I know you guys don't like last years draft hindsight threads...
-
In the 2000 draft, 15 of the 31 first round picks made the Pro Bowl some time in their career. Courtney Brown was not one of them. I wish we had taken any one of those 15.
Brian Urlacher, John Abraham, Shaun Alexander all would have looked nice.
Second guessing is a beautiful thing.
-
In the 2000 draft, 15 of the 31 first round picks made the Pro Bowl some time in their career. Courtney Brown was not one of them. I wish we had taken any one of those 15.
Brian Urlacher, John Abraham, Shaun Alexander all would have looked nice.
Second guessing is a beautiful thing.
In the 2000 draft, 15 of the 31 first round picks made the Pro Bowl some time in their career. Courtney Brown was not one of them. I wish we had taken any one of those 15.
Brian Urlacher, John Abraham, Shaun Alexander all would have looked nice.
Second guessing is a beautiful thing.
but this isn't the same as say the debate over whether we should have stayed at 4 and taken someone like Watkins. We're talking about the yeoman picks later on in the draft where you absolutely cannot pass on guys like Borland if they're still there. I stated in a previous thread that because of our situation at WR Watkins was a no brainer...but in retrospect, with all the other top talent around that early in the draft, it's not as no brainer as taking a guy like Borland in the 3d round who was one of the best LB'ers in the country at a position we were as needy at as WR. Perhaps even more needier at LB'er than at WR given that the ILB'ers are the QB's of the defense. I feel like we took yet another gamble on a relative no name instead of another sound fundamentals type guy. In my case at least I'm not second guessing cause I plainly stated my confusion during the draft on why we passed on those two big 10 studs.
But doesn't it give anybody concern that not only do we seem to miss on 1st rounders, we're also whiffing badly on the late rounders that other teams seem to pick up and turn into pro bowlers. Steelers anyone? Why can't we learn from them on how they draft?
-
i saw borland yesterday flying around. he's fast but i wouldn't call him dominate by any means. he is a sure tackler though.
friggin what happened to the 49ers? harbaugh and the team look like they just quit. guess he's getting ready to head to ann arbor and already has his bags packed.
and yes, biting off that other thread kaepernik looks average when he's not running.
-
In the 2000 draft, 15 of the 31 first round picks made the Pro Bowl some time in their career. Courtney Brown was not one of them. I wish we had taken any one of those 15.
Brian Urlacher, John Abraham, Shaun Alexander all would have looked nice.
Second guessing is a beautiful thing.
but this isn't the same as say the debate over whether we should have stayed at 4 and taken someone like Watkins. We're talking about the yeoman picks later on in the draft where you absolutely cannot pass on guys like Borland if they're still there. I stated in a previous thread that because of our situation at WR Watkins was a no brainer...but in retrospect, with all the other top talent around that early in the draft, it's not as no brainer as taking a guy like Borland in the 3d round who was one of the best LB'ers in the country at a position we were as needy at as WR. Perhaps even more needier at LB'er than at WR given that the ILB'ers are the QB's of the defense. I feel like we took yet another gamble on a relative no name instead of another sound fundamentals type guy. In my case at least I'm not second guessing cause I plainly stated my confusion during the draft on why we passed on those two big 10 studs.
But doesn't it give anybody concern that not only do we seem to miss on 1st rounders, we're also whiffing badly on the late rounders that other teams seem to pick up and turn into pro bowlers. Steelers anyone? Why can't we learn from them on how they draft?
Don't sweat it. Buffalo drafted Kiko Alonso in 2nd round two years ago...then we pick Cyrus Kuonjo in 2nd this year who has played one game (potential bust) but we picked Seantrel Henderson in Round 7 and he has started at RT all year. Every team finds some gems but also whiffs on rounds 1-4 from time to time.but this isn't the same as say the debate over whether we should have stayed at 4 and taken someone like Watkins. We're talking about the yeoman picks later on in the draft where you absolutely cannot pass on guys like Borland if they're still there. I stated in a previous thread that because of our situation at WR Watkins was a no brainer...but in retrospect, with all the other top talent around that early in the draft, it's not as no brainer as taking a guy like Borland in the 3d round who was one of the best LB'ers in the country at a position we were as needy at as WR. Perhaps even more needier at LB'er than at WR given that the ILB'ers are the QB's of the defense. I feel like we took yet another gamble on a relative no name instead of another sound fundamentals type guy. In my case at least I'm not second guessing cause I plainly stated my confusion during the draft on why we passed on those two big 10 studs.
But doesn't it give anybody concern that not only do we seem to miss on 1st rounders, we're also whiffing badly on the late rounders that other teams seem to pick up and turn into pro bowlers. Steelers anyone? Why can't we learn from them on how they draft?
-
Don't sweat it. Buffalo drafted Kiko Alonso in 2nd round two years ago...then we pick Cyrus Kuonjo in 2nd this year who has played one game (potential bust) but we picked Seantrel Henderson in Round 7 and he has started at RT all year. Every team finds some gems but also whiffs on rounds 1-4 from time to time.but this isn't the same as say the debate over whether we should have stayed at 4 and taken someone like Watkins. We're talking about the yeoman picks later on in the draft where you absolutely cannot pass on guys like Borland if they're still there. I stated in a previous thread that because of our situation at WR Watkins was a no brainer...but in retrospect, with all the other top talent around that early in the draft, it's not as no brainer as taking a guy like Borland in the 3d round who was one of the best LB'ers in the country at a position we were as needy at as WR. Perhaps even more needier at LB'er than at WR given that the ILB'ers are the QB's of the defense. I feel like we took yet another gamble on a relative no name instead of another sound fundamentals type guy. In my case at least I'm not second guessing cause I plainly stated my confusion during the draft on why we passed on those two big 10 studs.
But doesn't it give anybody concern that not only do we seem to miss on 1st rounders, we're also whiffing badly on the late rounders that other teams seem to pick up and turn into pro bowlers. Steelers anyone? Why can't we learn from them on how they draft?
... we picked Seantrel Henderson in Round 7 and he has started at RT all year. Every team finds some gems but also whiffs on rounds 1-4 from time to time.
Our real issue (or at least mine) is we did not even play day 3. What Day 3 picks we did not deal away maneuvering Day 1, we traded away later. Missed some good, cheap value in a very deep draft.
Everyone knew Seantrel's talent. Everyone knew he'd been a problem child in Miami. All he needed was a nurturing environment like Buffalo... or Cleveland. Great pick by the Buffalo FO.
"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 -
... we picked Seantrel Henderson in Round 7 and he has started at RT all year. Every team finds some gems but also whiffs on rounds 1-4 from time to time.
Our real issue (or at least mine) is we did not even play day 3. What Day 3 picks we did not deal away maneuvering Day 1, we traded away later. Missed some good, cheap value in a very deep draft.
Everyone knew Seantrel's talent. Everyone knew he'd been a problem child in Miami. All he needed was a nurturing environment like Buffalo... or Cleveland. Great pick by the Buffalo FO.
-
i saw borland yesterday flying around. he's fast but i wouldn't call him dominate by any means. he is a sure tackler though.
friggin what happened to the 49ers? harbaugh and the team look like they just quit. guess he's getting ready to head to ann arbor and already has his bags packed.
and yes, biting off that other thread kaepernik looks average when he's not running.
i saw borland yesterday flying around. he's fast but i wouldn't call him dominate by any means. he is a sure tackler though.
friggin what happened to the 49ers? harbaugh and the team look like they just quit. guess he's getting ready to head to ann arbor and already has his bags packed.
and yes, biting off that other thread kaepernik looks average when he's not running.
He dominated Lynch in the 1st half when they met 1v1. Didn't blow him out of his socks by any means, nobody's gonna do that...but when Borland met Lynch in the hole there wasn't more than a few more inches of forward progress. And a couple times Borland met him in the backfield and blew the whole play up even if he was helped by other tacklers. There were plenty of 1v1 meetings though to make me go holy shit that rookie is holding his own. Lynch is a vet too remember, Borland is only gonna get stronger and faster. That's kind of scary. For the 9'ers to have that kind of depth now at LB'er is ridiculous. And that Wilhoite (Sp?) on the other side of Borland is no slouch either, but Borland is clearly the main run stopper. And that new kid Aaron Lynch? He's gonna be as good as Aldon at that OLB'er spot. What sucks for the 9'ers is that Harbaugh hitched his wagon to Kaepernick, and I think that's why he's on his way out. They have a limited window with the current defense, although it does look like they're retooling, so I think the owner realizes that the offense is just not gonna run well through Kapernick.
And I swear I'm done with the 9'ers if they keep using Hyde as a kick/punt returner. That's your fucking future workhorse wtf are they doing?
-
The Browns are 7-4 and still in the playoff discussion.
Borland's 49ers are being shown the door.
Stop your whining. Apparently you don't know how to enjoy success.
GO BROWNS!!!
The Browns are 7-4 and still in the playoff discussion.
Borland's 49ers are being shown the door.
Stop your whining. Apparently you don't know how to enjoy success.
GO BROWNS!!!
Oh for fuck sake dude I'm enjoying the success we're having. But I'm not gonna back down from commenting on personnel mistakes we're making because this team could be dominating the division if our defense was playing better and more consistent. And no it's not injuries, infact injuries haven't lessened or improved our front 7's performance. Our secondary is the ONLY reason this season is still in play...do you realize that? If not for our secondary we're probably in the basement of the North again. This was a year I feel we could have put a stamp on the North for a couple years to come.
-
Oh yeah. Guys have all kinds of Mock Draft contests, total offensive yards per game contest, and our offensive coordinator (Hackett) is quite predictable (run, run, pass) so we have a weekly "Guess the first play from scrimmage"...inevitably, 50% of the members guess dive play, up the middle for two yards. It would be fun to link up the two boards somehow for game days or pre-game threads because you guys are a lot like us (not like those knit wits in Bahhhhston or J-E-T-S Jets Jets Jets. Ugh.yeah i think i had him in one of our mock draft threads.
you guys do that on the bill's forum? we do draft mocks, the annual w-l record threads before the year and different fantasy games.
wonder if we can make a contest out of the W-L record thing?
-
A. I did not say Kirksey has been terrific, I said he IS terrific. And whining about borland....
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
Now, how many have the Browns lost?
I liked Borland in the draft. But he has little short arms, and injuries. The niners lost to Chicago,
of all teams - gave up 28 pts. Gave up 23 in an Arizona loss, 42 in the first Denver loss, gave up 23 to Baltimore,
and gave up 34 points to Denver in a 34-0 shut-out.
And the niners didn't have a brand new defense with new coaches.
And Kirksey is terrific. No thanks, I'll keep Kirksey and the Browns 7-4 record.
Kirksey is learning, the whole defense has been learning a new defense.
And Kirksey is regarded as terrific by his team.
-
A. I did not say Kirksey has been terrific, I said he IS terrific. And whining about borland....
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
Now, how many have the Browns lost?
I liked Borland in the draft. But he has little short arms, and injuries. The niners lost to Chicago,
of all teams - gave up 28 pts. Gave up 23 in an Arizona loss, 42 in the first Denver loss, gave up 23 to Baltimore,
and gave up 34 points to Denver in a 34-0 shut-out.
And the niners didn't have a brand new defense with new coaches.
And Kirksey is terrific. No thanks, I'll keep Kirksey and the Browns 7-4 record.
Kirksey is learning, the whole defense has been learning a new defense.
And Kirksey is regarded as terrific by his team.
A. I did not say Kirksey has been terrific, I said he IS terrific. And whining about borland....
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
Now, how many have the Browns lost?
I liked Borland in the draft. But he has little short arms, and injuries. The niners lost to Chicago,
of all teams - gave up 28 pts. Gave up 23 in an Arizona loss, 42 in the first Denver loss, gave up 23 to Baltimore,
and gave up 34 points to Denver in a 34-0 shut-out.
And the niners didn't have a brand new defense with new coaches.
And Kirksey is terrific. No thanks, I'll keep Kirksey and the Browns 7-4 record.
Kirksey is learning, the whole defense has been learning a new defense.
And Kirksey is regarded as terrific by his team.
Actually Cal the Niners are 7-5. But they will have to jump the 8-4 Lions and Seahawks to make the playoffs, or hope Arizona totally collapses down the stretch. If you look at the Lions schedule they should go 4-1. Ergo, for the Niners to make the playoffs they must beat Seattle, in Seattle. Lotsa luck there.
-
Nah- good points but you can drive yourself crazy looking in the rearview mirror. Kirksey has played above what you'd expect out of a third round pick. Or want to bash on David Veikune, Kaluka Maiava, and Beau Bell?
Other than Manziel- I would have taken Carr instead, Damn little to fault in Farmer's first draft. And he hit it out of the park in his FA pickups. Gabriel, Crowell, and Williams. Getting Whither was a wash losing Ward, and Dansby is an upgrade over Jackson.
Nah- good points but you can drive yourself crazy looking in the rearview mirror. Kirksey has played above what you'd expect out of a third round pick. Or want to bash on David Veikune, Kaluka Maiava, and Beau Bell?
Other than Manziel- I would have taken Carr instead, Damn little to fault in Farmer's first draft. And he hit it out of the park in his FA pickups. Gabriel, Crowell, and Williams. Getting Whither was a wash losing Ward, and Dansby is an upgrade over Jackson.
In the weeks before the draft I was dead sure they'd take Khalil Mack or Evans at #4 and Derek Carr at 26. I was stunned and still am with The trade with Buffalo and then Gilbert in the first round. Not to mention Manziel. So here we are watching the likes of Evans, Watkins, Odell Beckham, Martavis Bryant, Jordan Mathews etc and they're calling it the best wide out class ever. Farmer knew Gordon was going to be suspended and acted like a stubborn child. And why Manziel? A college freshman sensation who's liable to end up another Tebow. We sure will never know cuz there's no way he's a Brown next year.
-
Actually Cal the Niners are 7-5 Mr. Hoorta
*************************************************
Now, don't stop me, I was on a roll... the site I was at,
had the preseason games listed after the regular season.
I was tired. Had to stoke the fireplace...needed a rootbeer.
Outside of that, though, the Browns are doing fine with a 7-4 record,
and I don't see the big deal with nitpicking on the draft.
I don't know the niners' defensive scheme, and there are all sorts of factors
to comparisons. Kirksey plays sideliine to sideline - and it's a new defense.
All of our mock drafts are wrong. I don't get complaining unless a Browns draftee
sucks. And that is far from the situation. At least maybe wait til after the season?
-
Henderson is RT...but yes, I was kind of saying the same thing above.George C said:
When this draft class finishes its third season before you anoint them great.
Want to evaluate your front office? IMO, Dont look at 1-3.
That is pure crap shoot from the countries best potential.
You hit or bust on early round draft picks. The busts come out of nowhere for no reason. It just happens every year.
Look for what value your FO plucks in 4-7. Lots of gems buried there, and whoever finds them wins games.
The Bills BLEW their second on a LT who looks like he plays in quick sand, but scored a direct hit in round 7 with a guy now rated as a mid first round pick in Seantrel Henderson, our starting RG.
-
George C said:
When this draft class finishes its third season before you anoint them great.
Want to evaluate your front office? IMO, Dont look at 1-3.
That is pure crap shoot from the countries best potential.
You hit or bust on early round draft picks. The busts come out of nowhere for no reason. It just happens every year.
Look for what value your FO plucks in 4-7. Lots of gems buried there, and whoever finds them wins games.
The Bills BLEW their second on a LT who looks like he plays in quick sand, but scored a direct hit in round 7 with a guy now rated as a mid first round pick in Seantrel Henderson, our starting RG.
I don't really agree with your premise. An FO has to hit a high percentage of their Rnd 1-3 picks, because the talent pool is so dense there. Maybe the random failure of a high #1 is not the end, but accumulate enough misses and its all the talent other teams hit upon that leave you in the dust.
At any rate... Since we only took Desir in rounds 4-7, and traded away the rest of our Day 3 picks, we need a little more data to evaluate our FO. Fortunately for them their FA selections have been golden... Crowell, Gabriel, and Williams have all been significant, rookie contributors. And their vet FA signings have been great as well.
Henderson had a first round grade, reduced by off-field concerns. In the 7th he was a no-brainer.
-
A. I did not say Kirksey has been terrific, I said he IS terrific. And whining about borland....
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
Now, how many have the Browns lost?
I liked Borland in the draft. But he has little short arms, and injuries. The niners lost to Chicago,
of all teams - gave up 28 pts. Gave up 23 in an Arizona loss, 42 in the first Denver loss, gave up 23 to Baltimore,
and gave up 34 points to Denver in a 34-0 shut-out.
And the niners didn't have a brand new defense with new coaches.
And Kirksey is terrific. No thanks, I'll keep Kirksey and the Browns 7-4 record.
Kirksey is learning, the whole defense has been learning a new defense.
And Kirksey is regarded as terrific by his team.
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
what does that have to do with how Borland is playing? Have you seen what he's done since he became the starter in week 7? If I'm not mistaken he's got more tackles than both Dansby and Kirksey while not being the starter for 7 games. That's what this thread is about. Not that I think Kirksey is terrible, but how much better Borland is. Better than our big FA signing ILB too I might add. That's the kind of LB'er I want in Cleveland. I've talking for weeks here how none of our guys hardly ever meets the runner in the hole...ever. Not a single run stop has stood out to me the whole season. There are at least 2 or 3 run stops Borland made on Thursday that I can still remember clearly. Against Marshawn Lynch no less. I've made no bones about how unhappy I am with the way this defense is playing the past several weeks despite us still having a winning record. That winnign record is imo solely based on Hoyer. Just think what our record would be if we had been able to keep a few practice squad bums to 100 yds or less. And if this defense really played to it's potential, we might even have had a shot at a first round bye. That's the major source of my frustration. And I don't know really who to rage on for it. Is it the players or scheme? But as to your argument that it's a new scheme....is not Borland in a "new scheme" himself? I dunno....it should frustrate all of you that we weren't able to shit on the North harder.
-
Really? Have you looked at the 49'ner won loss record? They've lost seven games.
what does that have to do with how Borland is playing? Have you seen what he's done since he became the starter in week 7? If I'm not mistaken he's got more tackles than both Dansby and Kirksey while not being the starter for 7 games. That's what this thread is about. Not that I think Kirksey is terrible, but how much better Borland is. Better than our big FA signing ILB too I might add. That's the kind of LB'er I want in Cleveland. I've talking for weeks here how none of our guys hardly ever meets the runner in the hole...ever. Not a single run stop has stood out to me the whole season. There are at least 2 or 3 run stops Borland made on Thursday that I can still remember clearly. Against Marshawn Lynch no less. I've made no bones about how unhappy I am with the way this defense is playing the past several weeks despite us still having a winning record. That winnign record is imo solely based on Hoyer. Just think what our record would be if we had been able to keep a few practice squad bums to 100 yds or less. And if this defense really played to it's potential, we might even have had a shot at a first round bye. That's the major source of my frustration. And I don't know really who to rage on for it. Is it the players or scheme? But as to your argument that it's a new scheme....is not Borland in a "new scheme" himself? I dunno....it should frustrate all of you that we weren't able to shit on the North harder.
what does that have to do with how Borland is playing? Have you seen what he's done since he became the starter in week 7? If I'm not mistaken he's got more tackles than both Dansby and Kirksey while not being the starter for 7 games. That's what this thread is about. Not that I think Kirksey is terrible, but how much better Borland is. Better than our big FA signing ILB too I might add. That's the kind of LB'er I want in Cleveland. I've talking for weeks here how none of our guys hardly ever meets the runner in the hole...ever. Not a single run stop has stood out to me the whole season. There are at least 2 or 3 run stops Borland made on Thursday that I can still remember clearly. Against Marshawn Lynch no less. I've made no bones about how unhappy I am with the way this defense is playing the past several weeks despite us still having a winning record. That winnign record is imo solely based on Hoyer. Just think what our record would be if we had been able to keep a few practice squad bums to 100 yds or less. And if this defense really played to it's potential, we might even have had a shot at a first round bye. That's the major source of my frustration. And I don't know really who to rage on for it. Is it the players or scheme? But as to your argument that it's a new scheme....is not Borland in a "new scheme" himself? I dunno....it should frustrate all of you that we weren't able to shit on the North harder.
Those practice squad bums that you referenced are, I'm assuming, Lorenzo Taliaferro, Alfred Blue and Denard Robinson.
Taliaferro rushed 13 times for 71 yards against SF, at 5.5 YPC. Compare that to his 18 carries for 93 yards, for 5 YPC.
Robinson carved up Miami's 11th ranked rushing defense for 108 yards on 18 carries, for a 6.0 YPC. He also fared pretty well against Cincinnati, who's ranked similarly to Cleveland in rushing defense.
So maybe these "practice squad" players are actually fairly decent talent. And maybe, just maybe, our young defense doesn't suck as bad as you suggest.
-
what does that have to do with how Borland is playing? Have you seen what he's done since he became the starter in week 7? If I'm not mistaken he's got more tackles than both Dansby and Kirksey while not being the starter for 7 games. That's what this thread is about. Not that I think Kirksey is terrible, but how much better Borland is. Better than our big FA signing ILB too I might add. That's the kind of LB'er I want in Cleveland. I've talking for weeks here how none of our guys hardly ever meets the runner in the hole...ever. Not a single run stop has stood out to me the whole season. There are at least 2 or 3 run stops Borland made on Thursday that I can still remember clearly. Against Marshawn Lynch no less. I've made no bones about how unhappy I am with the way this defense is playing the past several weeks despite us still having a winning record. That winnign record is imo solely based on Hoyer. Just think what our record would be if we had been able to keep a few practice squad bums to 100 yds or less. And if this defense really played to it's potential, we might even have had a shot at a first round bye. That's the major source of my frustration. And I don't know really who to rage on for it. Is it the players or scheme? But as to your argument that it's a new scheme....is not Borland in a "new scheme" himself? I dunno....it should frustrate all of you that we weren't able to shit on the North harder.
Those practice squad bums that you referenced are, I'm assuming, Lorenzo Taliaferro, Alfred Blue and Denard Robinson.
Taliaferro rushed 13 times for 71 yards against SF, at 5.5 YPC. Compare that to his 18 carries for 93 yards, for 5 YPC.
Robinson carved up Miami's 11th ranked rushing defense for 108 yards on 18 carries, for a 6.0 YPC. He also fared pretty well against Cincinnati, who's ranked similarly to Cleveland in rushing defense.
So maybe these "practice squad" players are actually fairly decent talent. And maybe, just maybe, our young defense doesn't suck as bad as you suggest.
Those practice squad bums that you referenced are, I'm assuming, Lorenzo Taliaferro, Alfred Blue and Denard Robinson.
Taliaferro rushed 13 times for 71 yards against SF, at 5.5 YPC. Compare that to his 18 carries for 93 yards, for 5 YPC.
Robinson carved up Miami's 11th ranked rushing defense for 108 yards on 18 carries, for a 6.0 YPC. He also fared pretty well against Cincinnati, who's ranked similarly to Cleveland in rushing defense.
So maybe these "practice squad" players are actually fairly decent talent. And maybe, just maybe, our young defense doesn't suck as bad as you suggest.
don't forget Forsett added another 11 carries for 60 some odd yds. Indy held all 3 Raven RB's to 90 yds on 15 carries total. And Alfred Blue? His best game prior to the Cle game was 78 yds on 13 carries against the awful Giants. Oakland held him to 40 yds on 11 carries. C'mon dude these guys are shit. Look at Blues game log and you see one particular game stand out rather conspicuously. Infact if it weren't for that one game he's probably back on the Texans practice squad. 35% of his total season yds came against one team. C'mon really? Our run defense doesn't suck?
-
Oh and Denard's back to reality too...14 carries for 25 yds against Indy. Actually I'm sorry that's a solid Trich outing my bad.
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