Camp Barkley #1 Overall
-
When you going to figure out highlight videos mean nothing without the concurrent lowlight videos Po? Teams will do the exact same thing to Barkley in the pros- without the missing ingredient- a great QB.
Jim Brown, Walter Payton, and Barry Sanders combined have less championships than Tom Brady- or Joe Montana. That's the meal ticket to the top- so wise up.
Franco Harris has more titles than JB, Payton, or Sanders combined. And though he is a Hall of Famer....NO one who ever saw them play would equate Franco with the other three you mention. (and....oh...yea...he was another Penn St. RB).
Franco Harris has more titles than JB, Payton, or Sanders combined. And though he is a Hall of Famer....NO one who ever saw them play would equate Franco with the other three you mention. (and....oh...yea...he was another Penn St. RB).
Point taken- but it takes more than a great running back to win a championship, it takes a great team around him. If you want to get picky- I deliberately omitted Emmitt Smith- holds the record for rushing yards and is in the HOF too. Won several Super Bowls, with a great team. OTOH and as counterpoint- in the last 20 or so years- who are the "generational" running backs? I nominate Adrian Peterson and Ladanian Tomlinson. IIRC neither won a SB ring.
GREAT point Larry! That said, you chose 2 QBs that didn't even get drafted until the end of round 3 and in round 6. How about this one? The Dallas Cowboys drafted Troy Aikman 1st overall in 1989. Later that year, they traded RB Herschel Walker to Minnesota for a bunch of picks and players they could surround Aikman with. One of them led to Dallas trading up to draft Emmitt Smith at #17 overall in 1990. Doesn't this remind us there's ALWAYS good RBs after the 1st overall and/or 4th overall pick? There's not always going to be a Troy Aikman on your door step at #4 though (especially if 2 QBs are drafted at #2 and #3 overall).
Our FO has been overthinking the crap out of the QB position. Get our #1 QB with the 1st overall pick. Once we do that to the supply for the demand, there's probably going to be a run on the QB position at #2 and #3 anyway. Guess who that puts on our door step at #4? Barkley. We can either buy the hype and draft him or Herschel Walker his asssss in a trade-down for more picks.
Me and Royce have brought up where Kamara and Hunt were drafted last year. And even though UGA was once most known for Herschel Walker - Terrell Davis was a 6th round RB that had an Hall of Fame NFL career. Once he arrived in Denver, Elway stopped losing Superbowls. THIS YEAR, UGA sends Nick Chubb and Sony Michel to the NFL draft. In split duty last year, Michel had 156 carries for 1227 yds at 7.9 ypc and 16 TDs while Nick Chubb 223 carries for 1345 yds at 6.0 ypc and 15 TDs. Both guys also went over 1000 yards rushing at least 1 more time in their SEC career. The draft NEVER runs out of studs at RB after pick #1 or pick #4.
Regarding QBs, finding a Montana in the 3rd, or a Brady in the 6th is a once in 20 or so year stroke of luck. Usually, and I think Gip posted the stats, majority of the great qbs were drafted high in the first round. Yeah outliers like Farve and Brees and a few others.
Tom, I can easily see a scenario where QBs are going to go with the first three picks in April. We take Darnold (or Mayfield who I see as the second coming of Drew Brees) Will the Giants take Barkley ahead of their rare opportunity to draft their QBOTF to sit behind a declining Manning? Doubt it. There could be a free for all trade scenario for the Colts pick. They'd probably be more than happy to swap picks with Denver or the Jets. Elway didn't ask to get Mayfield on the North team for no reason.
We haven't drafted a QB high since Couch, and it's about freaking time to change that. Enough of the going for seconds like Quinn, Weeden, Manziel, Kizer, Frye, and McCoy. I've commented on Walter Football that he's nuts if he thinks the Browns aren't drafting a QB this year- even if we get Smith or Cousins on board.
GOD BLESS YA! You are Wunphunmofo. Before you officially replace Cupid - we interrupt this Hallmark moment to remind you that both Sony Michel and Nick Chubb had better ypc than Barkley in 2017. Why the urgency to leapfrog QB at #1 overall? You don't want to play spin the bottle when there's too many Roseann Barrs in the circle. Get our QB first, which should trigger a run on QBs at #2 and #3, that will leave us any pick of the litter we want at other positions/BPA at #4 overall.
As I already wrote, Sony Michel had 156 carries for 1227 yds at 7.9 ypc and 16 TDs while Nick Chubb 223 carries for 1345 yds at 6.0 ypc and 15 TDs. Not bad for split duty, eh?
The thing that worries me about Barkley is he had his hibernation games against Ohio State, Rutgers and Missedagain State. Trent Richardson was built just like him so we bought the hype to the wide-spread applause of network draft analysts after trading up from #4 or #3 to pick him. In the NFL, he looked like a raccoon crossing the road at night time. He had no vision, which rendered all that speed and power useless. RB is a position that usually stocks drafts well. Over the years we've seen RD 6 gems like Denver's Terrell Davis and Atlanta's Jamal Anderson; a RD 5 kid like Chicago's Jordan Howard; last year's round 3 guys NO's Alvin Kamara and KC's Kareem Hunt; previous RD 2 guys like Buffalo's Thurman Thomas, Pitts' LeVeon Bell and Cleveland's Greg Pruitt (depicted in my avatar). Before the draft got shortened, we landed Earnest Byner in round 10.
Ditto the above.
I saw enough of Sony Michel in the playoffs, I'd be more than happy to take him with our #33 pick. As you said, Byner in the 10th, and Arian Foster was a UFA. Ghoolie may think OL is dime a dozen, but RB is closer to the truth.... The difference between superstar production, and adequate production @ running back is negligible in my book..
-
I'd be open to drafting Barkley #1 if:
1) We land a vet QB like Cousins or Smith in the offseason
2) If our scouts determine that the talent gap between the top 4 QB prospects isn't too wide.
The veteran QB would be a hedge against a rookie QB we'd take at #4 - allowing them to sit and learn the offense for a year a two - while at the same time improving our RB corps and getting a much needed weapon on offense.
However, this only makes sense if you get a decent veteran QB during the offseason; if not, draft the best QB #1 overall.
-
I'd be open to drafting Barkley #1 if:
1) We land a vet QB like Cousins or Smith in the offseason
2) If our scouts determine that the talent gap between the top 4 QB prospects isn't too wide.
The veteran QB would be a hedge against a rookie QB we'd take at #4 - allowing them to sit and learn the offense for a year a two - while at the same time improving our RB corps and getting a much needed weapon on offense.
However, this only makes sense if you get a decent veteran QB during the offseason; if not, draft the best QB #1 overall.
I'd be open to drafting Barkley #1 if:
1) We land a vet QB like Cousins or Smith in the offseason
2) If our scouts determine that the talent gap between the top 4 QB prospects isn't too wide.
The veteran QB would be a hedge against a rookie QB we'd take at #4 - allowing them to sit and learn the offense for a year a two - while at the same time improving our RB corps and getting a much needed weapon on offense.
However, this only makes sense if you get a decent veteran QB during the offseason; if not, draft the best QB #1 overall.
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
"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 -
I'd be open to drafting Barkley #1 if:
1) We land a vet QB like Cousins or Smith in the offseason
2) If our scouts determine that the talent gap between the top 4 QB prospects isn't too wide.
The veteran QB would be a hedge against a rookie QB we'd take at #4 - allowing them to sit and learn the offense for a year a two - while at the same time improving our RB corps and getting a much needed weapon on offense.
However, this only makes sense if you get a decent veteran QB during the offseason; if not, draft the best QB #1 overall.
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
-
This video is worth the watch.
It's funny that so many people could be so wrong.
Humble Superstar, Saquon Barkley's don't come around very often, never seen a better player in 23 years, in 30 years of coaching- never seen a more complete back, the most unbelievable playmaker in the game. Ridiculously strong.
Also worth a view, amazing kid.
-
Barkley has barley scratched the surface, once he's in the NFL, he's only going to get even bigger and faster!
Say-say say-gone Saquon say Superbowl
The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one. -Mark Twain- "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain- -
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
I understand what you and jbluhm are trying to say but Tour's reply was spot on. Of course it matters what is thought of Kirk Cousins.
The reason Jimmy G wanted out of NE is he has the G.O.A.T. starting ahead of him with a Personal Trainer keeping him as fit as someone in their 20s. Washington doesn't think they see the next Tom Brady in Kirk Cousins or this conversation wouldn't be taking place right now. They would be celebrating post season victories with a long term QB situation they don't have to worry about. Now, is the team that has watched him practice every day since they drafted him doing that? No, they remain just as reluctant to lock him up long term as they have the last 2 years. What do you know that they're incapable of? And, why should that make me feel like we need to take our very 1st draft pick overall and spend it on a RB in a draft that looks to be very deep with RBs over a QB like Kirk Cousins?
And who are going to be the first people complaining that we didn't take a QB at #1 overall when they see one of this year's QB prospects emerging in the next year or 2? If we wait until #4 overall - what's to stop Elway from trading up with Indy at #3 overall to pick a QB in front of us? Why overthink this? I'm pretty confident Barkley won't be the only RB in this draft to make an NFL team happy they drafted him.... Not only that, if we start the run on QBs at #1 overall, the Giants need a QB to replace an Eli Manning on his last leg at #2. Now, the Colts have choices such as QB (understanding Luck never healed in 2017) or trade (with a team desperate for a QB) or take Barkley.
I STILL remember the 1999 draft when it seemed like the entire Philly fanbase was certain the answer to all their prayers was Rickey WIlliams at #2 overall. Andy Reid did the unthinkable and drafted a Veer Option QB from Syracuse named Donovan McNabb (after being Favre's position coach in GB knowing Favre was also a Veer Option QB at So Miss). Well, Ricky Williams got drafted by Mike Ditka and ended up on prozac during his brief tenure in New Orleans. Meanwhile McNabb turned around the NFL team with the worst record in 1998 by leading Philly to the playoffs just every year from 2000 to 2010 inclusive of 5 NFC Championship Game appearances and 1 very exciting Superbowl Game with NE (not to mention how many Pro Bowls and conference MVP seasons he had while never missing post seasons). Ricky did well but never even came close to being the difference maker McNabb became. Again, the best RBs in the last draft were selected in round 3 (Kamara and Hunt).
I welcome the only Defensive Coordinator to earn a Superbowl Ring in New Orleans while understanding Revenge of the Nerds is a sequel. "Come get some!" -
As a Redskins fan ... Cousins is solid but not elite. Of course, it's hard to tell with the team we've managed to assemble around him. Stick him on a team with a lot of talent and they could be perennial playoff team. At this point, I'd be happy if we brought Cousins back, and indifferent if we went another route. Part of the reason I'm taking an interest in the Browns is because (besides old family ties) I am intrigued by the team you've compiled, sick of the disfunction and BS of the Snyder/Allen regime in DC and the mismanagement of Cousins. and excited to see what happens in the coming years with all the young talent and draft picks you all have. If I'm a Browns fan, I'm excited to add Cousins because it instantly makes you a playoff-caliber team. Especially if you add Barkley then at #1. But I'm also not going to be drawing up tickets to the SB in 2-3 years. But if I'm a Browns fan that truly wants to become a SB contender in the next 5 years, I'm bringing in a veteran like Alex Smith, drafting a QB #1 or #4 overall that you think can be a stud and let him sit for 1-2 years ... and if they emerge and become a starter sooner, great. Now not saying Cousins can't lead a team to the super bowl ... he just isn't what I would term "elite" ... I'd stick Cousins in the next tier of guys that are between 5-12 overall at the position. Of course, it can click for him at any time ... and his shortcomings could be just as much the organization's fault as they are his.
-
The Browns have so many options this draft. I will say, Barkley is unreal. But if you choose to go QB+DB in the 1st, getting Michel, Chubb, etc. at 33 or 36 would be just as good, IMO. Lots of potential Kamara/Hunt type backs in this draft in the 2nd or 3rd round.
-
I'd be open to drafting Barkley #1 if:
1) We land a vet QB like Cousins or Smith in the offseason
2) If our scouts determine that the talent gap between the top 4 QB prospects isn't too wide.
The veteran QB would be a hedge against a rookie QB we'd take at #4 - allowing them to sit and learn the offense for a year a two - while at the same time improving our RB corps and getting a much needed weapon on offense.
However, this only makes sense if you get a decent veteran QB during the offseason; if not, draft the best QB #1 overall.
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
You think that Rosen will be the guy that separates himself. But what if he isn't. Though if he does do that. I would be glad to have the Browns takenYou think that Rosen will be the guy that separates himself. But what if he isn't. Though if he does do that. I would be glad to have the Browns taken
-
Barkley has barley scratched the surface, once he's in the NFL, he's only going to get even bigger and faster!
Say-say say-gone Saquon say Superbowl
Barkley has barley scratched the surface, once he's in the NFL, he's only going to get even bigger and faster!
Say-say say-gone Saquon say Superbowl
Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jonna Carter.Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jenna Carter.
-
Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jonna Carter.Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jenna Carter.
Ha, more speak to text. With the XFL coming back, wonder what He Hate Me is doing.
-
Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jonna Carter.Blair Thomas. Curtis Enis. He Jenna Carter.
Ha, more speak to text. With the XFL coming back, wonder what He Hate Me is doing.
Ha, more speak to text. With the XFL coming back, wonder what He Hate Me is doing.
You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so
-
Ha, more speak to text. With the XFL coming back, wonder what He Hate Me is doing.
You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so
You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so You'd think Gip would stop posting on here via his phone considering all the problems he has doing so
He's not giving up He's not giving up
-
We all watched the games the Browns played last year, we've all suffered the sling and arrows of defeat, we're all entitled to our own opinions on who is going to help us fix this thing. Last year we were SO CLOSE to winning games. We heard the players and coaches in their press conferences and interviews; we are only a couple of plays away from turning the corner.
I believe that Barkley is one of the players that can help us get to the edge and make that play when it matters.
I like how he's continuously gotten better as he's developed. From becoming a starter, to getting faster, getting stronger, working on his blocking and getting better at that, to the improvements in catching the ball, and many other areas as well. His projection continues to skyrocket right through the roof. He could be better than Ray Rice was for Baltimore, than Kamara has been for the Saints or Fournette for the Jaguars.
The question you have to ask yourself is why did Barkley have some games where his running percentage was so low? I feel I have answered that several times in different ways.
The question you need to ask yourself is- If Barkley is given the same holes to run through that some of the other RBs have had, would he have done better?
I think the answer to that question is - Fukc yeah he would have. Had Barkley played against lesser opponents it would have been the most incredible show you have ever seen. The good thing is that he's been the star there at Penn State, he's been the goat. The pressure and focus on him hasn't changed the person, it's changed the player. It's made him work even harder to be the impact player that he's become. It's made him change and adapt to defenses keying in to stop the run, to slow down Saquon. But make no mistake, you can't stop him- you can only hope to contain him for a little bit.
If every team only got to pick one college player a year during the draft. Barkley gets picked, each and every draft the NFL has ever had. That means that he's a special player. You take him when you're given the chance.
The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one. -Mark Twain- "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain- -
The flaw I see is that a spread of "not too wide" is insufficient. To take Barkley at #1 you have to see three QB prospects as indistinguishably worthy of the #4 pick... which I think is the same as seeing them worthy of the #1 overall.
And that ain't happening...
One prospect will separate himself from the crowd. You have to take that prospect at #1. You have to do so regardless of which vet you land because with either vet you do not expect to be back in this position again for years to come.
All that's left is to be right about which QB you take at #1...
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
Disagree...
I have my #1 overall QB. I am highly confident... as confident as I have been in years... that my #1 is "the guy." Therefore I let that dictate the vet QB I pursue.
I get the feeling that you are coming from the opposite camp. You have a vet you want and are letting that dictate the QB prospect you draft and, more importantly, when.
In my view whether Cousins is great or merely good, you are never going to get back into the position to draft a QB at the top of the first round again without mortgaging the future of the franchise for the opportunity to do so. And you can never offer enough to trade up for an elite prospect.
As to your points...
- A rookie deal for a 1st rounder is 5-years as well.
- Somehow NE (and other teams) got comfortable with Jimmy G's progress... and Brady's before that... same in GB with Rodgers... Wilson in Seattle... Dak in Dallas... Rivers in SD...
- Agree you don't draft that high for a backup... you draft that high in an attempt to secure your QB for the next 12-15 years... not just 5.. or 7... that's why I take this shot at a prospect. It helps (a lot) that I see my prospect as so promising.
"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 -
Barkley has barley scratched the surface, once he's in the NFL, he's only going to get even bigger and faster!
Say-say say-gone Saquon say Superbowl
Barkley has barley scratched the surface, once he's in the NFL, he's only going to get even bigger and faster!
Bigger is possible. Faster is not...
"You can't teach speed." - Hunter S. Thompson
If I'm a Browns fan, I'm excited to add Cousins because it instantly makes you a playoff-caliber team. Especially if you add Barkley then at #1. But I'm also not going to be drawing up tickets to the SB in 2-3 years.
But if I'm a Browns fan that truly wants to become a SB contender in the next 5 years, I'm bringing in a veteran like Alex Smith, drafting a QB #1 or #4 overall that you think can be a stud and let him sit for 1-2 years ... and if they emerge and become a starter sooner, great.
Welcome o' wise man from the East...
"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 -
It depends on which vet you would get, the length of the contract, and how long you expect him to play and be your starter. Whether you think he is worth it or not doesn't matter for this point, but if you get Kirk Cousins and you sign him to a 5 year deal, then it doesn't make any sense to draft a QB that high to be your backup. Doesn't make sense, because if you as a team expect Cousins to be your QB for the length of the contract, then the drafted QB wouldn't see the field, you wouldn't know what type of game player he could be, and most importantly he could walk after his rookie contract.
There is a reason Jimmy G wanted out in NE. He didn't want to leave because the team was bad, he had been there for a good amount of time, and he wanted to play.
Now, if you sign a vet you think can start a year or 2, then yes, get your guy. But to say you get one no matter what is wrong in my opinion
Disagree...
I have my #1 overall QB. I am highly confident... as confident as I have been in years... that my #1 is "the guy." Therefore I let that dictate the vet QB I pursue.
I get the feeling that you are coming from the opposite camp. You have a vet you want and are letting that dictate the QB prospect you draft and, more importantly, when.
In my view whether Cousins is great or merely good, you are never going to get back into the position to draft a QB at the top of the first round again without mortgaging the future of the franchise for the opportunity to do so. And you can never offer enough to trade up for an elite prospect.
As to your points...
- A rookie deal for a 1st rounder is 5-years as well.
- Somehow NE (and other teams) got comfortable with Jimmy G's progress... and Brady's before that... same in GB with Rodgers... Wilson in Seattle... Dak in Dallas... Rivers in SD...
- Agree you don't draft that high for a backup... you draft that high in an attempt to secure your QB for the next 12-15 years... not just 5.. or 7... that's why I take this shot at a prospect. It helps (a lot) that I see my prospect as so promising.
Disagree...
I have my #1 overall QB. I am highly confident... as confident as I have been in years... that my #1 is "the guy." Therefore I let that dictate the vet QB I pursue.
I get the feeling that you are coming from the opposite camp. You have a vet you want and are letting that dictate the QB prospect you draft and, more importantly, when.
In my view whether Cousins is great or merely good, you are never going to get back into the position to draft a QB at the top of the first round again without mortgaging the future of the franchise for the opportunity to do so. And you can never offer enough to trade up for an elite prospect.
As to your points...
- A rookie deal for a 1st rounder is 5-years as well.
- Somehow NE (and other teams) got comfortable with Jimmy G's progress... and Brady's before that... same in GB with Rodgers... Wilson in Seattle... Dak in Dallas... Rivers in SD...
- Agree you don't draft that high for a backup... you draft that high in an attempt to secure your QB for the next 12-15 years... not just 5.. or 7... that's why I take this shot at a prospect. It helps (a lot) that I see my prospect as so promising.
BINGO on the highlighted statements. Tour, you stated this perfectly.
Thank you!!
Mike
-
Interesting tweet...
Not sure about the media vs. league thing, but it does fit the ranking vs. mock differences discussion.
Benjamin AllbrightVerified account @AllbrightNFL
I think RB Saquon Barkley isn't going to go as high as people think. No one I talked to had him top 7. That's not to say he isn't talented, but it appears media higher on him than league.
8:30 AM - 28 Jan 2018"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 all watched the games the Browns played last year, we've all suffered the sling and arrows of defeat, we're all entitled to our own opinions on who is going to help us fix this thing. Last year we were SO CLOSE to winning games. We heard the players and coaches in their press conferences and interviews; we are only a couple of plays away from turning the corner.
I believe that Barkley is one of the players that can help us get to the edge and make that play when it matters.
I like how he's continuously gotten better as he's developed. From becoming a starter, to getting faster, getting stronger, working on his blocking and getting better at that, to the improvements in catching the ball, and many other areas as well. His projection continues to skyrocket right through the roof. He could be better than Ray Rice was for Baltimore, than Kamara has been for the Saints or Fournette for the Jaguars.
The question you have to ask yourself is why did Barkley have some games where his running percentage was so low? I feel I have answered that several times in different ways.
The question you need to ask yourself is- If Barkley is given the same holes to run through that some of the other RBs have had, would he have done better?
I think the answer to that question is - Fukc yeah he would have. Had Barkley played against lesser opponents it would have been the most incredible show you have ever seen. The good thing is that he's been the star there at Penn State, he's been the goat. The pressure and focus on him hasn't changed the person, it's changed the player. It's made him work even harder to be the impact player that he's become. It's made him change and adapt to defenses keying in to stop the run, to slow down Saquon. But make no mistake, you can't stop him- you can only hope to contain him for a little bit.
If every team only got to pick one college player a year during the draft. Barkley gets picked, each and every draft the NFL has ever had. That means that he's a special player. You take him when you're given the chance.
We all watched the games the Browns played last year, we've all suffered the sling and arrows of defeat, we're all entitled to our own opinions on who is going to help us fix this thing. Last year we were SO CLOSE to winning games. We heard the players and coaches in their press conferences and interviews; we are only a couple of plays away from turning the corner.
I believe that Barkley is one of the players that can help us get to the edge and make that play when it matters.
I like how he's continuously gotten better as he's developed. From becoming a starter, to getting faster, getting stronger, working on his blocking and getting better at that, to the improvements in catching the ball, and many other areas as well. His projection continues to skyrocket right through the roof. He could be better than Ray Rice was for Baltimore, than Kamara has been for the Saints or Fournette for the Jaguars.
The question you have to ask yourself is why did Barkley have some games where his running percentage was so low? I feel I have answered that several times in different ways.
The question you need to ask yourself is- If Barkley is given the same holes to run through that some of the other RBs have had, would he have done better?
I think the answer to that question is - Fukc yeah he would have. Had Barkley played against lesser opponents it would have been the most incredible show you have ever seen. The good thing is that he's been the star there at Penn State, he's been the goat. The pressure and focus on him hasn't changed the person, it's changed the player. It's made him work even harder to be the impact player that he's become. It's made him change and adapt to defenses keying in to stop the run, to slow down Saquon. But make no mistake, you can't stop him- you can only hope to contain him for a little bit.
If every team only got to pick one college player a year during the draft. Barkley gets picked, each and every draft the NFL has ever had. That means that he's a special player. You take him when you're given the chance.
Sure Barkley would get picked in every draft. No one around here is saying he's a bum. He wouldn't get picked #1 overall though. That hasn't happened since Ki Jana Carter, and we know that didn't turn out well for the Bengals. Before that it was Bo Jackson. Saquon is doubtless very good for Jeremiah to make him his top rated player. Better than Adrian Peterson? Better than Ladanian Tomlinson? Doubtful, and neither of them were drafted #1 overall, so take the rose colored glasses off and chill out. Like I said, if he can run a sub 4.3 at the combine, (Bo Jackson holds the record @ 4.2) I'll start believing your hype.
The list of names on the QB jersey has gotten far too long, and it's time to put a stop to that before we think about drafting a running back instead at the top of the draft. Then we're stuck with factory seconds again at the most important position on offense.
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