Why not Minkah at #1
-
My point is yea? So?Darnold and Rosen may not be anywhere as good at playing their position as Minkah is at his. Some don't even have Darnold and Rosen or either as being in the top 2 at their positions.
As Tour said....if you have an absolutely No Brainer at QB...you go for the QB......but neither of those guys are considered a no brainer by any means.
so you are saying to wait till the 2nd or 3rd round to draft a qb or maybe even the 4th
so you are saying to wait till the 2nd or 3rd round to draft a qb or maybe even the 4th
I am saying perhaps wait until the 4th pick...
I guess the question is: which player stands out head and shoulders above all others. Last year, many thought it was Garrett....and that Garrett was the no brainer first pick....even though our greater need was for a QB....we didn't go QB..we went for the BPA supposed "no brainer".
Why should we not do the same this year ? Go for the BPA? In my opinion and that of many others, there were a couple of QBs last year that were much better than the crop available this year.....and we MAY have some players available in the draft who far more qualify for BPA than the QBs on the board.
I would rather go for the BPA....than overdraft a questionable QB. And we may have choices at QB at #4 every bit as good as we have at #1....as perhaps the guy at QB we would feel obligated to get at #1 would be "just a guy"....and not a once every 5-7 year guy.
-
Again....Mock Drafts are only predictions of what teams might do....not of what they should do. They do not rank the best prospects...they just say what they think teams will do. And teams will always "overdraft" QBs...because of the importance and needs at the position. But here is one guy's opinion: Matt Miller of the Bleacher Report, on who are the best players...irregardless of position:
Rank Player School 1 RB Saquon Barkley Penn State 2 S Minkah Fitzpatrick Alabama 3 OG Quenton Nelson Notre Dame 4 LB Roquan Smith Georgia 5 QB Josh Rosen UCLA 6 DE Bradley Chubb NC State 7 QB Sam Darnold USC 8 OT Connor Williams Texas 9 RB Derrius Guice LSU 10 CB Josh Jackson Iowa So, per this, in theory....any QB we want SHOULD be available at #4 (not that they will.
-
I do not want a D guy at #1 even if we sign Cousins as our long term FQB. This team has to draft someone at #1 that puts 10 or more TD's on the board. I guess that will be Barkley or a QB. I am going to watch the draft on our oldest smallest TV so that if we do draft someone like Minkah at one I wont mind so much replacing the TV lol
Mind you I am fine with Minkah at 4
-
See this: Not one of the QBs made the Top Ten player list:
-
WalterFootball's Big Board is similar: Only Rosen at #7 is listed as a Top 10 prospect:
-
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
-
WalterFootball's Big Board is similar: Only Rosen at #7 is listed as a Top 10 prospect:
WalterFootball's Big Board is similar: Only Rosen at #7 is listed as a Top 10 prospect:
What do you think Carson Wentz was rated as an overall prospect when he entered? Or Goff?
-
I do not want a D guy at #1 even if we sign Cousins as our long term FQB. This team has to draft someone at #1 that puts 10 or more TD's on the board. I guess that will be Barkley or a QB. I am going to watch the draft on our oldest smallest TV so that if we do draft someone like Minkah at one I wont mind so much replacing the TV lol
Mind you I am fine with Minkah at 4
I do not want a D guy at #1 even if we sign Cousins as our long term FQB. This team has to draft someone at #1 that puts 10 or more TD's on the board. I guess that will be Barkley or a QB. I am going to watch the draft on our oldest smallest TV so that if we do draft someone like Minkah at one I wont mind so much replacing the TV lol
Mind you I am fine with Minkah at 4
Well.....a lot more of the "big boards" have Barkley at the top or close to the top than they have any of the QBs up there.
But, I am not sure. I think by far our two greatest needs are at QB and in the defensive backfield.
I am only saying that it seems that perhaps the "Garrett" of this draft is not the QB...but is that DB....and that any one of several QBs could be had at #4....and that it is an apparent mixed bag at QB such that getting one at #4 may be no worse than taking one at #1.
-
another thing we have never developed a qb we just throw em out there also their is not gonna be another Andrew luck he started for three and a half years at Stanford most qb's these days come out after two the exception being Watson and he played well while healthy
-
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
Yea? Which QB? Like I am saying...it seems by all accounts that Minkah is head and shoulders above any one else that plays that position...and head and shoulders above any of the QBs.
We have the luxury of getting him...and getting maybe the best QB out of the bunch...and it is a bunch....
I know Tour is on Rosen's knob. I know Cal is on Allen's knob. I know some are on Mayfield's knob...and perhaps some are on Darnold's knob.
There is NO consensus #1 QB. Minkah IS fairly well the consensus #1 DB. Though he is not the consensus #1 pick. A lot put Chubb of NC State on there....but no one would predict we would take him due to us having taken Garrett last year at the same position. And no one projects Minkah at #1 because no DB has ever gone #1.
I guess I may be OK with this: We take whatever from the grab bag of QBs at #1.....as long as we know also that the Giants are going to also grab in that same QB bag...and that the Colts are not going to go for Minkah...so we can get him at #4. We have to see what their needs are.
In theory I guess we could do this:
Take a QB at #1. Trade our #4 to the Giants at #2 and take Minkah .....as long as the Giants are secure in believing that the Colts will not take a QB...or trade down to let someone else who is QB needy trade up to get the one they want.
-
c'mon unless you are the Browns QB'S allways come off the board first so the Hell with the rankings if there is a QB they covet grab him at #1 it would be insane to wait till later
c'mon unless you are the Browns QB'S allways come off the board first so the Hell with the rankings if there is a QB they covet grab him at #1 it would be insane to wait till later
But...my point is that there are none worth "coveting" at #1. The guy to covet does not play QB...and they can get one at #4.
-
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
Well....it would not be getting cute if they skipped the QB and went for the BPA...if the QBs on the board are, as I said, a mixed bag.
And answer me this: by your analysis then the Browns "got cute" last year by skipping the QB (twice). Two QBs last year that I think perhaps are better than the Jambalaya at QBs we have this year.
-
WalterFootball's Big Board is similar: Only Rosen at #7 is listed as a Top 10 prospect:
What do you think Carson Wentz was rated as an overall prospect when he entered? Or Goff?
What do you think Carson Wentz was rated as an overall prospect when he entered? Or Goff?
Why do I have to think about that? Why not just tell me. Use whatever source you want.
Then explain why this is relevant here.
-
another thing we have never developed a qb we just throw em out there also their is not gonna be another Andrew luck he started for three and a half years at Stanford most qb's these days come out after two the exception being Watson and he played well while healthy
another thing we have never developed a qb we just throw em out there also their is not gonna be another Andrew luck he started for three and a half years at Stanford most qb's these days come out after two the exception being Watson and he played well while healthy
If there were an Andrew Luck in this draft....then we wouldn't be having this debate. I think it also questionable if we have a Watson in this draft.
-
I'm sorry Gip, but if the Browns get cute and skip QB with their 1st pick again I'm going to officially go oobatz.
Totally on the Fitzpatrick bandwagon though.
Well....it would not be getting cute if they skipped the QB and went for the BPA...if the QBs on the board are, as I said, a mixed bag.
And answer me this: by your analysis then the Browns "got cute" last year by skipping the QB (twice). Two QBs last year that I think perhaps are better than the Jambalaya at QBs we have this year.
Well....it would not be getting cute if they skipped the QB and went for the BPA...if the QBs on the board are, as I said, a mixed bag.
And answer me this: by your analysis then the Browns "got cute" last year by skipping the QB (twice). Two QBs last year that I think perhaps are better than the Jambalaya at QBs we have this year.
before last years draft your jambalaya reference could also been used and so ya I'm saying to draft Darnold to which we could develop into a starting QB,this team needs a freaking direction and drafting Darnold would do that drafting a db from bama doesn't move the needle
-
so looking back would you still take garrett over Watson or trubisky
If you really want me to look back....I take Bosa the year before....and then I go for MT. But that is water over the dam.
-
I want a vet QB then that lets us take Minkah at 1 and Barkley at 4, no QB in this years draft is a top 5 pick IMO
I want a vet QB then that lets us take Minkah at 1 and Barkley at 4, no QB in this years draft is a top 5 pick IMO
I could live with that. Do you see any real franchise QBs in 2018? What about 2019?
GO BUCKEYES, BROWNS, INDIANS, CAVS, YSU, NAVY and yes I like ND! -
Well....it would not be getting cute if they skipped the QB and went for the BPA...if the QBs on the board are, as I said, a mixed bag.
And answer me this: by your analysis then the Browns "got cute" last year by skipping the QB (twice). Two QBs last year that I think perhaps are better than the Jambalaya at QBs we have this year.
before last years draft your jambalaya reference could also been used and so ya I'm saying to draft Darnold to which we could develop into a starting QB,this team needs a freaking direction and drafting Darnold would do that drafting a db from bama doesn't move the needle
before last years draft your jambalaya reference could also been used and so ya I'm saying to draft Darnold to which we could develop into a starting QB,this team needs a freaking direction and drafting Darnold would do that drafting a db from bama doesn't move the needle
If you think that Darnold is the be all end all of the QBs available...that he is John Elway/Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck The Next Generation then you surely go for him. But I hear NO ONE saying anything remotely like that about him. Are you hearing that?
(In fact... he may be sitting there at #4....I hear about Rosen being more often highly ranked)
And I don't care about moving any needles. What needle are you wanting moved? TV ratings? i want wins.
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