Barkley at #1?
-
The Coach got fired for benching Manning.
The Colts defense was 10th vs the run. Browns were 5th. Fair amount worse? Yeah, I guess so http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
The Colts run game was 24th in the NFL in 2017. Plus, they bad QB play. The Giants run game was ranked 29th. NYG or Indy will grab Barkley if the Browns pass. I reckon by your standards there Guns the Browns OFFENSE was a fair amount worse than the Giants http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff The only silver lining on the Browns offense was the 10th ranked run game and now Crowell is off to make his fortune.
Look at team efficiency and where the last 3 teams are drafting? You take Barkley because he can help your offense the most right now http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff
Sometimes it gets a little verbose.
I love sports analogies. Who told you different?
I know that the Browns dont have a QB. They also need a RB who can make a difference like a Bell, Gurley, Hunt, Fournette - all 2017 playoff teams.
The Giants have a QB, but they need a RB with the 29th rush offense in 2017
The Colts have a QB assuming Luck is healthy, but they had the 24th rush offense in the NFL and now Gore is gone.
I am building the best team.
Barkley at 1 and youre set at RB for 4 years. QB at 4 and youre set at that position for the foreseeable future. Sign a Vet FA QB to take over this season while your rookie QB learns the game.
Do you know how the NFL works?
My man, take off the Patriots hat for a second. That is clouding your judgement, as 31 teams aren't like your Patriots.
I'll go right down the line on what you said.
1. Coached fired, not exactly. It might have been the final straw, but I think how the team was performing and his relationship with players before the benching had more to do with his firing than sitting Manning 1 week. The owner was in board with it too, so if that were the ONLY reason, he should have fired himself as well.
2. The Colts/Giants offense was better and the Browns defense better than Indy. You know why? Better players on those sides of ball. Colts had the better QB.
NOBODY is saying that the Colts are going to draft a QB, if they stay at 3, I think there are 3 potential picks for them: Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson. They could also trade to a team who wants to trade up for a QB to move back a little and gain more picks, because their roster is bad. More on the Giants next
3. The Giants do have a QB, for maybe next 2 years, then what? I dont expect the Giants to be nearly that bad next season, as their entire team was hurt last year on offense, and thus defense on the field more, resulting in more points. The Giants STILL have a good defense. So do you honestly belief they will find Elis replacement drafting lower in 1st in a year or 2? If the Giants draft a QB, it isn't for next year or 2, it is for the FUTURE. Every team, including the Browns, are trying to build for the future. They got rid of aging vets for the future to play the young guys for the future.
Both teams also know, just like the Browns that there are good backs later in the draft, and that you can get similar production from later picks. Maybe not as much as Barkley, but close. The running game is largely predicated upon the O line as well, since they are the reason backs dont get the yards, they are the reason they do.
4. You can build whatever team you want, but the fact doesn't change that the 3rd QB (potentially) isn't looked upon as highly as 1st. Maybe they all turn out good, and that is great, but having the best back for 4 years like you said isn't a long time, and without the QB it's all for naught. And you said none of these QBs have that buzz, but now they are setting the Browns up for the future, which is it?
If the Browns find the best QB in the 7th, that is great, but they have to find the QB.
Realistically, how much better does 4 years of Saquon Barkley make the team?
-
I dont care if the Browns take Barkley, but to think that EVERYTHING is going to work out perfectly is just a bit cuckoo to me. There are certainly cases each year where a lower round guy turns out to be good. They are then called steals. They were ranked close to where they should have been, but there are things you just can't measure.
To me, I just don't like the idea of possibly your 3rd choice of QB especially that is the most important position. There maybe what 20 franchise QB in the league, give or take.
Good point. Let's take a look at QBs drafted and currently starting with at least 3 years of experience on their resumes:
Tom Brady - 6th round
Russell Wilson - 3rd round
Aaron Rodgers - #24 overall (who first sat behind a 2nd round pick Brett Favre)
Ben Roethlisberger - #11 overall
Drew Brees - 2nd round
Philip Rivers - #4 overall and traded to SD from NYG for Eli
Joe Flacco - #18 overall
Derek Carr - 2nd round
Jimmy Garoppolo - 2nd round
Kirk Cousins - 4th round
Matt Ryan - #3 overall
Eli Manning - #1 overall for SD traded to NYG for 4th pick overall Rivers
Blake Bortles - #3 overall
Matthew Stafford - #1 overall
Andrew Luck - #1 overall
Alex Smith - #1 overall
Cam Newton - #1 overall
There's a TON of guys above that were drafted from pick #4 overall and later... One of them is about to get the biggest FA contract of 2018 and he started longer than RG3 for the same team that up to #2 to take RG3.
Good point. Let's take a look at QBs drafted and currently starting with at least 3 years of experience on their resumes:
Tom Brady - 6th round
Russell Wilson - 3rd round
Aaron Rodgers - #24 overall (who first sat behind a 2nd round pick Brett Favre)
Ben Roethlisberger - #11 overall
Drew Brees - 2nd round
Philip Rivers - #4 overall and traded to SD from NYG for Eli
Joe Flacco - #18 overall
Derek Carr - 2nd round
Jimmy Garoppolo - 2nd round
Kirk Cousins - 4th round
Matt Ryan - #3 overall
Eli Manning - #1 overall for SD traded to NYG for 4th pick overall Rivers
Blake Bortles - #3 overall
Matthew Stafford - #1 overall
Andrew Luck - #1 overall
Alex Smith - #1 overall
There's a TON of guys above that were drafted from pick #4 overall and later... One of them is about to get the biggest FA contract of 2018 and he started longer than RG3 for the same team that up to #2 to take RG3.
Ist overall picks
Smith - 0 super bowls
Luck - 0 super bowls
Stafford - 0 super bowls
Manning - 2 super bowls
25% odds of hitting it right aint good odds to me.
-
I meant Phillip Rivers.
There was draft talk about him from NC State.
And I said there was for him.
The point is, there was serious buzz about Leaf, enough thst there was real question whether he or Peyton went 1st.
Buzz means NOTHING.
And I said there was for him.
The point is, there was serious buzz about Leaf, enough thst there was real question whether he or Peyton went 1st.
Buzz means NOTHING.
OK
Might as well draw names out of a hat.
-
HOF QBs have won 12 of the last 15 Super Bowls. Who is the HOF QB in this bunch? Not 1 guy is creating the buzz of a E Manning or a Ben or a Brees when they were drafted.
Marshall Faulk won in 2000 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FaulMa00.htm
Marshwan Lynch won the Super Bowl in 2013 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm
Lynch helped Wilson win one as a rookie. The Browns would be crazy to pass on Barkley.
He says "few and far between" and you support your claim by posting two examples in 17 years of football seasons. One of those examples had a HOF QB under center and a current top 10 QB in the NFL. Very nice!
If the Browns like a QB enough to think he's the future of franchise, we take him number 1-there's no debate. Sam Darnold is being compared to Andrew Luck by NFL scouts, he got a little buzz if I'm remembering correctly. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2018/profiles/sam-darnold?id=2560057
The Browns have been awful for going on two decades because they've failed to draft a franchise QB. You can point to busts all you want, but I can equally point to Ki-Jana Carter and others (cough, Trent Richardson, cough) for massive failures at the RB position. Don't even get me started on the whole "well he could have been good if the talent was better" argument either. Dozens of Browns rejects have gone to better teams, gotten a chance to start, and showed they were equally bad to back-up caliber players (Quinn, Anderson, McCoy) and that's just off the top of my head.
I think Barkley is going to be a great player, don't get me wrong. But a QB is unquestionably and always more valuable. Hell, we've had RB's on the team that are currently 2nd and 3rd for most rushing yards in a game and it sure as hell hasn't gotten the organization very far along.
He says "few and far between" and you support your claim by posting two examples in 17 years of football seasons. One of those examples had a HOF QB under center and a current top 10 QB in the NFL. Very nice!
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
Youre right. All you need to do is select the next HOF QB in this draft.
If the Browns like a QB enough to think he's the future of franchise, we take him number 1-there's no debate. Sam Darnold is being compared to Andrew Luck by NFL scouts, he got a little buzz if I'm remembering correctly. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2018/profiles/sam-darnold?id=2560057
The Browns have been awful for going on two decades because they've failed to draft a franchise QB. You can point to busts all you want, but I can equally point to Ki-Jana Carter and others (cough, Trent Richardson, cough) for massive failures at the RB position. Don't even get me started on the whole "well he could have been good if the talent was better" argument either. Dozens of Browns rejects have gone to better teams, gotten a chance to start, and showed they were equally bad to back-up caliber players (Quinn, Anderson, McCoy) and that's just off the top of my head.
I think Barkley is going to be a great player, don't get me wrong. But a QB is unquestionably and always more valuable. Hell, we've had RB's on the team that are currently 2nd and 3rd for most rushing yards in a game and it sure as hell hasn't gotten the organization very far along.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
-
It all depends on which QB they think is the best. If' it's Darnold, they have to take him at 1. If they think that Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield are all basically equals and they all have positives and negatives and they're happy ending up with any of the 3 then I can see taking Barkley and then taking whatever QB is left. From what I heard (I didn't watch) Rosen didn't look all that great on Saturday. I still like Darnold and I am very intrigued by Mayfield. I think he could be a Brees or Wilson type player.
No question Barkley is a stud and certainly looks like a guy who will be a game changer, the problem is we need a QB and we have the choice of the litter and really shouldn't settle for our 3rd choice in exchange for a RB, when history has proven that stud running backs can be found later in the draft, at say pick 33.
It all depends on which QB they think is the best. If' it's Darnold, they have to take him at 1. If they think that Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield are all basically equals and they all have positives and negatives and they're happy ending up with any of the 3 then I can see taking Barkley and then taking whatever QB is left. From what I heard (I didn't watch) Rosen didn't look all that great on Saturday. I still like Darnold and I am very intrigued by Mayfield. I think he could be a Brees or Wilson type player. - Mark O
Agree with everything except for the Rosen thing. He got a lot of compliments even though he had a couple critics. It seemed like more people that thought he looked good than bad who covered the day. In fact, they showed his great deep throw that hit the receiver in stride when they said Allen wasn't the only one looking impressive on the deep ball - Flugel
No question Barkley is a stud and certainly looks like a guy who will be a game changer, the problem is we need a QB and we have the choice of the litter and really shouldn't settle for our 3rd choice in exchange for a RB, when history has proven that stud running backs can be found later in the draft, at say pick 33. - Mark O
Last week I was right there with this train of thought enjoying how well you articulated to somebody you were debating. In fact, I was on that side of this for months. This week I'm remembering a couple differences than I was willing to previously:
1) We have the most $ to spend for a FA QB by a ton making that a potential pick of the litter opportunity as well in an experienced QB arena. And Philly and Minnesota showed us how important vet QBs can be. It also equips us with an ability to not throw a young guy in way before he's ready to start which is bigger than some give it credit for.
2) #1 above won't do it alone so we could use a recruiting attraction for a FA QB like a playmaker/scoring threat the #1 overall that could help us significantly with in lassoing a yes tag of a veteran FA QB. This is bigger to me today than I allowed it to be previously while I'm reading and learning more about the top rated QBs in this draft. The QB I'm hearing to be is most ready is Rosen and I think he'll be there at #4 if our FO likes him.
3) IMO a part time RB like Sony Michel with only 9 receptions does not = a complete every down back who's equally dangerous in the passing game as he is at running the ball. 54 receptions in 13 games plus 18 TDs on the ground would have made Crow a keeper here instead of a FA we may lose. The last time we drafted Tim Couch at #1 overall - what did people bitch about? The only time we made the playoffs was in 2002 when we drafted a RB in round 1 who averaged over 100 yards rushing the final 6 weeks of his rookie year. You can't sell play action fakes if you can't run the ball so the pass pro struggles especially with younger QBs that tend hold onto the ball a littler longer. - Flugel
-
Do you know how the NFL works?
My man, take off the Patriots hat for a second. That is clouding your judgement, as 31 teams aren't like your Patriots.
I'll go right down the line on what you said.
1. Coached fired, not exactly. It might have been the final straw, but I think how the team was performing and his relationship with players before the benching had more to do with his firing than sitting Manning 1 week. The owner was in board with it too, so if that were the ONLY reason, he should have fired himself as well.
2. The Colts/Giants offense was better and the Browns defense better than Indy. You know why? Better players on those sides of ball. Colts had the better QB.
NOBODY is saying that the Colts are going to draft a QB, if they stay at 3, I think there are 3 potential picks for them: Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson. They could also trade to a team who wants to trade up for a QB to move back a little and gain more picks, because their roster is bad. More on the Giants next
3. The Giants do have a QB, for maybe next 2 years, then what? I dont expect the Giants to be nearly that bad next season, as their entire team was hurt last year on offense, and thus defense on the field more, resulting in more points. The Giants STILL have a good defense. So do you honestly belief they will find Elis replacement drafting lower in 1st in a year or 2? If the Giants draft a QB, it isn't for next year or 2, it is for the FUTURE. Every team, including the Browns, are trying to build for the future. They got rid of aging vets for the future to play the young guys for the future.
Both teams also know, just like the Browns that there are good backs later in the draft, and that you can get similar production from later picks. Maybe not as much as Barkley, but close. The running game is largely predicated upon the O line as well, since they are the reason backs dont get the yards, they are the reason they do.
4. You can build whatever team you want, but the fact doesn't change that the 3rd QB (potentially) isn't looked upon as highly as 1st. Maybe they all turn out good, and that is great, but having the best back for 4 years like you said isn't a long time, and without the QB it's all for naught. And you said none of these QBs have that buzz, but now they are setting the Browns up for the future, which is it?
If the Browns find the best QB in the 7th, that is great, but they have to find the QB.
Realistically, how much better does 4 years of Saquon Barkley make the team?
Gun
I got no problem with you, but youre not reading what I write.
ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that, "McAdoo's handling -- or mismanagement -- of how Eli Manning has been benched has been met with open unhappiness from Giants [CEO] John Mara, who is extremely fond of the two-time Super Bowl MVP." https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/giants-reportedly-fire-ben-mcadoo-days-after-he-benches-eli-manning/
Macadoo went 11 - 5 the previous season with Manning. In 2017 they lost Beckham and had a lousy run game.
2 Yes the Browns run offense was better with Crowell who is now a FA. Colts have the better QB if Luck is back 100%, but now they no RB. Giants have a 2 time Super Bowl QB who has proven that he can win in big games, but they had the 29th rushing offense in the NFL last year.
3 If the Giants take a QB at 2 then Manning is done. He will have 1 foot on a banana peel from the get go. The Giants are a well run franchise. Always have been, but I just do not see them taking a QB in the 1st round. They traded up for Manning when they wanted to make a move at QB. Also, youre taking a player who would sit and do your team little good if Manning does somehow turn it around.
4 I am not hearing that this Rosen kid looks like the best QB in the crop. Nor Darnold, or Allen, or Rudloph etc. With about 7 weeks to go till draft day you would think that at least 1 guy would distance himself from the others. If the Giants took Rosen would Darnold, Mayfield, Rudolph or Allen be a bad pick for the Browns? I dont think so. You are building for the future because the rookie QB should learn behind a Vet QB.
With Barkley, if the Browns rushing attack was top 5 for 4 years I guess I am missing how that would not be a good thing.
Gun
I got no problem with you, but youre not reading what I write.
ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that, "McAdoo's handling -- or mismanagement -- of how Eli Manning has been benched has been met with open unhappiness from Giants [CEO] John Mara, who is extremely fond of the two-time Super Bowl MVP." https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/giants-reportedly-fire-ben-mcadoo-days-after-he-benches-eli-manning/
Macadoo went 11 - 5 the previous season with Manning. In 2017 they lost Beckham and had a lousy run game.
2 Yes the Browns run offense was better with Crowell who is now a FA. Colts have the better QB if Luck is back 100%, but now they no RB. Giants have a 2 time Super Bowl QB who has proven that he can win in big games, but they had the 29th rushing offense in the NFL last year.
3 If the Giants take a QB at 2 then Manning is done. He will have 1 foot on a banana peel from the get go. The Giants are a well run franchise. Always have been, but I just do not see them taking a QB in the 1st round. They traded up for Manning when they wanted to make a move at QB. Also, youre taking a player who would sit and do your team little good if Manning does somehow turn it around.
4 I am not hearing that this Rosen kid looks like the best QB in the crop. Nor Darnold, or Allen, or Rudloph etc. With about 7 weeks to go till draft day you would think that at least 1 guy would distance himself from the others. If the Giants took Rosen would Darnold, Mayfield, Rudolph or Allen be a bad pick for the Browns? I dont think so. You are building for the future because the rookie QB should learn behind a Vet QB.
With Barkley, if the Browns rushing attack was top 5 for 4 years I guess I am missing how that would not be a good thing.
It wouldn't be a bad thing, I just don't see it making the difference in what any franchise wants, a championship, not without the right QB, whether that guy is at 1,4,33, or Mr Irrevelent. Again, I dont dislike Barkley at all, dont mind if the Browns take him (even at 1).
What I do think is wrong is people talking like Barkley is perfect, has no flaws, or is a savior. And then there seems to be a 50/50 split on whether it's a great QB class or subpar. If you see 3 of them as great, and closely rated together, then sure. That doesn't happen a lot though. And if you only have 1-2 You really like, then you are risking it. And IF you don't have one rated highly, and saying just wait until 4 to take him, well why take him AT ALL if he isn't good enough to draft at 1 at the most important position.
And then for the sake of argument, say the Browns take Barkley at 1 like a lot of people seem to be saying now, and then the QB gets chosen before their next pick and that QB turns out to be great, then those same people will be up in arms because they didn't draft thst guy. So the team did what THEY wanted then to do, and will still whine.
As far as the Giants, you still have that Pats gear on apparently. There is only 1 Tom Brady. Even the better Manning (Peyton) retired at what 39? So Eli has 2 years until that. So after those 2 years, the Giants will NEED a QB, and chances are that Giants are not in position to draft top QB then. Eli may very well turn it around this year, but he isn't turning the clock backwards. And as you said, they are a well run franchise and know that his time is coming to an end, and need to build for future.
As far as McAdoo, when the decision was made, the owner was on board. They had 1 win at THAT point. He was already losing his job, the benching just added to it. Him benching Manning was NOT the sole reason he was fired
-
OK
Might as well draw names out of a hat.
No, you shouldn't. You just seem to fail to realize that things work both ways. You started the talk about buzz saying not for these guys, but there was for other GOT QBs. I just point out that there has been just as much buzz for guys who are on top 10 busts of all time.
So what is the difference in the buzz for Eli/Rivers/Ben vs buzz for Leaf/Russell/RG3?
And then there are ones who had no buzz.
So exactly what does this buzz do?
-
Leaf could very well make the HOF. He has consistently played at high level for a number of season. Marino did not win a ring, but is in the HOF.
You might want to go back and review what you wrote Chief.
You said, "Buzz, yeah maybe" There was no maybe about it. Both Ben and Manning were highly touted and regarded as top flight QBs, NY moved up to get Manning. Rivers was on a team that went 14 - 2 coached by Marty. Kieding missed the winning FG for the win. I was there. No, Rivers has not won a ring, but you cant count SD out of making the post season since Rivers has been there.
The only player right now ready for the NFL is Barkley. All the QBs are projects. Take a project at 1 or take a project at 4.
In what world do you live in where you think Ryan Leaf could very well make the Hall of Fame. Now I like you Boo, but that was stoopid
In what world do you live in where you think Ryan Leaf could very well make the Hall of Fame. Now I like you Boo, but that was stoopid
You're actively being trolled into responses and you don't even realize it.
-
He says "few and far between" and you support your claim by posting two examples in 17 years of football seasons. One of those examples had a HOF QB under center and a current top 10 QB in the NFL. Very nice!
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
Youre right. All you need to do is select the next HOF QB in this draft.
If the Browns like a QB enough to think he's the future of franchise, we take him number 1-there's no debate. Sam Darnold is being compared to Andrew Luck by NFL scouts, he got a little buzz if I'm remembering correctly. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2018/profiles/sam-darnold?id=2560057
The Browns have been awful for going on two decades because they've failed to draft a franchise QB. You can point to busts all you want, but I can equally point to Ki-Jana Carter and others (cough, Trent Richardson, cough) for massive failures at the RB position. Don't even get me started on the whole "well he could have been good if the talent was better" argument either. Dozens of Browns rejects have gone to better teams, gotten a chance to start, and showed they were equally bad to back-up caliber players (Quinn, Anderson, McCoy) and that's just off the top of my head.
I think Barkley is going to be a great player, don't get me wrong. But a QB is unquestionably and always more valuable. Hell, we've had RB's on the team that are currently 2nd and 3rd for most rushing yards in a game and it sure as hell hasn't gotten the organization very far along.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
Youre right. All you need to do is select the next HOF QB in this draft.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
OK forgot about Faulk, my bad. I said "generational" RBs. That means to my mind a once in a 20 year talent, not a once in every 3-5 year talent. A guy who you can put in the conversation with the GOATs- the Browns, Payton's, and Sanders. Faulk, Tomlinson, and certainly not Lynch aren't on that level. So, Boo you want to tell me that Saquon will be on the GOAT level, since you're saying draft him #1 overall? Plenty of game tape to the contrary? Plenty of history showing a HOF QB trumps HOF RB? I'll even put Barkley on Adrian Peterson level for comparison, he'd be a nice complimentary piece on the Browns if we already had our franchise quarterback, too bad we DON'T.
PS regarding Seattle and Beast Mode, (as with Payton and the Bears) he can thank the Legion of Boom for getting them there.
-
Gun
I got no problem with you, but youre not reading what I write.
ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that, "McAdoo's handling -- or mismanagement -- of how Eli Manning has been benched has been met with open unhappiness from Giants [CEO] John Mara, who is extremely fond of the two-time Super Bowl MVP." https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/giants-reportedly-fire-ben-mcadoo-days-after-he-benches-eli-manning/
Macadoo went 11 - 5 the previous season with Manning. In 2017 they lost Beckham and had a lousy run game.
2 Yes the Browns run offense was better with Crowell who is now a FA. Colts have the better QB if Luck is back 100%, but now they no RB. Giants have a 2 time Super Bowl QB who has proven that he can win in big games, but they had the 29th rushing offense in the NFL last year.
3 If the Giants take a QB at 2 then Manning is done. He will have 1 foot on a banana peel from the get go. The Giants are a well run franchise. Always have been, but I just do not see them taking a QB in the 1st round. They traded up for Manning when they wanted to make a move at QB. Also, youre taking a player who would sit and do your team little good if Manning does somehow turn it around.
4 I am not hearing that this Rosen kid looks like the best QB in the crop. Nor Darnold, or Allen, or Rudloph etc. With about 7 weeks to go till draft day you would think that at least 1 guy would distance himself from the others. If the Giants took Rosen would Darnold, Mayfield, Rudolph or Allen be a bad pick for the Browns? I dont think so. You are building for the future because the rookie QB should learn behind a Vet QB.
With Barkley, if the Browns rushing attack was top 5 for 4 years I guess I am missing how that would not be a good thing.
It wouldn't be a bad thing, I just don't see it making the difference in what any franchise wants, a championship, not without the right QB, whether that guy is at 1,4,33, or Mr Irrevelent. Again, I dont dislike Barkley at all, dont mind if the Browns take him (even at 1).
What I do think is wrong is people talking like Barkley is perfect, has no flaws, or is a savior. And then there seems to be a 50/50 split on whether it's a great QB class or subpar. If you see 3 of them as great, and closely rated together, then sure. That doesn't happen a lot though. And if you only have 1-2 You really like, then you are risking it. And IF you don't have one rated highly, and saying just wait until 4 to take him, well why take him AT ALL if he isn't good enough to draft at 1 at the most important position.
And then for the sake of argument, say the Browns take Barkley at 1 like a lot of people seem to be saying now, and then the QB gets chosen before their next pick and that QB turns out to be great, then those same people will be up in arms because they didn't draft thst guy. So the team did what THEY wanted then to do, and will still whine.
As far as the Giants, you still have that Pats gear on apparently. There is only 1 Tom Brady. Even the better Manning (Peyton) retired at what 39? So Eli has 2 years until that. So after those 2 years, the Giants will NEED a QB, and chances are that Giants are not in position to draft top QB then. Eli may very well turn it around this year, but he isn't turning the clock backwards. And as you said, they are a well run franchise and know that his time is coming to an end, and need to build for future.
As far as McAdoo, when the decision was made, the owner was on board. They had 1 win at THAT point. He was already losing his job, the benching just added to it. Him benching Manning was NOT the sole reason he was fired
It wouldn't be a bad thing, I just don't see it making the difference in what any franchise wants, a championship, not without the right QB, whether that guy is at 1,4,33, or Mr Irrevelent. Again, I dont dislike Barkley at all, dont mind if the Browns take him (even at 1).
What I do think is wrong is people talking like Barkley is perfect, has no flaws, or is a savior. And then there seems to be a 50/50 split on whether it's a great QB class or subpar. If you see 3 of them as great, and closely rated together, then sure. That doesn't happen a lot though. And if you only have 1-2 You really like, then you are risking it. And IF you don't have one rated highly, and saying just wait until 4 to take him, well why take him AT ALL if he isn't good enough to draft at 1 at the most important position.
And then for the sake of argument, say the Browns take Barkley at 1 like a lot of people seem to be saying now, and then the QB gets chosen before their next pick and that QB turns out to be great, then those same people will be up in arms because they didn't draft thst guy. So the team did what THEY wanted then to do, and will still whine.
As far as the Giants, you still have that Pats gear on apparently. There is only 1 Tom Brady. Even the better Manning (Peyton) retired at what 39? So Eli has 2 years until that. So after those 2 years, the Giants will NEED a QB, and chances are that Giants are not in position to draft top QB then. Eli may very well turn it around this year, but he isn't turning the clock backwards. And as you said, they are a well run franchise and know that his time is coming to an end, and need to build for future.
As far as McAdoo, when the decision was made, the owner was on board. They had 1 win at THAT point. He was already losing his job, the benching just added to it. Him benching Manning was NOT the sole reason he was fired
The Giants won the super bowl going 9 - 7 and 10 - 6. Manning has proven that he can win big games on the road.
2 years of a clutch QB or a rookie who is unproven? Im going with the guy who has the resume. You cant teach coming through in the clutch.
-
passing on Barkley would be a monumental screw-up.
Take him! Im sure Darnold or Rosen will be there at 4, and if not, take Micah Fitzpatrick.
passing on Barkley would be a monumental screw-up.
Take him! Im sure Darnold or Rosen will be there at 4, and if not, take Micah Fitzpatrick.
Thank you.
He is gone by 4.
-
As fans we only get a partial view of the big picture. This FO gets to meet with these QB Prospects face to face and put them through the paces. They will have a #1 QB by the time the dust settles, and they cannot take the chance that someone else will draft him.
If they draft scared and let other teams determine who their QB will be so they can use #1 overall on one of the easiest positions to fill, it will be the same old Sheet(unless it works).
Edit: Barkley will probably be there at 4, and if he isn’t, it’s not like you missed out on your QB, so it’s no biggie.
Royce, you make some valid points. BUT, the last time we drafted a QB in round 1 - there wasn't a consensus in our organization while a better QB like Carr got drafted a round later elsewhere. This year's group of QBs may not be that easy for everyone in FO/staff to be on the same page with. For example, right now Mayock is saying he didn't see why he keeps hearing us taking Mayfield at #4 when there's Josh Allen and Sam Darnold (who was just too terrified to throw at the combines). If anyone in our FO is thinking this very same way - what makes you so certain we HAVE to go QB 1st? Haven't we gone the arm strength over accuracy route ad-nauseum here via DA, Weeden and Kizer? How many times does our history need to show us you can't square peg a round hole?
Again, we've never had way more $ than everyone else needing a veteran FA QB like we have this time around. Nothing about this needs to be terrifying for our Front Office if they defer the QB to #4 overall. Do you know how many great QBs have been drafted after #4 overall? Here's a ratload of those: Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Kirk Cousins, Derek Carr, Jimmy Garapollo, Ben Roethlisberger, Nick Foles, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Mark Brunell just off the top of my head... And Philip Rivers was drafted at #4 (ahead of Ben Rapen) while Kurt Warner wasn't even drafted. A ton of those guys had at least 2 QBs drafted in front of them. Were their finders all just a bunch of Jethro Clampetts striking oil by accident - or did they have some degree of research behind the investments?
And in Favre's case, the team that drafted him wasn't willing to put the things into him that the team who traded for him did up in GB.
With our FA situation, this might be a very good year to pick a QB at #4 overall just 3 picks after securing our very first scoring weapon in the starting lineup. If we WANT to recruit a veteran QB to come here money alone won't do it. They're going to want at least 1 reliable scoring weapon. Even Josh Gordon isn't one if we count his last 10 starts since 2013 with only 1 TD. This is ANOTHER reason I want us to bring Barkley here aside from his very underrated receiving skills. Counting his 2 kickoff returns for scores in 2017, he's got 45 TDs in the last 2 years. I'm pretty confident that will help us recruit a veteran QB; plus we may be losing our previous starting RB.
There's more than 1 thing that took this stubborn knucklehead from 1 side of this debate to the other. If people can just read the rationale, they might get it more than they are willing to. There's only 2 teams drafting between us at 1 and us at 4 and if one of them takes Josh Allen - I'll send them all the candy and flowers they could ever want.
Royce, you make some valid points. BUT, the last time we drafted a QB in round 1 - there wasn't a consensus in our organization while a better QB like Carr got drafted a round later elsewhere. This year's group of QBs may not be that easy for everyone in FO/staff to be on the same page with. For example, right now Mayock is saying he didn't see why he keeps hearing us taking Mayfield at #4 when there's Josh Allen and Sam Darnold (who was just too terrified to throw at the combines). If anyone in our FO is thinking this very same way - what makes you so certain we HAVE to go QB 1st? Haven't we gone the arm strength over accuracy route ad-nauseum here via DA, Weeden and Kizer? How many times does our history need to show us you can't square peg a round hole?
Again, we've never had way more $ than everyone else needing a veteran FA QB like we have this time around. Nothing about this needs to be terrifying for our Front Office if they defer the QB to #4 overall. Do you know how many great QBs have been drafted after #4 overall? Here's a ratload of those: Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Kirk Cousins, Derek Carr, Jimmy Garapollo, Ben Roethlisberger, Nick Foles, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Mark Brunell just off the top of my head... And Philip Rivers was drafted at #4 (ahead of Ben Rapen) while Kurt Warner wasn't even drafted. A ton of those guys had at least 2 QBs drafted in front of them. Were their finders all just a bunch of Jethro Clampetts striking oil by accident - or did they have some degree of research behind the investments?
And in Favre's case, the team that drafted him wasn't willing to put the things into him that the team who traded for him did up in GB.
With our FA situation, this might be a very good year to pick a QB at #4 overall just 3 picks after securing our very first scoring weapon in the starting lineup. If we WANT to recruit a veteran QB to come here money alone won't do it. They're going to want at least 1 reliable scoring weapon. Even Josh Gordon isn't one if we count his last 10 starts since 2013 with only 1 TD. This is ANOTHER reason I want us to bring Barkley here aside from his very underrated receiving skills. Counting his 2 kickoff returns for scores in 2017, he's got 45 TDs in the last 2 years. I'm pretty confident that will help us recruit a veteran QB; plus we may be losing our previous starting RB.
There's more than 1 thing that took this stubborn knucklehead from 1 side of this debate to the other. If people can just read the rationale, they might get it more than they are willing to. There's only 2 teams drafting between us at 1 and us at 4 and if one of them takes Josh Allen - I'll send them all the candy and flowers they could ever want.
I understand that historically a lot of good QBs come after #4, but you can multiply that argument by ten for the RB position. Not only do RBs have the shortest shelf life, but they are also one of the easiest positions to fill. To argue a RB at #1 is only a few clicks south of saying we need a punter or kicker at #1. I’m not convinced that Barkley will have the best career of this RB group, because every year there’s a mid round guy who comes out of nowhere to become a superstar. The 2 best backs from last draft were taken in the third round.
I like Barkley, but I’m in no way upset if the browns don’t draft him. If they want to take their QB at 4, then I’d prefer they take Bradley Chubb at 1. take a premium position and set this defense up to be murderous.
-
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
Youre right. All you need to do is select the next HOF QB in this draft.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
OK forgot about Faulk, my bad. I said "generational" RBs. That means to my mind a once in a 20 year talent, not a once in every 3-5 year talent. A guy who you can put in the conversation with the GOATs- the Browns, Payton's, and Sanders. Faulk, Tomlinson, and certainly not Lynch aren't on that level. So, Boo you want to tell me that Saquon will be on the GOAT level, since you're saying draft him #1 overall? Plenty of game tape to the contrary? Plenty of history showing a HOF QB trumps HOF RB? I'll even put Barkley on Adrian Peterson level for comparison, he'd be a nice complimentary piece on the Browns if we already had our franchise quarterback, too bad we DON'T.
PS regarding Seattle and Beast Mode, (as with Payton and the Bears) he can thank the Legion of Boom for getting them there.
OK forgot about Faulk, my bad. I said "generational" RBs. That means to my mind a once in a 20 year talent, not a once in every 3-5 year talent. A guy who you can put in the conversation with the GOATs- the Browns, Payton's, and Sanders. Faulk, Tomlinson, and certainly not Lynch aren't on that level. So, Boo you want to tell me that Saquon will be on the GOAT level, since you're saying draft him #1 overall? Plenty of game tape to the contrary? Plenty of history showing a HOF QB trumps HOF RB? I'll even put Barkley on Adrian Peterson level for comparison, he'd be a nice complimentary piece on the Browns if we already had our franchise quarterback, too bad we DON'T.
PS regarding Seattle and Beast Mode, (as with Payton and the Bears) he can thank the Legion of Boom for getting them there.
Well, hell. Look what I found.
However, if the Browns snag the quarterback that the Giants view as the best in this class, a generational talent at running back in Penn State's Saquon Barkley could ignite a Giants' offense that is already loaded with talented playmakers such as Odell Beckham Jr., Sterling Shepard, and Evan Engram. http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2018/03/giants_nfl_draft_big_board_ranking_top-5_prospects.html#incart_river_index
Barkley is the missing piece to the Giants puzzle. Not QB right now.
-
It wouldn't be a bad thing, I just don't see it making the difference in what any franchise wants, a championship, not without the right QB, whether that guy is at 1,4,33, or Mr Irrevelent. Again, I dont dislike Barkley at all, dont mind if the Browns take him (even at 1).
What I do think is wrong is people talking like Barkley is perfect, has no flaws, or is a savior. And then there seems to be a 50/50 split on whether it's a great QB class or subpar. If you see 3 of them as great, and closely rated together, then sure. That doesn't happen a lot though. And if you only have 1-2 You really like, then you are risking it. And IF you don't have one rated highly, and saying just wait until 4 to take him, well why take him AT ALL if he isn't good enough to draft at 1 at the most important position.
And then for the sake of argument, say the Browns take Barkley at 1 like a lot of people seem to be saying now, and then the QB gets chosen before their next pick and that QB turns out to be great, then those same people will be up in arms because they didn't draft thst guy. So the team did what THEY wanted then to do, and will still whine.
As far as the Giants, you still have that Pats gear on apparently. There is only 1 Tom Brady. Even the better Manning (Peyton) retired at what 39? So Eli has 2 years until that. So after those 2 years, the Giants will NEED a QB, and chances are that Giants are not in position to draft top QB then. Eli may very well turn it around this year, but he isn't turning the clock backwards. And as you said, they are a well run franchise and know that his time is coming to an end, and need to build for future.
As far as McAdoo, when the decision was made, the owner was on board. They had 1 win at THAT point. He was already losing his job, the benching just added to it. Him benching Manning was NOT the sole reason he was fired
The Giants won the super bowl going 9 - 7 and 10 - 6. Manning has proven that he can win big games on the road.
2 years of a clutch QB or a rookie who is unproven? Im going with the guy who has the resume. You cant teach coming through in the clutch.
The Giants won the super bowl going 9 - 7 and 10 - 6. Manning has proven that he can win big games on the road.
2 years of a clutch QB or a rookie who is unproven? Im going with the guy who has the resume. You cant teach coming through in the clutch.
My gosh, you just aren't very football smart. IF the Giants draft a QB, they DON'T START HIM DAY 1, THEY GO WITH MANNING UNTIL HE RETIRES.
You know, in 1-2 years see as though he is OLD.
End of lesson today. You obviously are trolling, uneducated, or just have 1 set opinion, and won't change for anything. It is sad any way you look at it.
-
He says "few and far between" and you support your claim by posting two examples in 17 years of football seasons. One of those examples had a HOF QB under center and a current top 10 QB in the NFL. Very nice!
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
Youre right. All you need to do is select the next HOF QB in this draft.
If the Browns like a QB enough to think he's the future of franchise, we take him number 1-there's no debate. Sam Darnold is being compared to Andrew Luck by NFL scouts, he got a little buzz if I'm remembering correctly. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2018/profiles/sam-darnold?id=2560057
The Browns have been awful for going on two decades because they've failed to draft a franchise QB. You can point to busts all you want, but I can equally point to Ki-Jana Carter and others (cough, Trent Richardson, cough) for massive failures at the RB position. Don't even get me started on the whole "well he could have been good if the talent was better" argument either. Dozens of Browns rejects have gone to better teams, gotten a chance to start, and showed they were equally bad to back-up caliber players (Quinn, Anderson, McCoy) and that's just off the top of my head.
I think Barkley is going to be a great player, don't get me wrong. But a QB is unquestionably and always more valuable. Hell, we've had RB's on the team that are currently 2nd and 3rd for most rushing yards in a game and it sure as hell hasn't gotten the organization very far along.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
Youre getting a QB at 4 and signing a Vet QB. Thats how you win now. Watson was a surprise in Houston.
"a" QB is the key word there. We don't have to get what's left of the bunch at #4, we can get our guy. If the Browns brass has tapped a QB as a top 5 pick, he should go number 1.Let me put it this way, assuming whichever QB would go number #1 and lives up to the potential.
Would you rather have Barry Sanders or Tom Brady? Adrian Peterson or Aaron Rodgers?
It's a crap shoot for any draft, but that answer is obvious.
-
#1 QB favoured by FO.
#4 Minkah
Running back at #1, however good is not the right move IMO.
-
The Giants won the super bowl going 9 - 7 and 10 - 6. Manning has proven that he can win big games on the road.
2 years of a clutch QB or a rookie who is unproven? Im going with the guy who has the resume. You cant teach coming through in the clutch.
My gosh, you just aren't very football smart. IF the Giants draft a QB, they DON'T START HIM DAY 1, THEY GO WITH MANNING UNTIL HE RETIRES.
You know, in 1-2 years see as though he is OLD.
End of lesson today. You obviously are trolling, uneducated, or just have 1 set opinion, and won't change for anything. It is sad any way you look at it.
My gosh, you just aren't very football smart. IF the Giants draft a QB, they DON'T START HIM DAY 1, THEY GO WITH MANNING UNTIL HE RETIRES.
You know, in 1-2 years see as though he is OLD.
End of lesson today. You obviously are trolling, uneducated, or just have 1 set opinion, and won't change for anything. It is sad any way you look at it.
Ridiculous.
As Manning gets another year older, you have just wasted your pick on a QB who wont play. Sorry, but I just dont want to spell everything out in infinite detail for someone to hopefully grasp. Next, we will be back to the Giants never drafting this high again.
-
Good point. Let's take a look at QBs drafted and currently starting with at least 3 years of experience on their resumes:
Tom Brady - 6th round
Russell Wilson - 3rd round
Aaron Rodgers - #24 overall (who first sat behind a 2nd round pick Brett Favre)
Ben Roethlisberger - #11 overall
Drew Brees - 2nd round
Philip Rivers - #4 overall and traded to SD from NYG for Eli
Joe Flacco - #18 overall
Derek Carr - 2nd round
Jimmy Garoppolo - 2nd round
Kirk Cousins - 4th round
Matt Ryan - #3 overall
Eli Manning - #1 overall for SD traded to NYG for 4th pick overall Rivers
Blake Bortles - #3 overall
Matthew Stafford - #1 overall
Andrew Luck - #1 overall
Alex Smith - #1 overall
There's a TON of guys above that were drafted from pick #4 overall and later... One of them is about to get the biggest FA contract of 2018 and he started longer than RG3 for the same team that up to #2 to take RG3.
Ist overall picks
Smith - 0 super bowls
Luck - 0 super bowls
Stafford - 0 super bowls
Manning - 2 super bowls
25% odds of hitting it right aint good odds to me.
Ist overall picks
Smith - 0 super bowls
Luck - 0 super bowls
Stafford - 0 super bowls
Manning - 2 super bowls
25% odds of hitting it right aint good odds to me.
Do you realize how many teams win superbowls with starting RBs that didn’t get drafted at all?
Shmuck, the Eagles just won the Super Bowl with 2 undrafted RBs and a 5th rounder that they traded for.....
Willie Parker, Dominique Rhodes, Mike Bell, Pierre Thomas, LeGarette Blount, Corey Clement were all undrafted, and all have a Super Bowl ring that’s less than 15 years old.
theres also a lot of guys who were taken near the middle/end of the draft who made major contributions to Super Bowl wins. Brandon Jacobs (4th) James White (4th) Ahmad Bradshaw (7th) Jay Ajayi (5th) James Starks (6th)
It isn’t even an apples to apples discussion because while you’re listing #1 overall QBs who don’t have Super Bowl rings, the last RB to go #1 overall is old enough to be a father to guys looking to sign their second contract in the NFL, and he was a bust.
Ill be here waiting to hear about the long snapper you guys want to draft at #1.
-
OK forgot about Faulk, my bad. I said "generational" RBs. That means to my mind a once in a 20 year talent, not a once in every 3-5 year talent. A guy who you can put in the conversation with the GOATs- the Browns, Payton's, and Sanders. Faulk, Tomlinson, and certainly not Lynch aren't on that level. So, Boo you want to tell me that Saquon will be on the GOAT level, since you're saying draft him #1 overall? Plenty of game tape to the contrary? Plenty of history showing a HOF QB trumps HOF RB? I'll even put Barkley on Adrian Peterson level for comparison, he'd be a nice complimentary piece on the Browns if we already had our franchise quarterback, too bad we DON'T.
PS regarding Seattle and Beast Mode, (as with Payton and the Bears) he can thank the Legion of Boom for getting them there.
Well, hell. Look what I found.
However, if the Browns snag the quarterback that the Giants view as the best in this class, a generational talent at running back in Penn State's Saquon Barkley could ignite a Giants' offense that is already loaded with talented playmakers such as Odell Beckham Jr., Sterling Shepard, and Evan Engram. http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2018/03/giants_nfl_draft_big_board_ranking_top-5_prospects.html#incart_river_index
Barkley is the missing piece to the Giants puzzle. Not QB right now.
Well, hell. Look what I found.
However, if the Browns snag the quarterback that the Giants view as the best in this class, a generational talent at running back in Penn State's Saquon Barkley could ignite a Giants' offense that is already loaded with talented playmakers such as Odell Beckham Jr., Sterling Shepard, and Evan Engram. http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2018/03/giants_nfl_draft_big_board_ranking_top-5_prospects.html#incart_river_index
Barkley is the missing piece to the Giants puzzle. Not QB right now.
And I've already said Saquon to the Giants doesn't necessarily make them an instant SB contender. Sugar plums dancing in the NY collective heads, let's see where the preseason SB odds fall- and that's around five months away.The Eagles (with a healthy Wentz) and the Cowboys (with Elliott off suspension) will have a lot to say about even winning the division. The G-Men may well go the Barkley route, if they want a last hurrah (and no backup plan) with Eli as the QB- but he's starting to show his age. When Eli retires, they're going to be hoping (like the Browns at the cursed #22) they can get lucky and find their qb- which like you're saying- is going to take a couple years to mature.
Ha- so a NJ paper has Barkley rated the #1 prospect for the Giants. So does about everyone else. To be "generational" the nfl.com rankings better be 8.0 or better. Close, no cigar Saquon. The hype train is in full force, (saw the Superquon pic in the NY Post) but that generational word is being tossed around a bit too freely for my tastes.
So If the draft goes Browns qb, Giants Saquon, Denver (or the Jets) trade with the Colts to take a qb- (and don't try telling me that's not a distinct possibility) the Browns will beat Saquon's 40 time up to the podium to turn in Chubb's name.
Seriously- like Gunz, I'm not going to be upset if we go Saquon\quarterback. Just saying that's not the only option- and maybe not even the best.
-
The exact quote was that Emmit Smith was the last RB to lead a team to a championship 20 years ago. Its happened as recently as 2013.
OK, just who was that?
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