Skip to content

Here is where we are now.

The Browns Board
62 18 1.7k
  • @gunz41 said:

    Pretty sure he was talking about Smith, not Barmore

    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. 

    @the-gipper said:

    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. 

  • @the-gipper said:

    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. 

    @gunz41 said:

    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? 

  • @gunz41 said:

    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? 

    @the-gipper said:

    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 

  • @runyon27 said:

    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? 

    @the-gipper said:

    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.

  • @gunz41 said:

    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? 

    @the-gipper said:

    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. 

  • 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.  

    @d-bone said:

    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?

    @ballpeen said:

    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. 

    @poeticg said:

    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.

  • 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. 

    @poeticg said:

    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

  • @d-bone said:

    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?

    @ballpeen said:

    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.

    @tour2ma said:

    Andrew, too?

    Thanking Andrew is a Process that I'm still working through...  

  • 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. 

    @poeticg said:

    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 😉     

  • 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 😉     

    @gumby73 said:

    pick #22

    The Browns' pick of death!

  • @gumby73 said:

    pick #22

    The Browns' pick of death!

    @tour2ma said:

    The Browns' pick of death!

    #22. 😮   Maybe they could trade it for a second round pick ?  Two thirds ?  

    Or just be brave and keep it and go for it !

  • 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 😉     

    @gumby73 said:

    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 😉     

    @gumby73 said:

    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..

  • @gumby73 said:

    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..

    @gumby73 said:

    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...

  • And if say Devonta Smith is there?

    @tour2ma said:

    And if say Devonta Smith is there?

    I really doubt he will be there. 

  • @gumby73 said:

    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...

    @tour2ma said:

    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...

    No you ain't.   LOL!?

  • @gumby73 said:

    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..

    @gumby73 said:

    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..

    Imagine if some proper selections had been made with those picks.  Those....hopefully good....players would be in the prime of their careers for the Browns right now.   Khalil Mack or Mike Evans were available at #4

    Bradley Roby and Demarcus Lawrence at #26