|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Your right we do disagree that the RB position is more important then that of the WR position today.
You are in the minority there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663 |
Quote:
You are in the minority there.
I'm ok with that.
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: 830
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830 |
I see us taking Richardson.
Offense is our most pressing need at the moment. And an extremely talented back will take alot of pressure off of Colt by opening up the PA game.
I see this team as being desperate to improve right now, from game 1. With that in mind RB is the only choice that can have an immediate impact.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
Back to the spirit of the thread, I think, with no trade downs, we take the CB.
On a side note: If were going RT or WR with our 2nd 1st, we will almost have to trade up past Cin. to get the best one. I've got a feeling their looking at the same areas we are.
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: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
Quote:
On a side note: If were going RT or WR with our 2nd 1st, we will almost have to trade up past Cin. to get the best one. I've got a feeling their looking at the same areas we are.
I guess you could add RB in there as well.
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: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
I think Claiborne is the biggest talent that will be there, outside of Kalil, who I think will be gone and we wouldn't take even if he was.
My gut isn't telling me anything on Richardson and Blackmon. I'm ignoring the media's input, too. I won't be surprised if H&H take either one.
I have flip-flopped between Richardson & Blackmon a few times the last few months, but right NOW I'm thinking Richardson would have a bigger impact on the offense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
I want TR because not only is he the safest, but he's a need and a playmaker on O.
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: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Richardson. Why?
-We need playmakers in the worst way on offense, which eliminates defensive players.
-In year three of his tenure, the honeymoon is over for Holmgren and results are expected now, not next year. The position which represents the most immediate impact is running back as that position has the shortest learning curve.
-Need. We have no starting caliber RB's on the roster. The best thing we have is a complimentary back in Jackson who is coming off of a year-long injury.
-Risk. Richardson is widely accepted as being the lowest risk in this draft, and when combined with need, represents the best combination at the #4 pick.
-Value. All scouts state he's the best at his position to come out in years, and when that's combined with the fact he's a 3-down player who will be expected to touch the ball 250 times in his very first season, well, that's value.
I can make a case for about five players in the #4 position, but none of those players have the overall package which meets the criteria of need, risk, and value.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
I think our best bet is to take Blackmon at #4.
- IMHO he's best wr to come out of college in 2 years. He may not run as good as routes as AJ Green. But he's a better playmaker, runs better after the catch, and has incredible range in his ability to catch the ball. PPl say he has a few drops. But when u catch over 260 balls the last few years even if he drops 5-10 balls... he's still at 95%. And physical dominance on corners can not be understated. It was his trade mark to shake off a DB and take it to the end zone
-I love Trent Richardson, but I feel we can find a serviceable back later on. Peede, James, the kid from Boise or VT by the 3rd will still be there. Not a fan of Lamar Miller. I think the quality of RB's in this draft is deeper then WR. Blackmon, Wright, Floyd will be gone by end of 1st. In contrast, we can still find some good backs by the 3rd
-The Tannehill question... NO WAY AT #4. It will be one of the dumbest moves in all of draft history. If he is there in th 3rd i'd take a shot on him. No experience, Not a leader, and gets frustrated easily. I dont care how good of an Athlete he is.. he is a Project. In 3 years sitting and some learning he could be a serviceable QB in this league.
#22 pick:
- We need to fill RT position with this pick. If someone falls to us that is much better value we take bpa. I.e Ingram, Kirpatrick, etc. then we take RT at #37. We absolutely need to fill the turnstile at RT before the 3rd. Quality usually drops off bigtime for OL from early 2nd to 3rd. Then we can still get a RB in the 3rd or trade back up and get the RB we want before then.
If we dont go with Blackmon at #4, a WR must be picked here. And once again RT would almost absolutely be taken at #37
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
Quote:
We will swap with STL and draft Tannehill.
I like Richardson though for my pick.
In this scnario, What do the Browns get for the swap / trade down to 6?
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
At least one of STLs 2nds, I'd prefer the 33.
And I'd want possibly a 3 next year.
All the people talking about getting one of Washingtons 1st are crazy...
The only way we get a first is if we trade with someone out of the top 10 who wants Kalil if he falls, or we pull another Julio Jones.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
I say use the guidelines that the Rams set for trading up 2 spots to us.
I would make them give up atleast 1 future first and a 2nd this year. Or they can missout on Blackmon. They have the picks. Just how bad do they want him?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
I say use the guidelines that the Rams set for trading up 2 spots to us.
I would make them give up atleast 1 future first and a 2nd this year. Or they can missout on Blackmon. They have the picks. Just how bad do they want him?
Unless we plan on taking Blackmon at 4, which I don't think we do. They miss out on nothing. They can sit pat and take Blackmon at 6.
Unless we trade with someone else, and I doubt Jacksonville is going to give up a future first.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
I am kinda hoping that the Browns can work a trade that looks something like this: Browns get a swap of 1st round picks with a team, plus a 2nd and a 3rd. They give up the #4 overall, and a 4th and a 6th. We have as many picks this year as we can possibly use .... and we can't trade away any of the supplemental picks ....... but we can use our own picks, plus traded picks to improve positioning in the draft. I would be ecstatic if we could somehow wind up with 2 firsts, 2 seconds, and 2 thirds ........ 
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: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
This draft will determine how much I hunt this fall
Select Tannihill and I'll be in a tress stand every saturday & Sunday, Terrible pick awfull pick this pick will set our Team back another 5 years, we cant miss, tannihill better be another Brees, Rodgers or Brady, if there is any chance he isnt we must pass,
Select Richardson, Claiborne or Blackman and I'll probebly stay at home on Sundays a few more times & watch
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,253
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,253 |
JK, I think we will take Richardson or trade down. I don't like either path. I say take Blackmon. If we take Richardson the ot5her teams D will just pinch down and shut off our running and short passing game ( see last year ). We need a playmaker at WR to open up things. If we keep trading for average players maybe someday we will be a average team. For those of you that want to draft defense . I don't understand this at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558 |
I think it will be Richardson.
As for why, Because Richardson is probably the safest player not named Luck in this draft and we can't afford to miss with this pick. Holm and Heck want to build through the draft and with our roster being below average in talent we have to make this pick count. Also we need impact players and that is what he is, he's probably the best back to come out since Peterson maybe even since Tomlinson. Another reason is although this is now a passing league you still have to be able to run the ball when you need too and none of the guys on our current roster is the type that can consistently do that. And finally if you have a good running game that will help open up the passing game because if your running effectively then the opposing team will have to play with 8 or 9 guys in the box allowing more favorable matchups in the passing game.
#gmstrong
Live, Love, Laugh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Quote:
And finally if you have a good running game that will help open up the passing game because if your running effectively then the opposing team will have to play with 8 or 9 guys in the box allowing more favorable matchups in the passing game.
We faced 8 and 9 man fronts on virtually every down last year and that was with a really sloppy group of running backs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
Quote:
Quote:
And finally if you have a good running game that will help open up the passing game because if your running effectively then the opposing team will have to play with 8 or 9 guys in the box allowing more favorable matchups in the passing game.
We faced 8 and 9 man fronts on virtually every down last year and that was with a really sloppy group of running backs.
And an equally sloppy group of WRs...not to mention the trifecta of Pashos-Hicks-Cousins
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
This is from Walterfootball.com. It contains some interesting quotes from various talking heads including Mayock and Shefter. What's the highlight? Shefty thinks we're taking Richardson, and WalterFootball thinks so as well...
web page Adam Schefter's NFL Draft News Published April 15, 2012 By Walt - @walterfootball Adam Schefter answered a ton of NFL Draft-related tweets Saturday. I found some of the commentary pretty interesting:
Of the Browns' No. 4 pick: "My sense today, subject to change, is Richardson."
I'm sticking to what I wrote in my 2012 NFL Mock Draft. The most likely to least likely options at No. 4 are Trent Richardson, Ryan Tannehill, Justin Blackmon and Morris Claiborne. Richardson just makes the most sense because he's the top prospect available and fills a huge need. If the Browns have concerns that Tannehill can develop into a franchise quarterback, then he can't be the pick.Speaking of the No. 4 selection, will the Rams move up to take Justin Blackmon? "That would be an upset. Don't see it." That would be pretty illogical. The Buccaneers aren't picking Blackmon at No. 5, so if the Oklahoma State wideout makes it past the Vikings, the Rams will be sure to get him. Blackmon will be Jacksonville's choice if he's still available. But what will the Jaguars do at No. 7 if he's not? "Many think pass rusher, which is possible. But don't dismiss a WR." Per a very reliable source, the Jaguars dislike Quinton Coples. Melvin Ingram interests them much more, but they're going to attempt to move down so they can select either Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright. Ingram could also be available in the event of a trade, so Jacksonville will desperately try to shift out of the No. 7 spot. As for No. 8? "If Miami doesn't get Tannehill, Fins fans will be boisterous." Tannehill figures to be the pick if he's available. The NFL Network's Albert Breer reported that the Dolphins liked Tannehill even before hiring Mike Sherman. So unless Sherman tells Jeff Ireland that Tannehill's mother is a whore, the Texas A&M quarterback will be in a Miami uniform, assuming no one trades up for him. So, the question must be asked: Who would trade up for Tannehill? Perhaps the Chiefs will jump to No. 7. Schefter didn't rule it out, saying that the only way Kansas City would land Tannehill is if it moved up. Meanwhile, Comcast Sports Net Philadelphia reported Saturday morning that the Eagles won't leap to No. 4 for Tannehill. Some people want to construct crazy scenarios in which some team trades up for Tannehill, but it's highly unlikely to happen. The Eagles and Dolphins aren't going to do it, and I highly doubt Kansas City will jump into the top five. Assuming the Browns go with Richardson, Tannehill, in all likelihood, won't be picked until No. 7 or 8. Meanwhile, Schefter still is doubtful about Matt Kalil going to Minnesota. When asked, "Claiborne or Kalil for the Vikings," Schefter responded, "Or Blackmon. Vikings considering all three. But Kalil is not a lock at 3." General manager Rick Spielman should just change his name to "Matt Millen 2.0" if he passes on Kalil. Hopefully he doesn't assault anyone from the rear with kielbasas. Everyone assumes that Blackmon will be the first wideout off the board, but can Michael Floyd be selected earlier? "Don't think so, but it wouldn't floor me." Blackmon has always been the heavy favorite to be the initial receiver chosen on April 26, so this is just confirmation. Schefter was asked what the Titans would do with No. 20 overall. "In a perfect world, a quality CB falls to the Titans." Everyone assumes that Tennessee will obtain the best defensive lineman available, and the front office very well could, but both Dre Kirkpatrick and Stephon Gilmore are in play for the 20th selection. Not done yet, either. 
Don Banks' latest mock says: Richardson
Quote:
You're starting to hear some draft experts characterize Richardson as the guy who is better at his position than anyone else is at theirs in their entire lottery, quarterbacks included. That kind of thing should give Mike Holmgren and Co. a sense of peace about making this pick.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...l#ixzz1sBcAGdgi
DraftMasher says: Richardson
CBSsportsline.com has two guys, Rang and Brugler, who updated their mock's on the 12th:
Rang: Tannehill
Brugler: Richardson
Footballs Future: Richardson
From the NFLNetwork.com website, we have Charley Casserly, Charles Davis, Albert Breer, Chad Reuter, Brian Baldinger, Bucky Brooks, and Lombardi. How are they mocked?
Casserly: Richardson
Davis: Richardson
Breer: Richardson
Reuter: Blackmon
Baldinger: Richardson
Brooks: Richardson
Lombardi: Blackmon
FoxSports: Claiborne
DraftTek's computer-driven mumbo-jumbo says: Richardson
Ourlads.com: Richardson
SportingNews.com: Richardson
Look people...it's over. Get your minds ready to be screaming "GO TRENT GO!!!" on Sunday's because that's who we are going with.
I can't wait. 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
No talk of Richardson going #3 to Minnesota, or anyone trading up to #3 for Richardson.
Definetly seems like this says Tannehill is not good enough for the Browns but Miami has to take him. If he can have a good enough career in Miami, then he can be just as good on the Browns.
I will always assume the media hopes that Miami gets what it wants over Cleveland, or any city gets what it wants over Cleveland until the media stops showing it's anti Ohio bias.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
What has been the BA of those hacks over the years? If anything that proves that it won't be Richardson
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
What has been the BA of those hacks over the years? If anything that proves that it won't be Richardson
I think that the Rams are targeting Richardson, but we will have to wait and see how much they like him as far as Trade offers. They will take Blackmon at 6 if Richardson is gone, but they won't trade up to get him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
If the vikes pass on Kalil, well- as a vikes fan as well -i'll be ticked.
But it would be wonderful news for the browns. This philly talk, my hunch is it's not about a qb or cb, its about the left tackle..... I think a team would trade up for Kalil. I still think Jerry Jones might want Claiborne....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
j/k
If we trade down, we better get something like the Rams just did I know were talking # 2 pick to # 4 pick, but it should atleast be comparable, lets not give it away for another 2nd rounder & 2 sixth's we need (2) second rounders & thier first next year. We need to keep dealing than move back up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
j/c From Peter King's MMQB: Quote:
The Browns are the pivot point of the first round at No. 4. You have the big quarterbacks going 1-2, and then Minnesota is praying it can stir up interest at No. 3. Not going to happen, according to the teams I've talked to, because there isn't enough love for another of these five prospects -- tackle Matt Kalil, running back Trent Richardson, cornerback Morris Claiborne, wideout Justin Blackmon or quarterback Ryan Tannehill to move up to three. Or four.
If the Vikings stay where they are, it's most likely they go for the long-term protector of second-year QB Christian Ponder instead of a desperately needed cover man like Claiborne. Then, Cleveland. I heard different things over the weekend from people I trust. GM Tom Heckert loves Blackmon and that would be his pick; president Mike Holmgren is still trying to decide with finality if Tannehill is the franchise quarterback worth taking here. The safest pick? Richardson, at a need position, even though receiver is a bigger need.
link
Last edited by brownsfansince79; 04/16/12 09:19 AM.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
This interview over the weekend with Tannehill will go a long way towards deciding which direction we go. Well we still have the private workout with him as well. Being the last guy in or at least one of is a good sign as is Randy Lerner wanting a franchise QB in here. It wasn't long ago he was talking about the Browns passing on a QB that he wanted and that sticking in his craw.
Knowing who all goes down to watch the private workout would be really interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
This interview over the weekend with Tannehill will go a long way towards deciding which direction we go. Well we still have the private workout with him as well. Being the last guy in or at least one of is a good sign as is Randy Lerner wanting a franchise QB in here. It wasn't long ago he was talking about the Browns passing on a QB that he wanted and that sticking in his craw.
Knowing who all goes down to watch the private workout would be really interesting.
it should be every man, woman and intern in the building. I mean, even if it's a smokescreen, there's no reason to not do that.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
jc http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82..._headline_stackReport: Browns split on Justin Blackmon, Ryan TannehillThe Cleveland Browns are split on whether to take Oklahoma State receiver Justin Blackmon or Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill with the fourth overall pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, Sports Illustrated reported Monday. Reuter: Second-best RB prospect? Trent Richardson is this draft's top-rated back, but who's next? Chad Reuter scouts three second-tier RB prospects. More ... Citing unnamed sources, the magazine reported that Browns general manager Tom Heckert is sold on Blackmon while president Mike Holmgren is weighing whether the team should go with Tannehill. Last week, The Plain Dealer reported that the Browns might also trade the pick, though CSN Philadelphia reported that the Philadelphia Eagles won't be among the teams bidding for it. The Browns also currently have the No. 22 pick and have been linked to several high-profile prospects, including running back Trent Richardson and quarterback Brandon Weeden.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
they're just referencing Peter King's comments that bfs79 linked above, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Report: Browns split on Justin Blackmon, Ryan Tannehill
Thankfully this report came out during the 2 week pre-draft misinformation window when I believe virtually nothing that's being said... it's almost always smokescreen at this point.
If my Jeopardy answer is "Justin Blackmon and Ryan Tannehill", my question would be "Who are the two players the Browns would love teams to trade up for?" The Rams trading up for Blackmon would give us whoever is left of Richardson/Claiborne and if someone else trades up to #3, that lets us trade down with the Rams anyway to give them Kalil. Someone trading up for Tannehill would allow us to trade down farther.
If this isn't smokescreen... well... my faith in this front office would be destroyed pretty quickly. To me (and many analysts out there), this is a 5 player draft at the top: Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Claiborne, Richardson. If we're deciding between none of them at #4, something is SERIOUSLY wrong with our FO.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Let's pretend we're actually targeting Trent Richardson ... Is this realistic? 1. Indianapolis - Luck 2. Washington - RGIII 3. Minnesota - Kahlil We're sitting at 4. We bluff that we want Blackmon. St. Louis trades #6 and #39 for the 4 pick. 4. St. Louis - Blackmon 5. Tampa Bay - Claiborne We're at 6. Bluff that we want Tannehill. Miami trades #8, #42 for #6. 6. Miami - Tannehill 7. Jacksonville - Ingram Then we end up with picks 8, 22, 37, 39, 42 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
I hope that we're smarter than picking Tannehill at 4.
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: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Might want to change that to I hope Tannehill is as good as Mourgrym thinks he is lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 835
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 835 |
JC. I am in with the folks that say they will be hunting on weekends if the Browns draft anybody but Richardson or Blackmon @ #4. The Browns will be bad enough to have a shot at Barclay next season IMO. I hope I am dead wrong. BUT PLEASE! Take Richardson! He even took a Leukiemia ( sp?) patient to her prom. And I will be ok with whatever goes down after that. IMHO there is NOT a huge drop off in WR talent from Blackmon. I like the Hill Kid out of GT and the Baylor Wideout. He would be great in the slot. I also like Cousins over Weeden @ QB. At least Cousins has a clue of what it is like to play in upper midwest weather. Against tougher competition than Weeden. No real D in the Big 12. IMO. I am sure the Browns can find some OL depth or LB in the middle rounds. Hopefully find a steal to play RT. Then use the rest of the picks for filling holes based on BPA. Mostly @ ILB. Just saying. 
Einstein could not even fathom the mathematical improbabilities of the Browns woes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I don't think the Bucs would pass on Richardson.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
I think it is a complete tossup with the Bucs taking Richardson or Claiborne. Wonder how many would be wanting the browns to trade 22 and 37 to move up to 10 to grab Richardson if he were to fall.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
I think it is a complete tossup with the Bucs taking Richardson or Claiborne. Wonder how many would be wanting the browns to trade 22 and 37 to move up to 10 to grab Richardson if he were to fall.
Pass.
My ideal draft at this point would start off something like this:
1) Richardson
1a) WR Floyd, WR Wright, OT Glenn, OT Martin
2)Weeden
I think that would be an ideal start to rebuilding the mess we call an offense. I think that we could use some of our lower picks to move back up into the 2nd round for either a WR or OT, whichever we don't grab in the 1st.
I do not want to turn 2 valuable high picks into one. I want quality and quantity. Heck, even drafting Richardson I would probably look at another back later int he draft. I think that there is quite a bit of talent available at RB, and if we can come away with 2 talented players, that would be great. I have already stated that I like a guy like McNutt, even as early as one of our 4th round picks. He runs precise routes, gets open, has great hands, and great size. He lacks great top end speed, but if the Browns feel that Little can become a #1 with 4.5 speed in this offense, then McNutt probably can too.
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.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) With The Fourth Pick Of The 2012
Draft....
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
