|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Let's say hypothetically you are the owner/president/gm of a new NFL franchise and this is your first draft. You have already signed, through the expansion draft, a bunch of backups and players who will be out of the NFL in 3 years. Let's also assume, for purposes of discussion, that trading the #1 pick IS NOT AN OPTION. Who do you take?
Andrew Luck - the obvious choice but expansion QBs have not faired well and you run the risk of having him so beaten up in 2 or 3 years that he is worthless. If you don't take him, however, you will be second guessed for a long time.
RGIII - Don't know why, if you are taking a QB, you would take him instead of Luck, but hey, I figured I would throw it out there.
Matt Kalil - Not the best player, but by far the best OL in the draft and probably the best interior lineman on either side of the ball. If you really believe you build a team from the inside out, he seems to be your pick.
Trent Richardson - Sort of meets two needs, he's not going to get killed any more than any other RB (like your QB is) but he is also a skill position player who can be "the face" of your franchise. Downside is that with the limited career expectancy of a RB, by the time you start to get good, he's going to be in the back half of his prime.
Morris Claiborne - If you want to build your defense first, he's a good start but with the non-existent pass rush you are likely to have, it could be a few years before you see his potential.
Fletcher Cox/Melvin Ingram - Again if you want to build the defense and start with the interior then I guess you look at these guys, though neither is close to being the best player in the draft.
Justin Blackmon - This choice makes almost no sense to me without a QB or an OL and whether or not he will ever be elite is in question but I thought I would put him on here.
I will tell you up front.. I'm taking Kalil and leaving Luck on the board.. it would be tough, but I think its the smart long term play.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
I agree with you on Kalil
Buld your trenches first.then plug the skill positions in,if you get Luck hes going to just get pounded and most likely never reach his potential.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I agree with you, DC. I think you build this team through the trenches. But, unlike the educated folks who call themselves Browns fans, most fanbases would be livid with that.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Interesting scenario.
Actually, I likely do take RG3. Although Luck is the better QB, RG3 is the overall better athlete. With an offense made up of castoffs and draft picks, I pick the guy most likely to make the big plays and be able to make something out of nothing.
RG3 has better scrambling ability and is more likely to hunt for the big play...which expansion teams likely need as their guys aren;t good enough to methodically move down the field on long drives.
Kalil is an interesting pick but one of the realities of an expansion franchise IS ticket sales and giving the team a leader and a face. You almost have to make that a more glamour spot.
Last edited by CanadaDawg; 04/25/12 12:53 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
I agree with you, DC. I think you build this team through the trenches. But, unlike the educated folks who call themselves Browns fans, most fanbases would be livid with that.
Yeah, and just using The Browns as an example. How different could things have been if we had drafted a stud LT first in 99? I dont even remember if there was one who came out in 99, but the Browns went with the sexy pick of a franchise QB who never even had a chance to be that. We would have been better sutied taking our lumps with a journeyman QB and building our lines.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
I agree with you on Kalil
Buld your trenches first.then plug the skill positions in,if you get Luck hes going to just get pounded and most likely never reach his potential.
KING
This!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
If there wasn't a surefire quarterback like Luck, I would probably take the left tackle. But since Luck is compared to Peyton Manning, I don't see how you pass that up.. You could always let the guy sit a year until you improve your team.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
Even if we didn't take Couch, we would've still stunk it up. Our main problem was having inept front office guys making our draft choices.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I dont even remember if there was one who came out in 99,
John Tait was the first OT off the board to the Chiefs at 14 followed by a couple others..
Here's another scenario as I think about it. If you really think Luck is as good as advertised.. do you pick up a veteran in FA (sign him to pretty big money and then apologize because he's going to get killed), take Luck #1 then use your high second and third to take OL, then use your #1 next year to take a LT, and make sure Luck never sees the field his first year? By year 2 you could have 3 or 4 highly drafted OL plus a FA or two for interior OL if you could swing it...
Look, Couch was no Andrew Luck but we took him and then compounded that mistake by making ZERO effort to find him any decent protection for the next 4 or 5 years..
Do you draft Luck with the understanding that QB prospects like him are rare and then sit him until you can protect him?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
that's exactly how I would do it.. You're probably going to pick top 5 the following year.. Sit Luck for a year, and get your left tackle the next draft..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Yeah that makes sense, but wasnt that our plan for Couch? But then Detmer went down and the FO caved into fan pressure for Couch.
I think if there isnt a LT worthy in that draft then you trade down and stock pile a bunch of 2,s and 3,s and build your core of a team.
And I still say the core of your team should be OL and DL first.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,551
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,551 |
If I think the Franchise QB is there I take him,, I pick up a veteran or two to hold down the fort for at least a year for two reasons,,1. to allow time to put talent at WR, RB and Oline. 2. to allow for an orderly transition to the face of the team for years to come.
I still contend that's the biggest mistake we made with Couch.
#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: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
You take Andrew Luck.
There's a QB that caliber on the board, you take him, regardless of what you have around him.
But I will say, under NO circumstances does he play in year 1. Maybe not in year 2.
I don't care how many QB's we go through, I'd sign Charlie Frye to play a few games if I had to. Anything to avoid him being put in that position.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
I don't know, the Browns had more problems than just drafting a QB 1st overall. This is a thin class at OT, no doubt, but remember that the Browns didn't just not draft OL in the first or second round in 1999, they didn't in 2000, 2001, or 2002. In 2003, they finally drafted Jeff Faine, but he was a C and Couch was already a wreck.
I still take a QB 1st overall... I mean these two guys are legitimately among the top 5 QB prospects in the last 6 or 7 years. Is Kalil one of the top 5 LT prospects in that time? People are talking about him falling to 10? Why is nobody starting rumors that Luck or Griffin might fall?
It would be a tough call for me between Luck and Griffin. I really don't think you can lose in that situation. So, at the root of the question, I take a QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
Quote:
You take Andrew Luck.
There's a QB that caliber on the board, you take him, regardless of what you have around him.
But I will say, under NO circumstances does he play in year 1. Maybe not in year 2.
I don't care how many QB's we go through, I'd sign Charlie Frye to play a few games if I had to. Anything to avoid him being put in that position.
Pretty much agree with this. Do everything in your power to keep him from playing in year one. Maybe give him a game or part of a game in the last week of the season.
The next year invest in either a top tier OL or a great RB, because if he does play, you'll be doing a lot of Metcalf up the middle all year.
Taking an OL over a franchise guy like Luck simply because you think building from the line out is the way to go is probably not the way to go about this situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
If you rate Andrew Luck as a prospect like Peyton Manning coming out of college...then you have to take Luck....If not...then I take Kalil....I am not convinced Claiborne is the come all be all CB...I think he is the best CB in this draft...I think he is a future shut down CB...But I can't see him in the mold as the best player in this draft as well as a player that will be looked as a hinge for a defense...and he would be looked at in that way...
But as everyone else have stated(if drafting Luck)....I am right there drafting the OLine right after and in the next couple years. And Luck doesn't play in year one barring dire emergency (3rd QB scenario) I don't care if we go winless without him in the game...
I build the trenches(both sides)...build the running game...and then he can come in. He won't have a lot in receivers to throw to at that time...but they will know the system, and we will be running most of the time anyway...
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: 2,573
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,573 |
I agree wholeheartedly.Just think if we would have drafted a stud LT 4 years ago,we'd be soo much better now.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831 |
Well if you're an expansion team, you're most likely going to be picking #1 next year as well. I would - without question - take Andrew Luck in the 1st and the best offensive skill player with the 33rd pick.
I would sign a vet FA and he would play that whole first season no matter what. Next year, when I'm picking 1st again, I take the best LT in the 1st, the best G in the 2nd, the best G/C/T in the 3rd and try to sign some vet o-linemen. I think this is realistic since you will probably have a huge amount of cap room. Start Luck in either his 2nd or 3rd season depending on how the team is looking. Even if he sits for 2 years (worst case scenario) he will be 24 years old and still have a solid decade left of being in top form.
All in all, there is no way you pass on the guy that is supposed to be the next Manning/Elway. You protect him - sure - but you do not pass on him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
I agree wholeheartedly.Just think if we would have drafted a stud LT 4 years ago,we'd be soo much better now.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
What good is an Andrew Luck if he gets beaten to death in the first couple years? I am all for this idea of a QB for the next decade, BUT - I am pretty sure that we haven't had a QB last that long since Otto Graham. Sipe? Injured. Kosar? Injured. Couch? Beaten to death. Bill Nelson? Injured. He did have over a 10-year career, but not with us. Frank Ryan? Had a great line, and a great RB, and won a championship. Don't think he lasted 10 years, though.
As for making him sit for at least one year, that's a wonderful idea, it's just not one that our past history would indicate is at all likely.
Build the LINE.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 330
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 330 |
I would take Luck. He seems to be the real deal. The Texans had extra picks in rounds 2-7 so I would pick 2 OL and RB in the 2nd/3rd rounds. Prevent your QB of the future from getting killed by protecting him and by giving him a run game
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
As for making him sit for at least one year, that's a wonderful idea, it's just not one that our past history would indicate is at all likely.
Past history doesn't matter... this is YOUR team, you get to do whatever you want.
If you want to go OL that's fine but don't blame it on mistakes that the Browns or anybody else has made in the past. This is your chance to say what you would do differently than them. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,393
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,393 |
Quote:
I agree wholeheartedly.Just think if we would have drafted a stud LT 4 years ago,we'd be soo much better now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
If your trying to build a winning team and you can't trade away the #1 pick to Washington for a king's ransom, then taking Kalil is probably the safest bet. If you're trying to plant butts in the seats in the short term, it'll be either of the QBs. Of course, neither one of them would be expected to start right away - so taking the QB might be the smartest play if you can actually keep them from seeing the field as a player for the first year or two.
With that said and in the circumstances that you've outlined, I probably go with you in drafting Kalil. He's not Orlando Pace or Joe Thomas, but he's certainly capable of securing the blind side of your QBs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,498
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,498 |
I build the D. It's a quicker way to respectability.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
If there wasn't a surefire quarterback like Luck, I would probably take the left tackle. But since Luck is compared to Peyton Manning, I don't see how you pass that up.. You could always let the guy sit a year until you improve your team.
That's the thing, you can't.
Couch was supposed to sit and learn. Of course, we know that didn't happen. Detmer got hurt in the second game of the season and Couch was thrust into the starting role.
McCoy was supposed to sit and learn. Again, of course we know that didn't happen either. Both Delhomme & Wallace got injured and McCoy was thrust into the starting role.
You could potentially do that if you also choose another QB with some compensatory pick in the 7th round or something and making him the backup to your expansion draft QB with your overall #1 pick the third string QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
You might do that if you can actually sit him but that's not a guarantee (see references to Detmer, Delhomme and Wallace above) and you might be forced to throw him into the fire.
If you're truly set on that, if your starting QB goes down and is going to be out of action for more than a week or two, you place them on the IR and sign another QB from the ranks of the undrafted players, the CFL or one of the arena leagues. You don't put your investment in Luck to see the field under any circumstance whatsoever.
Now, if you're building that team with 13 picks with 2 of them in the first round, I think you can take Luck with that first overall pick and use every other pick you have from your second pick in the first round to the 4th round to put the best OL you can field on the gridiron. You take flyers on the RB and WRs with whatever you got and what you can get in the later rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Remember the gist of the scenario. You CANNOT trade down from the #1 overall pick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
That's the thing, you can't.
Couch was supposed to sit and learn. Of course, we know that didn't happen. Detmer got hurt in the second game of the season and Couch was thrust into the starting role.
McCoy was supposed to sit and learn. Again, of course we know that didn't happen either. Both Delhomme & Wallace got injured and McCoy was thrust into the starting role..
My point is, I'll go 0-16 while signing a different guy off the street to play Quarterback every week if I have to, my #1 draft pick, under no circumstances, plays Year 1.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
It all depends on who would be available in the expansion draft. I believe in 99 we could have had Vincent Brisbee. What did Carolina do?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Oh, I wouldn't be disagreeing with you a bit except that if you can get him legitimate protection from the get go, you can actually start him from Day 1.
The problem that the Browns had in 1999 is that they never did get anything to protect their future QB. They found out the hard way. It wasn't until after that #1 overall pick was injured was it even considered a priority. Even then, it was a resisted.
You could draft your QB #1 and play them right away if you spent the picks on the OL to protect him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
except that if you can get him legitimate protection from the get go, you can actually start him from Day 1.
I don't think you can expect a couple expansion draft players and even a few 2nd and 3rd round picks to come together and play well as a unit that quickly.
Quote:
The problem that the Browns had in 1999 is that they never did get anything to protect their future QB. They found out the hard way.
I don't think they found out the hard way, I think they were just stupid. Tim Couch was sacked 56 times his rookie season and with their first 3 picks in the next draft the Browns took a DE, a WR and a RB... That's just not addressing the problem.
So the following year their franchise QB got hurt and missed most of the season.. so did they address the problem then? Nope, the next year with their first 3 picks, they went DT, WR, RB .... AGAIN!!
And that, in a nutshell, is why we are where we are... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440 |
I take Luck hands down. He would never see the field year one. Possible not even year 2. You will be most surely drafting top 5 the next couple of years. You can address the O-line with those picks. You can always get a guy as good as Kalil. He isn't rated as high as Thomas or even Jake Long were when they came out. A QB like Luck doesn't come out every year.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Expansion Draft
|
|
![[Linked Image from i190.photobucket.com]](http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z33/booger52/phpGGRdhwAM.jpg)
