Here is where we are now.
-
I think O-gun is replaceable. He has leveled off after a promising rookie season. One guy you didn't mention that has shown promise is Taylor, at least in tipping passes. Not sure what kind of run stop grades he is getting.
Yeah I think I am done with Ogunjobi, I was disappointed in his play this year and I think upgrading the interior of the D line needs to be done.
Yeah I think I am done with Ogunjobi, I was disappointed in his play this year and I think upgrading the interior of the D line needs to be done.
Can you think of a guy we may consider to do that?
-
I was talking about Barmore. He responded directly to my comment about Barmore. Here is his statement: If he fits what the Browns are trying to do on defense, yes.
Well you were talking about both.
If Barmore is there, depending on fit (i.e. what have coming back, FA, etc.) Then I certainly would look. But I think that DL was the least of Browns worries on D this year.
I don't see Smith being the next Harvin, but just say Smith is "ranked" 5th and is somehow still available. I don't think he fits the NEED for Browns.
-
I was talking about Barmore. He responded directly to my comment about Barmore. Here is his statement: If he fits what the Browns are trying to do on defense, yes.
Well you were talking about both.
If Barmore is there, depending on fit (i.e. what have coming back, FA, etc.) Then I certainly would look. But I think that DL was the least of Browns worries on D this year.
I don't see Smith being the next Harvin, but just say Smith is "ranked" 5th and is somehow still available. I don't think he fits the NEED for Browns.
Well you were talking about both.
If Barmore is there, depending on fit (i.e. what have coming back, FA, etc.) Then I certainly would look. But I think that DL was the least of Browns worries on D this year.
I don't see Smith being the next Harvin, but just say Smith is "ranked" 5th and is somehow still available. I don't think he fits the NEED for Browns.
OK, now, about this "fit".... Y'all seem to be using that term in different contexts. You seem to be saying that "fit" means if we are loaded at a position....say DT, then drafting another DT would not be the most prudent move for the team....given other needs. That I get. But I didn't take it that that is what Dutch was talking about (though, actually, he didn't explain anything about what he was talking about, he just went all PMS). The other "fit" is that supposedly a guy is not the right kind of player for some certain designated scheme that a team wants to run defensively; because he played in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4....or because he is used to playing upright rather than putting his hand on the ground. My contention being that talent supercedes all that. If you can get a guy that can tackle like hell, or rush the passer like hell....you get him if you need him notwithstanding what "system" you may think he is suited for.....and, again, my contention being that you suit your system to your talent...or, especially with like a 20 year old talent like Barmore, you coach him up and have him adapt.
Doesn't that seem fair?
-
Well you were talking about both.
If Barmore is there, depending on fit (i.e. what have coming back, FA, etc.) Then I certainly would look. But I think that DL was the least of Browns worries on D this year.
I don't see Smith being the next Harvin, but just say Smith is "ranked" 5th and is somehow still available. I don't think he fits the NEED for Browns.
OK, now, about this "fit".... Y'all seem to be using that term in different contexts. You seem to be saying that "fit" means if we are loaded at a position....say DT, then drafting another DT would not be the most prudent move for the team....given other needs. That I get. But I didn't take it that that is what Dutch was talking about (though, actually, he didn't explain anything about what he was talking about, he just went all PMS). The other "fit" is that supposedly a guy is not the right kind of player for some certain designated scheme that a team wants to run defensively; because he played in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4....or because he is used to playing upright rather than putting his hand on the ground. My contention being that talent supercedes all that. If you can get a guy that can tackle like hell, or rush the passer like hell....you get him if you need him notwithstanding what "system" you may think he is suited for.....and, again, my contention being that you suit your system to your talent...or, especially with like a 20 year old talent like Barmore, you coach him up and have him adapt.
Doesn't that seem fair?
OK, now, about this "fit".... Y'all seem to be using that term in different contexts. You seem to be saying that "fit" means if we are loaded at a position....say DT, then drafting another DT would not be the most prudent move for the team....given other needs. That I get. But I didn't take it that that is what Dutch was talking about (though, actually, he didn't explain anything about what he was talking about, he just went all PMS). The other "fit" is that supposedly a guy is not the right kind of player for some certain designated scheme that a team wants to run defensively; because he played in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4....or because he is used to playing upright rather than putting his hand on the ground. My contention being that talent supercedes all that. If you can get a guy that can tackle like hell, or rush the passer like hell....you get him if you need him notwithstanding what "system" you may think he is suited for.....and, again, my contention being that you suit your system to your talent...or, especially with like a 20 year old talent like Barmore, you coach him up and have him adapt.
Doesn't that seem fair?
Of course. And I don't know what he was meaning?
All I was saying is that from what I read, I guess I assumed that he was talking about Smith not Barmore, since you had talked about both in the thread.
Barmore certainly would be on my board. Smith would be too, but if there is someone comparable to his grade on the defensive side (even if you believe Smith will be better) you want to look at need
-
Can you think of a guy we may consider to do that?
Anybody can name names. The GM probably knows. I let O-gun walk. He is a marginal starter at best.
-
Well you were talking about both.
If Barmore is there, depending on fit (i.e. what have coming back, FA, etc.) Then I certainly would look. But I think that DL was the least of Browns worries on D this year.
I don't see Smith being the next Harvin, but just say Smith is "ranked" 5th and is somehow still available. I don't think he fits the NEED for Browns.
OK, now, about this "fit".... Y'all seem to be using that term in different contexts. You seem to be saying that "fit" means if we are loaded at a position....say DT, then drafting another DT would not be the most prudent move for the team....given other needs. That I get. But I didn't take it that that is what Dutch was talking about (though, actually, he didn't explain anything about what he was talking about, he just went all PMS). The other "fit" is that supposedly a guy is not the right kind of player for some certain designated scheme that a team wants to run defensively; because he played in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4....or because he is used to playing upright rather than putting his hand on the ground. My contention being that talent supercedes all that. If you can get a guy that can tackle like hell, or rush the passer like hell....you get him if you need him notwithstanding what "system" you may think he is suited for.....and, again, my contention being that you suit your system to your talent...or, especially with like a 20 year old talent like Barmore, you coach him up and have him adapt.
Doesn't that seem fair?
OK, now, about this "fit".... Y'all seem to be using that term in different contexts. You seem to be saying that "fit" means if we are loaded at a position....say DT, then drafting another DT would not be the most prudent move for the team....given other needs. That I get. But I didn't take it that that is what Dutch was talking about (though, actually, he didn't explain anything about what he was talking about, he just went all PMS). The other "fit" is that supposedly a guy is not the right kind of player for some certain designated scheme that a team wants to run defensively; because he played in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4....or because he is used to playing upright rather than putting his hand on the ground. My contention being that talent supercedes all that. If you can get a guy that can tackle like hell, or rush the passer like hell....you get him if you need him notwithstanding what "system" you may think he is suited for.....and, again, my contention being that you suit your system to your talent...or, especially with like a 20 year old talent like Barmore, you coach him up and have him adapt.
Doesn't that seem fair?
Fit is important. Sure, a guy like Donald is going to fit anywhere, but guys like that don't hit FA easily. They go through a few years of being tagged.
DT's come in different shapes and sizes. Smaller, quicker guys are usually 1 gap players. Hit the gap, penetrate, and see what happens. Others are bigger and not as quick and they are 2 gap players. They don't shoot gaps between defenders. They are expected to hold th2 ground where they are lined up, plus the ground maybe 2 yards to each side.
Most do one or the other. Few can do both.
-
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
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- -
Thank you Kevin, Baker, Nick, Jarvis and Kareem for making it possible for threads like this to not be posted until the middle of January, instead of the usual mid October.
Thank you Kevin, Baker, Nick, Jarvis and Kareem for making it possible for threads like this to not be posted until the middle of January, instead of the usual mid October.
Andrew, too?
what do you think? I think it pretty unrealistic, but it may be unrealistic to think barmore is there, but he is listed there according to CBS. Generally speaking, i don't think CBS is very good in their rankings.
Likely very unrealistic, but I only used Smith to make an "anti-draft for need" point.
"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 -
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
No Safety? No CB? No DE to bookend MG?
No way in hell Berry is going all in on one pick when we have starter and depth issues on both sides of the ball...
... not to mention a bushel basket of FAs... not all of whom we will be able to sign due to the cap.
We are way more than one LB away... I don't care how studly he is.
"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 -
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
You don’t go from 26 to top 10 unless you need a QB
-
Thank you Kevin, Baker, Nick, Jarvis and Kareem for making it possible for threads like this to not be posted until the middle of January, instead of the usual mid October.
Andrew, too?
what do you think? I think it pretty unrealistic, but it may be unrealistic to think barmore is there, but he is listed there according to CBS. Generally speaking, i don't think CBS is very good in their rankings.
Likely very unrealistic, but I only used Smith to make an "anti-draft for need" point.
-
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
What would it take to get into the Top Ten?
Our 1st, 2nd, 4th and a 2nd next year?
We don't need a lot of picks right now. Develop what we have and go for Quality over Quantity IMO.
If we can dip into the top ten for a Stud LB, even if it cost us the entire draft, that's what we really need I believe.
Yea, and you are way off too.
The Chiefs trade (27 to 10) was #27, 3rd round pick, and next year #1.
-
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded down and than back up from what draft slot number to pick a QB from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the prior pick slot & team we traded up with?
Trade ups Beware
Browns & Buffett: Got to go fishin, Down to rock bottom again, with just a few Friends -
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded down and than back up from what draft slot number to pick a QB from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the prior pick slot & team we traded up with?
Trade ups Beware
"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 -
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded down and than back up from what draft slot number to pick a QB from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the prior pick slot & team we traded up with?
Trade ups Beware
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded down and than back up from what draft slot number to pick a QB from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the prior pick slot & team we traded up with?
Trade ups Beware
Second round.....Cowboys? No. I am thinking of the Quinn trade there. Also taken #22.
-
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded down and than back up from what draft slot number to pick a QB from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the prior pick slot & team we traded up with?
Trade ups Beware
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded back up *from what draft slot number to pick a QB* from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the *prior pick slot & team we traded up with*?
The Answers are.. What is pick *#26 (the pick the Browns will start at in the 2021 draft) And whom are the *Philadelphia Eagles
In the 2014 NFL draft, your Cleveland Browns owned 2 first round picks.. Pick #4 & Pick #26.. Pick #26 was added from the Colts in a trade for RB Trent Richardson..
Pick #4 was traded to the Bills to select WR Sammy Watkins.. The Browns slid down to Pick #9, to than trade up one slot to pick at #8 to draft CB Justin Gilbert from the Vikings..
Pick #26 from Indy,was used in a trade up with the Eagles to pick #22 to draft QB Johnny ? to Cleveland..
Browns & Buffett: Got to go fishin, Down to rock bottom again, with just a few Friends -
Gumby draft trivia.... It's 2014...
The Browns traded back up *from what draft slot number to pick a QB* from Texas A&M at pick #22... Can ya name the *prior pick slot & team we traded up with*?
The Answers are.. What is pick *#26 (the pick the Browns will start at in the 2021 draft) And whom are the *Philadelphia Eagles
In the 2014 NFL draft, your Cleveland Browns owned 2 first round picks.. Pick #4 & Pick #26.. Pick #26 was added from the Colts in a trade for RB Trent Richardson..
Pick #4 was traded to the Bills to select WR Sammy Watkins.. The Browns slid down to Pick #9, to than trade up one slot to pick at #8 to draft CB Justin Gilbert from the Vikings..
Pick #26 from Indy,was used in a trade up with the Eagles to pick #22 to draft QB Johnny ? to Cleveland..
Pick #4 was traded to the Bills to select WR Sammy Watkins.
Sammie was my guy at #4 that year until Khalil Mack miraculously fell into our lap at #4 and WE STILL TRADED THE FUCKING PICK!!!
Thanks, Ray "Fuckity Fuck Fuck Fuck" Farmer...
But I'm over it now...
"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 -
Maybe they could trade it for a second round pick ? Two thirds ?
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