2014 NFL Fan Draft - Your Team is on the Clock!
-
why is everyone going with Mack. He wasn't even talked about until a week ago, theres no way you take him number 4 overall. you guys are smoking crack.
-
why is everyone going with Mack. He wasn't even talked about until a week ago, theres no way you take him number 4 overall. you guys are smoking crack.
-
why is everyone going with Mack. He wasn't even talked about until a week ago, theres no way you take him number 4 overall. you guys are smoking crack.
why is everyone going with Mack. He wasn't even talked about until a week ago, theres no way you take him number 4 overall. you guys are smoking crack.
I think its very reasonable.
I'm surprised more people didn't pick Bortles though, as he pretty much confirmed he's the top QB yesterday.
-
Trouble is, Bortles is the top qb in a pretty weak class, and there are questions about his
footwork and the time it would take for him to acclimate to the pro game.
Given that, if Khali Mack is there...it's a no brainer - he's a surefire star lb.
And I believe he's good for the inside as well as outside.
This is going to be the craziest draft in many years...
-
Were stacked at OLB, that would be a horrible pick
-
Were stacked at OLB, that would be a horrible pick
Were stacked at OLB, that would be a horrible pick
Kruger, Groves, Mingo, Sheard?
None too outstanding there.
But despite that fact, if we drafted Mack he'd probably play both ILB and OLB. He has the size and speed for both. And he can cover.
-
Yup... Mack would be the only legit 3-down LB on the roster. Also would not matter whether in a 3-4 or 4-3 set... Many now rank Khalil as the best defensive player in the draft now.
Bortles is best of a good, not great QB class.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Yup... Mack would be the only legit 3-down LB on the roster. Also would not matter whether in a 3-4 or 4-3 set... Many now rank Khalil as the best defensive player in the draft now.
Bortles is best of a good, not great QB class.
-
Out of these options, I'm all on board for Bortles.
I'm not concerned about him being the #1 right away... I think Hoyer (or maybe another vet) can help bridge the gap until he's ready to go.
And I think he's the best QB in this year's draft, even though Manziel should be considered to have higher upside.
-
At this juncture with Bortles lasting to pick #4 I would have to select him, even though I do not believe that he is ready to be an NFL starter in his rookie season. The pick only makes sense to me if he only earns the job through a true offseason/preseason competition between Hoyer and who ever else is brought in. I understand the perception that a top 5 pick needs to start right away, but I think it makes even more sense to simply invest in the future regardless of what pick it is. If you think he can be a top 5 QB in the NFL in 5 years, but needs coaching on mechanics (his mechanic problems involves having his feet set properly which is easier to coach than say a poor throwing motion) then you make that pick.
However I would be just as happy with selecting Mack at this spot. He is a proven play maker. Even though he is a MAC product and played against MAC competition, he constantly performed at a high level against top offenses when they played out of conference. The only issue there is then we would have 4 starting caliber OLB. So where do we put Mack? He could easily play at ILB. But only problem with that however is if you draft a guy to be your future play maker at OLB/DE then you don't want to train and start him else where for his first one or two seasons and ILB isn't a position anymore that should be selected in the top 16. None of our other OLB are in a position to be moved to ILB either. I guess it would make sense if traded a guy, but that's hard to do. Mingo is here to stay, Kruger's contract is to large for many teams to want to trade for him, and Shread is such an unknown at OLB that we could litterally be trading a top 10 pass rusher for peanuts. It would make our rushing core one of the best in the league within the next two seasons, but over load our team in a spot that is one of the farthest from being a true need.
I completely do not agree with drafting Robinson. I understand that he may literally be the best OT prospect since our own Thomas, but that is literally why you do not make that selection. If he were picked he would be put at RT and we would then have 3 first round picks tied up in our O-Line. I don't think that investment out weighs the improvement in play we would see between him and Schwartz, whom I actually think is a solid RT. The only way this pick would make sense is if we traded Thomas away, which would literally have to be done this year. At this point in his career, his trade value is starting to go down. This is the last season we would be able to get multiple 1st rounders, or a high 1st round pick for him, but then again we would be trading away the very best LT in football for someone who is, regardless of any scouting and feelings, an unknown player in the NFL.
Honestly in a situation where Watkins is gone by the time we pick, trading back is out best option. For those who say that is not likely to happen in this draft do to the vast amount of talent available this year and teams being unwilling to give those picks away, I still say why not. I don't think we are going to see as much trading in the first round, but I do think there is such a good amount of great talent that a team will move up to jump someone else. Even with the QB's dropping as far as they have, there are still 2-3 QB hungry teams that are right behind us who might want a shot at Bortles, and considering that they would only have to trade to #4 instead of having to trade up to #1 or #2, the cheaper option makes it more likely for a trade to happen. Also I think we will see some trading this year, for future draft picks. Teams may not be willing to give up picks for this years draft, but will be willing to pay more in future picks in order to move up. What might have been a swap for 2nd round picks and an addition 3rd rounder for next season might end up being a swap of 2nd round picks for an additional 2nd round pick for next season. I wouldn't mind seeing the Browns move back 4ish spots if it meant picking up a 1st and 2nd rounder for next season with an addition mid round pick for this year, and with guys like Mack, Robinson, and Bortles at where we pick, it could very likely happen.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
why is everyone going with Mack. He wasn't even talked about until a week ago, theres no way you take him number 4 overall. you guys are smoking crack.
I think its very reasonable.
I'm surprised more people didn't pick Bortles though, as he pretty much confirmed he's the top QB yesterday.
I think its very reasonable.
I'm surprised more people didn't pick Bortles though, as he pretty much confirmed he's the top QB yesterday.
Like Tour said, most drafted before the UCF pro day. I know pro days aren't worth much but there is a lot of unknown about him and thus skepticism and I think the pro day did a ton to squelch that flame.
I actually switched my vote from Bortles to Mack ... I was torn either way.
-
At this juncture with Bortles lasting to pick #4 I would have to select him, even though I do not believe that he is ready to be an NFL starter in his rookie season. The pick only makes sense to me if he only earns the job through a true offseason/preseason competition between Hoyer and who ever else is brought in. I understand the perception that a top 5 pick needs to start right away, but I think it makes even more sense to simply invest in the future regardless of what pick it is. If you think he can be a top 5 QB in the NFL in 5 years, but needs coaching on mechanics (his mechanic problems involves having his feet set properly which is easier to coach than say a poor throwing motion) then you make that pick.
However I would be just as happy with selecting Mack at this spot. He is a proven play maker. Even though he is a MAC product and played against MAC competition, he constantly performed at a high level against top offenses when they played out of conference. The only issue there is then we would have 4 starting caliber OLB. So where do we put Mack? He could easily play at ILB. But only problem with that however is if you draft a guy to be your future play maker at OLB/DE then you don't want to train and start him else where for his first one or two seasons and ILB isn't a position anymore that should be selected in the top 16. None of our other OLB are in a position to be moved to ILB either. I guess it would make sense if traded a guy, but that's hard to do. Mingo is here to stay, Kruger's contract is to large for many teams to want to trade for him, and Shread is such an unknown at OLB that we could litterally be trading a top 10 pass rusher for peanuts. It would make our rushing core one of the best in the league within the next two seasons, but over load our team in a spot that is one of the farthest from being a true need.
I completely do not agree with drafting Robinson. I understand that he may literally be the best OT prospect since our own Thomas, but that is literally why you do not make that selection. If he were picked he would be put at RT and we would then have 3 first round picks tied up in our O-Line. I don't think that investment out weighs the improvement in play we would see between him and Schwartz, whom I actually think is a solid RT. The only way this pick would make sense is if we traded Thomas away, which would literally have to be done this year. At this point in his career, his trade value is starting to go down. This is the last season we would be able to get multiple 1st rounders, or a high 1st round pick for him, but then again we would be trading away the very best LT in football for someone who is, regardless of any scouting and feelings, an unknown player in the NFL.
Honestly in a situation where Watkins is gone by the time we pick, trading back is out best option. For those who say that is not likely to happen in this draft do to the vast amount of talent available this year and teams being unwilling to give those picks away, I still say why not. I don't think we are going to see as much trading in the first round, but I do think there is such a good amount of great talent that a team will move up to jump someone else. Even with the QB's dropping as far as they have, there are still 2-3 QB hungry teams that are right behind us who might want a shot at Bortles, and considering that they would only have to trade to #4 instead of having to trade up to #1 or #2, the cheaper option makes it more likely for a trade to happen. Also I think we will see some trading this year, for future draft picks. Teams may not be willing to give up picks for this years draft, but will be willing to pay more in future picks in order to move up. What might have been a swap for 2nd round picks and an addition 3rd rounder for next season might end up being a swap of 2nd round picks for an additional 2nd round pick for next season. I wouldn't mind seeing the Browns move back 4ish spots if it meant picking up a 1st and 2nd rounder for next season with an addition mid round pick for this year, and with guys like Mack, Robinson, and Bortles at where we pick, it could very likely happen.
The only issue there is then we would have 4 starting caliber OLB. So where do we put Mack?
Where you'd see four, I'd only see one... Mack.
Mingo may develop into a 2nd, but right now he can't set the edge against the run as a 3-4 OLB, a responsibility he'd be relieved of in a 4-3.
By contrast Sheard and Kruger can set the edge, but neither can pass in cover. IMO both need to go to DE in a 4-3.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
The only issue there is then we would have 4 starting caliber OLB. So where do we put Mack?
Where you'd see four, I'd only see one... Mack.
Mingo may develop into a 2nd, but right now he can't set the edge against the run as a 3-4 OLB, a responsibility he'd be relieved of in a 4-3.
By contrast Sheard and Kruger can set the edge, but neither can pass in cover. IMO both need to go to DE in a 4-3.
Where you'd see four, I'd only see one... Mack.
Mingo may develop into a 2nd, but right now he can't set the edge against the run as a 3-4 OLB, a responsibility he'd be relieved of in a 4-3.
By contrast Sheard and Kruger can set the edge, but neither can pass in cover. IMO both need to go to DE in a 4-3.
And groves is busy in the red light district.
We have a lot of solid guys. Nobody like Mack though.
-
what happened to pick @26 poll?
-
Out of curiosity, I checked the other sites he listed and he seems to have run into a barrier at the Raiders boards and hasn´t been able to start it until today.
You can see how that is going here:
-
Out of curiosity, I checked the other sites he listed and he seems to have run into a barrier at the Raiders boards and hasn´t been able to start it until today.
You can see how that is going here:
Out of curiosity, I checked the other sites he listed and he seems to have run into a barrier at the Raiders boards and hasn´t been able to start it until today.
You can see how that is going here:
Yes, I am falling a bit behind schedule due to boards that are forcing me to post "x" amount of times before I can starta thread on their boards. For the Raiders board that number was a whopping 100 posts.
Unfortunately, as of now I know the Falcons require 50, the bills require 25, and I have still many more to check. I do know some boards still haven't confirmed me as a member yet...smh
-
Out of curiosity, I checked the other sites he listed and he seems to have run into a barrier at the Raiders boards and hasn´t been able to start it until today.
You can see how that is going here:
Yes, I am falling a bit behind schedule due to boards that are forcing me to post "x" amount of times before I can starta thread on their boards. For the Raiders board that number was a whopping 100 posts.
Unfortunately, as of now I know the Falcons require 50, the bills require 25, and I have still many more to check. I do know some boards still haven't confirmed me as a member yet...smh
Yes, I am falling a bit behind schedule due to boards that are forcing me to post "x" amount of times before I can starta thread on their boards. For the Raiders board that number was a whopping 100 posts.
Unfortunately, as of now I know the Falcons require 50, the bills require 25, and I have still many more to check. I do know some boards still haven't confirmed me as a member yet...smh
LOL... just give us your log in info... we'll help...
Or in the alternative we'll make the picks for them. Would the rules allow Oakland to draft JaMarcus Russell again?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Yes, I am falling a bit behind schedule due to boards that are forcing me to post "x" amount of times before I can starta thread on their boards. For the Raiders board that number was a whopping 100 posts.
Unfortunately, as of now I know the Falcons require 50, the bills require 25, and I have still many more to check. I do know some boards still haven't confirmed me as a member yet...smh
LOL... just give us your log in info... we'll help...
Or in the alternative we'll make the picks for them. Would the rules allow Oakland to draft JaMarcus Russell again?
LOL... just give us your log in info... we'll help...
Or in the alternative we'll make the picks for them. Would the rules allow Oakland to draft JaMarcus Russell again?
yeah maybe this was a little bit more complicated than you thought. screw the time to become a 'member' with a specific number of posts.
try doing it team specific.
you might as well be a census taker at this point, even though i applaud your efforts.
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