Mack or Watkins
-
Where to go with the 4th pick ?
I don't think we should go QB in the first round. There are way to many big time players at other positions.
So i think we should take one of these two guys since Clowney won't slip past the 3rd pick (if He's here, no brainer).
So who ? Mack or Watkins ? Watkins or Mack ? Amazing talent on both sides. Electric offensive player with elite skills or defensive cornerstone ? I just can't make up my mind.
Put Watkins next to Gordon, we have one of the best WR duo in the league. Put Mack inside next to Dansby, we're stacked with amazing linebacker talent.
I'm making my mock draft right now but i can't choose beetween these two.
So guys, which one do you prefer ? Who should the Browns take number 4 ?
-
When given two equally talented individuals, I say go with the area of greater need. To me that would be wide receiver and hence I'd go with Watkins.
"I said, 'I need someone who's going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it's not always going to be fun,'" -Paul DePodesta -
Bortles
-
I would agree, I would go with need since they are going to have a very similar grade. I also don't think that any of the QB's are going to be worth the 4th overall pick. I would rather get a sure thing WR or LB than a maybe QB. However I feel more and more like they are going to jump on a QB even though there is a good chance one of the top 4 will still be there for us at 26.
-
I mean, this says all it needs to:
"He has all the measurables," Pettine said. "If you look at him, if you said draw me an NFL quarterback, that's probably who you'd draw.
"I think the thing that's impressive about him is his ability in crunch time in a lot of tight games, a lot of come-from-behind wins, you can see he's confident, can make all the throws, I think he's a better athlete than some people give him credit for."
In my opinion, even if I hadn't watched a single snap of Bortles, I would want him based solely on those quotes.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
if we are just blwing smoke up people's asses and want a true QB that fits the mold of pettine and farmer...........bortles is at 4 (if you believe he s the next franchise QB) take him.
if you want to make an already dominant defense and add a couple of players then you go mack.
tough decision.
-
If you take mack that means the likely hood that Evans falls increases so I hope the browns take mack
-
I mean, this says all it needs to:
"He has all the measurables," Pettine said. "If you look at him, if you said draw me an NFL quarterback, that's probably who you'd draw.
"I think the thing that's impressive about him is his ability in crunch time in a lot of tight games, a lot of come-from-behind wins, you can see he's confident, can make all the throws, I think he's a better athlete than some people give him credit for."
In my opinion, even if I hadn't watched a single snap of Bortles, I would want him based solely on those quotes.
I mean, this says all it needs to:
"He has all the measurables," Pettine said. "If you look at him, if you said draw me an NFL quarterback, that's probably who you'd draw.
"I think the thing that's impressive about him is his ability in crunch time in a lot of tight games, a lot of come-from-behind wins, you can see he's confident, can make all the throws, I think he's a better athlete than some people give him credit for."
In my opinion, even if I hadn't watched a single snap of Bortles, I would want him based solely on those quotes.
The thing about this is there is no position on the team in which the unmeasurables are most important, and in my opinion, as or even more important than the measurables. I suppose the thing about crunch time talent speaks to this to some extent.
"I said, 'I need someone who's going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it's not always going to be fun,'" -Paul DePodesta -
The question was....Mack or Watkins?
My answer is.....Mack!
Just an old man with an opinion.
Mike
-
I mean, this says all it needs to:
"He has all the measurables," Pettine said. "If you look at him, if you said draw me an NFL quarterback, that's probably who you'd draw.
"I think the thing that's impressive about him is his ability in crunch time in a lot of tight games, a lot of come-from-behind wins, you can see he's confident, can make all the throws, I think he's a better athlete than some people give him credit for."
In my opinion, even if I hadn't watched a single snap of Bortles, I would want him based solely on those quotes.
The thing about this is there is no position on the team in which the unmeasurables are most important, and in my opinion, as or even more important than the measurables. I suppose the thing about crunch time talent speaks to this to some extent.
The thing about this is there is no position on the team in which the unmeasurables are most important, and in my opinion, as or even more important than the measurables. I suppose the thing about crunch time talent speaks to this to some extent.
Bortles is the best QB in terms of "measurables" as well?
Or are you talking about statistics?
-
The thing about this is there is no position on the team in which the unmeasurables are most important, and in my opinion, as or even more important than the measurables. I suppose the thing about crunch time talent speaks to this to some extent.
Bortles is the best QB in terms of "measurables" as well?
Or are you talking about statistics?
Bortles is the best QB in terms of "measurables" as well?
Or are you talking about statistics?
Let me rephrase. I mean intangibles are extremely important in a quarterback, so Bortles having good measurables does not convince me he is the best QB unless he also has the intangible things: intelligence, fast mental processing, pocket presence, receiver progression, etc. Those things you can only get a sense of by watching a guy play and not measuring his body or statistics.
-
Watkins for days.
-
Mack one hundred and ten percent. We can easily grab a no 2 receiver with our second first rounder or our second maybe even one of the third rounders considering how deep this wr class is. I can certainly see how enticing it would be to take Watkins but it doesn't make sense to me considering we would have to pay josh Gordon and Watkins big money. Too much money in one position.
-
Mack one hundred and ten percent. We can easily grab a no 2 receiver with our second first rounder or our second maybe even one of the third rounders considering how deep this wr class is. I can certainly see how enticing it would be to take Watkins but it doesn't make sense to me considering we would have to pay josh Gordon and Watkins big money. Too much money in one position.
GuNNerGatSKy said:
Mack one hundred and ten percent. We can easily grab a no 2 receiver with our second first rounder or our second maybe even one of the third rounders considering how deep this wr class is. I can certainly see how enticing it would be to take Watkins but it doesn't make sense to me considering we would have to pay josh Gordon and Watkins big money. Too much money in one position.
Only problem Gunner- and Mike H has been harping on it- Mack's natural position is OLB- and the Browns are loaded there.
Yeah- Watkins might be overkill- but tell that to Atlanta who traded a boatload to the Browns to get Julio Jones, when they already had Roddy White. We give up nothing to do that. Watkins will be on a relatively cheap rookie contract for years too.
Or would you rather we wait until the second round and potentially wind up with another Mohammed Massivedrop, Slowbiski or our current Butterfingers Braylon wannabe Little? I wouldn't rule out the Browns going qb @ #4, which means they would pick a wr @ #26.
-
the only thing is when we are discussing WRs i really like evans over watkins.
yeah watkins is a guy that can catch a screen and take it a mile, but so is dixon at RB or hawkins or benjamin at WR. if there is a deal to be had to move down to 9 or 10 and pick up evans and garner another pick (having the guy they covet gone @4) i take that deal in a second and draft evans.
he is by far the other biggest game changer at WR in the draft. big, great hands, with the height and weight to take any kind of ball out of the air thrown to him. just go back and look at the combine, or to all you manziel fans, look at the last 2 years at OKST.
this in my book is my second no brainer, which i'd rather see happen than adding another DE or some 'iffy' QB. then again wtf do i know EXCEPT that our second pick BETTER be a CB to play opposite haden. how many years are we just going to let some under-sized scrubs play opposite a pro-bowl corner when most teams in the league nowadays have 2-3 threats at TE and WR on the field every down?
-
the only thing is when we are discussing WRs i really like evans over watkins.
yeah watkins is a guy that can catch a screen and take it a mile, but so is dixon at RB or hawkins or benjamin at WR. if there is a deal to be had to move down to 9 or 10 and pick up evans and garner another pick (having the guy they covet gone @4) i take that deal in a second and draft evans.
he is by far the other biggest game changer at WR in the draft. big, great hands, with the height and weight to take any kind of ball out of the air thrown to him. just go back and look at the combine, or to all you manziel fans, look at the last 2 years at OKST.
this in my book is my second no brainer, which i'd rather see happen than adding another DE or some 'iffy' QB. then again wtf do i know EXCEPT that our second pick BETTER be a CB to play opposite haden. how many years are we just going to let some under-sized scrubs play opposite a pro-bowl corner when most teams in the league nowadays have 2-3 threats at TE and WR on the field every down?
the only thing is when we are discussing WRs i really like evans over watkins.
yeah watkins is a guy that can catch a screen and take it a mile, but so is dixon at RB or hawkins or benjamin at WR. if there is a deal to be had to move down to 9 or 10 and pick up evans and garner another pick (having the guy they covet gone @4) i take that deal in a second and draft evans.
he is by far the other biggest game changer at WR in the draft. big, great hands, with the height and weight to take any kind of ball out of the air thrown to him. just go back and look at the combine, or to all you manziel fans, look at the last 2 years at OKST.
this in my book is my second no brainer, which i'd rather see happen than adding another DE or some 'iffy' QB. then again wtf do i know EXCEPT that our second pick BETTER be a CB to play opposite haden. how many years are we just going to let some under-sized scrubs play opposite a pro-bowl corner when most teams in the league nowadays have 2-3 threats at TE and WR on the field every down?
I agree with this assessment. I'd rather us get the jump ball specialist than another guy who brings nearly the same skill set we already have. If would could trade down and still get Evans, i'd be happy.
-
When given two equally talented individuals, I say go with the area of greater need. To me that would be wide receiver and hence I'd go with Watkins.
When given two equally talented individuals, I say go with the area of greater need. To me that would be wide receiver and hence I'd go with Watkins.
But I would say that our far greater area of need is MLB. We got a topnotch #1 WR, a Pro Bowler at TE. We have Hawkins now, and Benjamin, and Josh Cooper and even Greg Little still.
We got diddly squat at MLB....except Craig Robertson....the Greg Little of the defense.
But....I will note what has been mentioned already: Mack may not be an ILB. More of an outside guy.
Maybe better to take Watkins and try to get a Shazier or the like later on.
-
When given two equally talented individuals, I say go with the area of greater need. To me that would be wide receiver and hence I'd go with Watkins.
But I would say that our far greater area of need is MLB. We got a topnotch #1 WR, a Pro Bowler at TE. We have Hawkins now, and Benjamin, and Josh Cooper and even Greg Little still.
We got diddly squat at MLB....except Craig Robertson....the Greg Little of the defense.
But....I will note what has been mentioned already: Mack may not be an ILB. More of an outside guy.
Maybe better to take Watkins and try to get a Shazier or the like later on.
But I would say that our far greater area of need is MLB. We got a topnotch #1 WR, a Pro Bowler at TE. We have Hawkins now, and Benjamin, and Josh Cooper and even Greg Little still.
We got diddly squat at MLB....except Craig Robertson....the Greg Little of the defense.
But....I will note what has been mentioned already: Mack may not be an ILB. More of an outside guy.
Maybe better to take Watkins and try to get a Shazier or the like later on.
I agree, Mack would not be moved to ILB (per Pettine) - a Watkins/Shazier 1st round would be a pretty incredible pull -
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 đź’—
Register Login