Newest Mock Has Us Taking Dee Milliner, I Love It
-
I just don't think you can beat 2 SEC studs. Shit, how about Mathieu in the 3rd? That would be some serious talent.
We wouldn't even need a free safety..
-
Trade down and get Rhodes or Vaccaro, Milliner is no where near a top ten talent
-
I just don't think you can beat 2 SEC studs. Shit, how about Mathieu in the 3rd? That would be some serious talent.
We wouldn't even need a free safety..
I just don't think you can beat 2 SEC studs. Shit, how about Mathieu in the 3rd? That would be some serious talent.
We wouldn't even need a free safety..
Matthieu will never be a legitimate starter anywhere in the NFL.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
it would be nice.
got a feeling if someone offeres a second rounder to us we'll be trading down.
-
I just don't think you can beat 2 SEC studs. Shit, how about Mathieu in the 3rd? That would be some serious talent.
We wouldn't even need a free safety..
Matthieu will never be a legitimate starter anywhere in the NFL.
Matthieu will never be a legitimate starter anywhere in the NFL.
Who are you to say anything about a player's potential? You're some bum who sits at home from the couch.
-
Matthieu will never be a legitimate starter anywhere in the NFL.
Who are you to say anything about a player's potential? You're some bum who sits at home from the couch.
Who are you to say anything about a player's potential? You're some bum who sits at home from the couch.
I'm some bum who sits at home on the couch and is right about Mathieu never being anything other than, at the very best, a slot CB.
By all means, continue to blow the kid because ESPN gave him a nickname.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
I hope we stay at 6.
Rhodes and Trufant are simply not on the same level as Milliner. We've had too many years of suck at the CB2 position.. and the shutdown corners would help the front 7 transition from 4-3 to 3-4.
-
i still think mathieu is going to prove a lot of people wrong and will be a legit player in the nfl.....if he stays out of trouble.
but by the 3rd round we will have already addressed the CB spot (hopefully) and we'll be looking for OL or FS.
-
Who are you to say anything about a player's potential? You're some bum who sits at home from the couch.
I'm some bum who sits at home on the couch and is right about Mathieu never being anything other than, at the very best, a slot CB.
By all means, continue to blow the kid because ESPN gave him a nickname.
I'm some bum who sits at home on the couch and is right about Mathieu never being anything other than, at the very best, a slot CB.
By all means, continue to blow the kid because ESPN gave him a nickname.
Yeah, who was our slot corner? Mathieu is a PLAYMAKER. Stats and on field tape don't lie. Not many are projecting Mathieu to be playing on the outside in the first place
-
I'm some bum who sits at home on the couch and is right about Mathieu never being anything other than, at the very best, a slot CB.
By all means, continue to blow the kid because ESPN gave him a nickname.
Yeah, who was our slot corner? Mathieu is a PLAYMAKER. Stats and on field tape don't lie. Not many are projecting Mathieu to be playing on the outside in the first place
Yeah, who was our slot corner? Mathieu is a PLAYMAKER. Stats and on field tape don't lie. Not many are projecting Mathieu to be playing on the outside in the first place
What stats? His two interceptions in 2011? The two he had before that?
The guy played across from one of the best college football CB's in the last 10 or so years and still barely was able to snag any passes.
His "playmaking ability" is really just his ability to make tackles, which was greatly aided by the fact that Chavis could press-man Mo Claiborne on one side of the field and combo the other half of the field. Mathieu was put in positions to succeed by his coaches, his eyes rarely had to leave the backfield and when he was asked to cover man-on-man he would often line up 5 yards off his receiver. Chavis had Mathieu at safety and CB, but in most respects he was the closest thing to a "Rover" ("Wolfman", "Monster", et al.) that we've seen in CFB in like 10-15 years.
If a team were to do the same thing with him in the NFL, he could find success. But, outside of Mangini's UFO defense( which worked out so well), there hasn't been too many instances of defensive formation innovation in the NFL in the last 15 years.
Add to that he's way undersized, not entirely speedy, has already drawn criticism of his work ethic and has a rap sheet to rival Charlie Sheen's, I just couldn't justify spending a third or fourth round pick on him.
Maybe in the sixth, if he were to fall.
-
Also: The two safeties behind Mathieu and Claiborne that year he started were Brandon Taylor, 4th out of all safeties in the 2012 class and Eric Reid, 4th out of all safeties this year.
The only plays Mathieu made were when he took a wild guess where the QB would throw -- not at all how you're taught, because if it's a pump-fake, you give up a TD. He simply gambled because his other DB's were first-team AllSEC and would cover his mistakes up.
And, he won't be able to replicate what little success he did have even if he was drafted by the Browns.. because when LSU plays Valdosta State, LSU DB's are supposed to get INT's, but there's no similarly bad QB in the NFL to inflate his stats.
He's small, he's not fast, he's not quick. He is not good. Add in his failure of more than 10 drug tests at LSU, and I would not draft him at all.
-
i still think mathieu is going to prove a lot of people wrong and will be a legit player in the nfl.....if he stays out of trouble.
but by the 3rd round we will have already addressed the CB spot (hopefully) and we'll be looking for OL or FS.
i still think mathieu is going to prove a lot of people wrong and will be a legit player in the nfl.....if he stays out of trouble.
but by the 3rd round we will have already addressed the CB spot (hopefully) and we'll be looking for OL or FS.
I agree 100% Mathieu will be very good in the NFL
-
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down. Rumour is that the Chargers (#11 overall) really want Lane Johnson and will likely trade with Cleveland for him. If you trade down, Rhodes will most likely be your pick.
Since the Steelers retained Sanders for another year, they probably aren't looking to trade up for Austin/Patterson and will probably pick defensively, Jarvis Jones being a heavily rumoured favorite. However I can still see Pittsburgh trading up a few slots for a DB.
-
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down. Rumour is that the Chargers (#11 overall) really want Lane Johnson and will likely trade with Cleveland for him. If you trade down, Rhodes will most likely be your pick.
Since the Steelers retained Sanders for another year, they probably aren't looking to trade up for Austin/Patterson and will probably pick defensively, Jarvis Jones being a heavily rumoured favorite. However I can still see Pittsburgh trading up a few slots for a DB.
Endymion said:
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down. Rumour is that the Chargers (#11 overall) really want Lane Johnson and will likely trade with Cleveland for him. If you trade down, Rhodes will most likely be your pick.
Since the Steelers retained Sanders for another year, they probably aren't looking to trade up for Austin/Patterson and will probably pick defensively, Jarvis Jones being a heavily rumoured favorite. However I can still see Pittsburgh trading up a few slots for a DB.
So? They matched the Patriots offer?
-
Endymion said:
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down. Rumour is that the Chargers (#11 overall) really want Lane Johnson and will likely trade with Cleveland for him. If you trade down, Rhodes will most likely be your pick.
Since the Steelers retained Sanders for another year, they probably aren't looking to trade up for Austin/Patterson and will probably pick defensively, Jarvis Jones being a heavily rumoured favorite. However I can still see Pittsburgh trading up a few slots for a DB.
So? They matched the Patriots offer?
So? They matched the Patriots offer?
Unfortunately, yes, the Steelers matched the Patriots offer. A second third round pick could've given them some much needed leverage to move up in the draft or fill some glaring holes (WR, S, CB, OLB, ILB, RB). Sanders is an okay reciever and the Steelers recieving corps is better with him (well on paper prior to the draft), just not that much better. Sanders will most likely leave the Steelers after this year and keeping him probably cost them a painless way to move up and get Patterson/Austin (either of which look to be improvements over Sanders).
-
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down. Rumour is that the Chargers (#11 overall) really want Lane Johnson and will likely trade with Cleveland for him. If you trade down, Rhodes will most likely be your pick.
Since the Steelers retained Sanders for another year, they probably aren't looking to trade up for Austin/Patterson and will probably pick defensively, Jarvis Jones being a heavily rumoured favorite. However I can still see Pittsburgh trading up a few slots for a DB.
Endymion said:
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down.
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
Endymion said:
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down.
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
I'm inclined to agree with you here. I think if we can pick up, say, Milliner in the first and then Rambo in the third, our defence is pretty much set. Maybe another ILB needed, and if Sheard doesn't pan out at OLB we need to look in to that, but I don't think those are priorities. That leaves us needing basically a guard and a tight end - we can manage with what we currently have for this season.
Having said that, I think if SD want to trade their 11th pick with us I'd probably go for it. The first round isn't eactly stacked with talent, and the most coveted position is either DE/OLB or LT from teams drafting - there's plenty of scope for us to trade down and still pick up a quality number 2 CB, then still get Rambo in the third and address another need with the second round pick - maybe we hit on a pass catching TE, or we look at an ILB or WR.
-
Endymion said:
I don't know, I hear alot of buzz about Cleveland trading down.
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
I agree to an extent.
I, too, believe we are finally at the point where we have accumulated enough depth and NFL level talent to where our main concern should be "impact" players. It's about time we start adding playmakers.
BUT
I do also think there are quite a few "impact" players that we could grab even if we trade down.
No doubt Milliner has outstanding talent and will be impactful no matter who drafts him. With that said, I think drafting him to be a #2 corner would have less of an impact for us than taking a either a pass rushing OLB to play opposite Kruger or an all-around ILB to play next to Jackson.
Putting Milliner across from Haden would almost be a waste. Milliner would essentially be full-time covering #2 receivers, wasting his talents on "possession" guys.
To me, that's a waste of a #6 pick.
We could instead, with that pick, trade back a couple spots and still be in the running for Rhodes (who, in my opinion, has the capability of being an extremely impactful player and may even end up having a better career than Milliner) and then a starting LB that we still desperately need.
I do understand all of the possibilities that drafting Milliner opens up for defensive scheming. I know that they won't necessarily be #1 and #2 designations. I understand all of that.
I maintain, however, that Rhodes is just as good of a prospect and that we can maximize our value by trading a couple spots. As long as we keep ourselves in the running for one of the top two CB's and one of the top 4 LB's, we are in great shape.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
I agree to an extent.
I, too, believe we are finally at the point where we have accumulated enough depth and NFL level talent to where our main concern should be "impact" players. It's about time we start adding playmakers.
BUT
I do also think there are quite a few "impact" players that we could grab even if we trade down.
No doubt Milliner has outstanding talent and will be impactful no matter who drafts him. With that said, I think drafting him to be a #2 corner would have less of an impact for us than taking a either a pass rushing OLB to play opposite Kruger or an all-around ILB to play next to Jackson.
Putting Milliner across from Haden would almost be a waste. Milliner would essentially be full-time covering #2 receivers, wasting his talents on "possession" guys.
To me, that's a waste of a #6 pick.
We could instead, with that pick, trade back a couple spots and still be in the running for Rhodes (who, in my opinion, has the capability of being an extremely impactful player and may even end up having a better career than Milliner) and then a starting LB that we still desperately need.
I do understand all of the possibilities that drafting Milliner opens up for defensive scheming. I know that they won't necessarily be #1 and #2 designations. I understand all of that.
I maintain, however, that Rhodes is just as good of a prospect and that we can maximize our value by trading a couple spots. As long as we keep ourselves in the running for one of the top two CB's and one of the top 4 LB's, we are in great shape.
I agree to an extent.
I, too, believe we are finally at the point where we have accumulated enough depth and NFL level talent to where our main concern should be "impact" players. It's about time we start adding playmakers.
BUT
I do also think there are quite a few "impact" players that we could grab even if we trade down.
No doubt Milliner has outstanding talent and will be impactful no matter who drafts him. With that said, I think drafting him to be a #2 corner would have less of an impact for us than taking a either a pass rushing OLB to play opposite Kruger or an all-around ILB to play next to Jackson.
Putting Milliner across from Haden would almost be a waste. Milliner would essentially be full-time covering #2 receivers, wasting his talents on "possession" guys.
To me, that's a waste of a #6 pick.
We could instead, with that pick, trade back a couple spots and still be in the running for Rhodes (who, in my opinion, has the capability of being an extremely impactful player and may even end up having a better career than Milliner) and then a starting LB that we still desperately need.
I do understand all of the possibilities that drafting Milliner opens up for defensive scheming. I know that they won't necessarily be #1 and #2 designations. I understand all of that.
I maintain, however, that Rhodes is just as good of a prospect and that we can maximize our value by trading a couple spots. As long as we keep ourselves in the running for one of the top two CB's and one of the top 4 LB's, we are in great shape.
Agree completely. If we were to trade down 11 there will no doubt be an 'impact' player that helps us immediately. There is enough talent in certain positions in this draft that our second round pick would be awesome (considering we get a second rounder trading down a few spots). Getting a TJ ward or Jabal Sheard talent with a pickup of a second would be awesome
-
And none of it is from the Browns. You were correct with the first 3 words.
When you trade out of the top 10, you aren't drafting an impact starter.. and the Browns need impact starters. We're no longer trying to plug a leaky sieve of a bad roster.. rather, we're looking to get over the hump and draft impact players who can be around for a while.
We've actually got NFL talent but not enough impact/All-Pro players. We can get an NFL-caliber starting OG or SS with the 3rd round pick, we don't "need" a second round pick. This year's second round pick is named Josh Gordon, and he's going to be an All-Pro. Josh Gordon is better than every receiver on most teams' roster.. he is our first legit WR1 since The Year Of Braylon.
Trading down is a flat-out stupid idea because our only "need" is for an All-Pro. Browns take Milliner.
I agree to an extent.
I, too, believe we are finally at the point where we have accumulated enough depth and NFL level talent to where our main concern should be "impact" players. It's about time we start adding playmakers.
BUT
I do also think there are quite a few "impact" players that we could grab even if we trade down.
No doubt Milliner has outstanding talent and will be impactful no matter who drafts him. With that said, I think drafting him to be a #2 corner would have less of an impact for us than taking a either a pass rushing OLB to play opposite Kruger or an all-around ILB to play next to Jackson.
Putting Milliner across from Haden would almost be a waste. Milliner would essentially be full-time covering #2 receivers, wasting his talents on "possession" guys.
To me, that's a waste of a #6 pick.
We could instead, with that pick, trade back a couple spots and still be in the running for Rhodes (who, in my opinion, has the capability of being an extremely impactful player and may even end up having a better career than Milliner) and then a starting LB that we still desperately need.
I do understand all of the possibilities that drafting Milliner opens up for defensive scheming. I know that they won't necessarily be #1 and #2 designations. I understand all of that.
I maintain, however, that Rhodes is just as good of a prospect and that we can maximize our value by trading a couple spots. As long as we keep ourselves in the running for one of the top two CB's and one of the top 4 LB's, we are in great shape.
I agree to an extent.
I, too, believe we are finally at the point where we have accumulated enough depth and NFL level talent to where our main concern should be "impact" players. It's about time we start adding playmakers.
BUT
I do also think there are quite a few "impact" players that we could grab even if we trade down.
No doubt Milliner has outstanding talent and will be impactful no matter who drafts him. With that said, I think drafting him to be a #2 corner would have less of an impact for us than taking a either a pass rushing OLB to play opposite Kruger or an all-around ILB to play next to Jackson.
Putting Milliner across from Haden would almost be a waste. Milliner would essentially be full-time covering #2 receivers, wasting his talents on "possession" guys.
To me, that's a waste of a #6 pick.
We could instead, with that pick, trade back a couple spots and still be in the running for Rhodes (who, in my opinion, has the capability of being an extremely impactful player and may even end up having a better career than Milliner) and then a starting LB that we still desperately need.
I do understand all of the possibilities that drafting Milliner opens up for defensive scheming. I know that they won't necessarily be #1 and #2 designations. I understand all of that.
I maintain, however, that Rhodes is just as good of a prospect and that we can maximize our value by trading a couple spots. As long as we keep ourselves in the running for one of the top two CB's and one of the top 4 LB's, we are in great shape.
i think a cornerback across from haden is this team's biggest need, so IMO it wouldn't be a waste to pick the number one CB in the draft at #6. the argument that either haden or millner will have to cover the number 2 receiver on the team makes the pick a waste is laughable. many #2 receivers on teams kill the opponents because do not have good corners on both sides of the field.
that being said if we have a chance to trade down and get a 2nd round pick then i'm all for it. we still should IMO (again) have to pick CB as our first pick with hughes. but the LB and DE depth in the draft is much greater than CB and FS depth, both of which we need to complete our defense. right now our LB corp is head and shoulders above the secondary. haden and ward are the only 2 guys i trust.
i don't get your obsession with LB especially given the fact we signed a couple in FA have many on our roster now that can get us through the year. all will be evaluated.
if i were GM i would pick CB, OL and S in that order then pick up whatever else is still left on the board, defensively.
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