Sideline Scouting Seven Round Mock
-
Over at Sideline Scouting we released a seven round mock draft today with explanations for every first round pick. Scroll over the tab “mock draft results” to see specific results for the Browns. Tabs towards the top of each page to scroll through each round.
http://www.sidelinescouting.com/mock/
What do you guys think of the picks we gave Cleveland.
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
-
Pick away... nits or otherwise...
... no apologies needed...I may be being a tad rigid here, but in my mind leading a team in catches does not a #1 receiver make. The '#1' is designation I reserve for a wideout who can separate at the line of scrimmage through quickness or strength or, on rare occasions, both. And that DQ's WR's that need the slot to routinely get open in my old school mind.
Won't disagree that you can "next year" yourself to death, but to spend a 4 on Tannehill? No way... and as I said, I like the kid and was willing to spend a 2nd round pick on him before the draft were QB-crazy after the 'Skins overbid for RGIII... the next Michael Vick... minus the dogs...
Wright is a 2nd tier WR at best...
I'm sure you had criteria for rounds 2 thru 7, but you did not share them. I've neither the time nor the interest to vet your picks, but if you should chose to post your thoughts then I'll read them... and probably disagree with them...
If you want to return the favor. I'm working on an update, but here's my first Mock. Have at it Sparky...
Checked out your mock and responded to it. A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing, he's a better player than Greg Little and would be their #1 WR by year two.
Cleveland's picks:
1.) Ryan Tannehill - Groom him as the quarterback of the future in cleveland. I'd have him start the year behind Colt and coach him up a bit. Great talent.
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
37.) Doug Martin - Versatile back who does everything and reminds many of Ray Rice or Jonathan Stewart. Between the tackles runner who can catch the ball. Has bellcow potential to carry the ball 250+ times a year.
Side note: If the Browns did that with those first three picks, that's an offense worth watching.
67.) Vinny Curry - Terrific pass rusher, fits in their scheme. Has a great first step and would be a steal at 67.
100.) Andrew Datko - Browns need a right tackle. Datko is a solid candidate at this spot. The crop gets very thin after him.
118.) Ryan Steed - Good small school cornerback. Cleveland needs depth behind Joe Haden.
139.) Aaron Henry - safety Mike Adams left, adding depth in the secondary here with Henry
160.) Brian Linthicum - Browns tight ends are well below average, taking a flier on Linthicum here, a good receiver, isn't a bad idea
204.) Darius Fleming - Chris Gocong and Kaluka Maiava could be improved upon, Fleming could be brought in for camp competition.
205.) Greg Childs - Second round talent who really struggled due to injuries the past 18 months. Grab him and hope to develop him as a #3 or #4 WR
211.) Justin Bethel - Depth at a position of need
245.) Derrick Shelby - Depth at a position of need
247.) Rokevious Watkins - Depth at a position of need
A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing...
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
-
A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing...
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
Our "tier" system must be different. I consider the first tier like the Calvin/Andre Johnson's of the world. Second tier would be the Greg Jennings, Steve Smith, Roddy White's of the world. Second tier is not a bad thing.
-
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
-
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
-
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
I actually really like Lamar Miller. I think Martin, Miller, and David Wilson are all on the exact same level. I have hard time doing my RB rankings because they're so close. Right now though I have the rankings as Martin, Wilson, and then Miller. The reasoning is because Martin is a Ray Rice type of player who can carry the load and is versatile in the passing game. He's a strong guy with surprising quickness. Wilson is a bit smaller but much more explosive. Lamar Miller was #2 on my rankings for most of the year, I love his style and think he can be a second round steal; however, Miller battled a shoulder injury all year and will be having surgery after the draft. So that little bit of a concern bumped him below Martin and Miller who are both (relatively) healthy. But all three are great players.
Media hype has nothing to do with my rankings. I don't really follow McShay or Kiper's rankings, I have my own that I keep all season. Kiper today has AJ Jenkins as an early second round pick. I don't have him in my top 100, and won't be putting him in.
Edit: Not sure where you get that Lamar Miller is the clear cut #2 RB in this draft. Most of the people I talk to don't have him at #2. I know a few draft guys I chat with have Chris Polk at #2. With running backs it's more about fit than anything when you have guys on a similar tier. Blocking schemes, current personnel, etc.
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
-
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
Honest question/Devil's advocate: Why does it matter if he doesn't contribute this year if you feel that he can be a franchise quarterback? If Colt McCoy is manning the quarterback position, you're pretty mush setting your win cap at six or seven. If you take Richardson, that's one year and 250 carries added to his career total on a (very) likely non-playoff team. Considering most runners these days only last a few years, wouldn't adding that future franchise quarterback be in the best interest of the organization if the goal is to win games? Now, as I said, I'd draft Richardson because he's BPA. But curious to hear your thoughts on that.
-
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
-
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
-
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
-
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
Good response. IMO, he'd only sit on the bench for a season, so it's good for the next decade after that. It's a move for the future. And the Browns aren't really in the position to compete next year no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the situation. but I can understand why a fan base would want a playmaker who can come in and have a difference. Can't be fun watching the current offense that the front office has been trotting out there.
-
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zing!
-
A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.
-
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zing!
Zing!
Not really a zing. I don't take it personally. I do this for a living. All fans have their opinions.
-
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
I said no attempt to scout the guys making the picks, I.e. Heckert & Holmgren ... no way do they spend 4 overall on such a questionable prospect. They either get a surefire Top 5 quality starter or they trade out of there ... they would never take Tannehill at 4 ... Heckert likes to bring in guys that start right away and Holmgren isn't going to spend that high of a pick on a QB project ... he just isn't.
Z
-
A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.
A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.
That's not really true. RG3 was a top 5 pick back in October... and was a "future first round pick" two years ago before his bad injury. It's really hard to find quarterbacks. There's really only 10-12 QBs in the world that make teams feel comfortable going into the playoffs. If you think you found a guy who can enter that top grouping, then you make the move to get him.
But I understand not wanting to see your #4 pick on the bench in year one. I think it's a more probable scenario than some people on this board are willing to recognize. But it makes sense why you'd rather take Richardson.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login