the 3rd round.
KeysDawg
The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. - Carl Sagan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
j/c
Here's my draft dilema:
I think we absolutely MUST take a RT at #37 or earlier. We simply do not have an NFL caliber player on our roster who can play RT right now.
There is no way I take a RT at #4 overall...although I WOULD do that before I would take Tannehill.
So we MUST take a RT at #22 or #37...by my way of thinking anyway.
I also believe we MUST...MUST get a talented WR on the roster. That might happen in Rd 3 or later...but I doubt that particular WR would produce right away. A first-year impact WR probably comes in the top 32 players drafted. (FWIW...I do not HAVE to have Blackmon to follow my wishes.)
If we are CERTAIN that the "right" RT and WR will be there at #22 & #37, I could be convinced to take TR at #4...although...I would rather take Claiborne and target a RB in Rd 3...or...trade back and stay focused on my RT & WR day-one starters.
I think the Claiborne then WR/RT and RT/WR option is the most "bang-for-the-buck" and fills three positions with Day 1 starters at two positions of absolute dire need AND lands a top playmaker/top 5 player in the draft.
In the end it comes down to this for me:
If we agree that a WR/RT must be taken at 22/37 (or earlier)...then what makes the biggest impact on this team in September?
Claiborne + WR (starter) + RT (starter) + 3rd Rd RB to play with the guys we have...or
Richardson + WR (starter) + RT (starter) + 3rd Rd "X" position?
I think a 3rd Rd RB in THIS draft can be a solid contributor right away. I do not think a 3rd Rd WR, DE, LB, CB, S, OL can be a solid contributor Day 1...depth for sure...but that's it.
This thought process keeps pushing me to Blackmon or Claiborne at #4 overall (or a trade down)...all because of the dire need we have at RT and WR.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) With The Fourth Pick Of The 2012
Draft....
|
|
