Sideline Scouting Seven Round Mock
-
I have just one question...If the Browns Would have traded up for RG3, who would he have thrown the ball to? They would have given up both firsts this year and a first next year and a second as well. RG3 would have had a season similar to Colts season this year but with more rushing yards. There would still be nobody open and receivers dropping more passes than they catch. So...how would that have helped this team at all?
I would much prefer to see what Colt can do with actual weapons. If he pisses his pants, than we have the weapons in place to bring in a franchise QB next year. That makes much more sense than to trade away 4 picks in the top 2 rounds of the draft to take a chance on a rookie that doesn't fit our offense anyway...Then, if he doesn't work out, have no QB, no weapons, and no picks to get any weapons either.
Everyone wants to make a splash in the draft I know. But a splash tends to only last a few seconds. Then you're left with nothing. I will trust Heckert...He has done well in the draft thus far. Let's see how this pans out.
Good quarterbacks make receivers around them better. Robert Griffin is and will be a terrific quarterback, they should have done anything and everything to get him. Then worry about the receivers second. Get the quarterback who can change your franchise for the next decade and worry about the rest later. I LOVED that trade for the Redskins because they were saying to their fan base, "We want to give you something to cheer for, and we're dedicated to winning. We're going to get a stud franchise quarterback and we're going to give up whatever we have to, to get this thing done." And that's the attitude the Browns front office should have taken. That Redskins fan base is re-energized and think that they're going to make a run in the next two years.
Browns fan base on the other hand are talking about "well, let's see what we have with Colt McCoy and take a stud running back." Look at the teams that win in the NFL. It has become a passing league. Having a top running back is a luxury, not a necessity. Having a top quarterback is a necessity, not a luxury. Colt McCoy is not the answer in Cleveland and I can confidently state that. Robert Griffin would have been that answer, but they chose to spend another season toiling in mediocrity.
As far as Ryan Tannehill, he's not on the same level as RG3, but the team will need to take a look at him, and if the coaching staff feels that they can develop him, then you take him at #4. Because Tannehill, although not a finished product, has a very high upside and is a better prospect than last year's #8 and #12 picks Jake Locker and Christian Ponder.
Good quarterbacks make receivers around them better. Robert Griffin is and will be a terrific quarterback, they should have done anything and everything to get him. Then worry about the receivers second. Get the quarterback who can change your franchise for the next decade and worry about the rest later. I LOVED that trade for the Redskins because they were saying to their fan base, "We want to give you something to cheer for, and we're dedicated to winning. We're going to get a stud franchise quarterback and we're going to give up whatever we have to, to get this thing done." And that's the attitude the Browns front office should have taken. That Redskins fan base is re-energized and think that they're going to make a run in the next two years.
Browns fan base on the other hand are talking about "well, let's see what we have with Colt McCoy and take a stud running back." Look at the teams that win in the NFL. It has become a passing league. Having a top running back is a luxury, not a necessity. Having a top quarterback is a necessity, not a luxury. Colt McCoy is not the answer in Cleveland and I can confidently state that. Robert Griffin would have been that answer, but they chose to spend another season toiling in mediocrity.
As far as Ryan Tannehill, he's not on the same level as RG3, but the team will need to take a look at him, and if the coaching staff feels that they can develop him, then you take him at #4. Because Tannehill, although not a finished product, has a very high upside and is a better prospect than last year's #8 and #12 picks Jake Locker and Christian Ponder.
1) Regarding the red bold, you- or no one else has any idea how RGIII will pan out as an NFL QB. He has loads of potential, sure. Let me remind you of a qb taken #2 overall- Ryan Leaf.
2) You're talking from a draftnick's perspective. We've done a 3 year look-back as to what the Redskins potentially gave up- and it ain't pretty.
3) Regarding Tannehill, we have our own Guru here that's broken down film on the guy- and St. Ryan is slow on his reads. Damn- we already have Colt to do that for us- so we should draft a better armed clone of his @ #4? Sure, let's take a project qb @ #4 overall. Excuse me, teams draft "project" quarterbacks in the fourth round or lower.
-
Pick away... nits or otherwise...
... no apologies needed...I may be being a tad rigid here, but in my mind leading a team in catches does not a #1 receiver make. The '#1' is designation I reserve for a wideout who can separate at the line of scrimmage through quickness or strength or, on rare occasions, both. And that DQ's WR's that need the slot to routinely get open in my old school mind.
Won't disagree that you can "next year" yourself to death, but to spend a 4 on Tannehill? No way... and as I said, I like the kid and was willing to spend a 2nd round pick on him before the draft were QB-crazy after the 'Skins overbid for RGIII... the next Michael Vick... minus the dogs...
Wright is a 2nd tier WR at best...
I'm sure you had criteria for rounds 2 thru 7, but you did not share them. I've neither the time nor the interest to vet your picks, but if you should chose to post your thoughts then I'll read them... and probably disagree with them...
If you want to return the favor. I'm working on an update, but here's my first Mock. Have at it Sparky...
Checked out your mock and responded to it. A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing, he's a better player than Greg Little and would be their #1 WR by year two.
Cleveland's picks:
1.) Ryan Tannehill - Groom him as the quarterback of the future in cleveland. I'd have him start the year behind Colt and coach him up a bit. Great talent.
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
37.) Doug Martin - Versatile back who does everything and reminds many of Ray Rice or Jonathan Stewart. Between the tackles runner who can catch the ball. Has bellcow potential to carry the ball 250+ times a year.
Side note: If the Browns did that with those first three picks, that's an offense worth watching.
67.) Vinny Curry - Terrific pass rusher, fits in their scheme. Has a great first step and would be a steal at 67.
100.) Andrew Datko - Browns need a right tackle. Datko is a solid candidate at this spot. The crop gets very thin after him.
118.) Ryan Steed - Good small school cornerback. Cleveland needs depth behind Joe Haden.
139.) Aaron Henry - safety Mike Adams left, adding depth in the secondary here with Henry
160.) Brian Linthicum - Browns tight ends are well below average, taking a flier on Linthicum here, a good receiver, isn't a bad idea
204.) Darius Fleming - Chris Gocong and Kaluka Maiava could be improved upon, Fleming could be brought in for camp competition.
205.) Greg Childs - Second round talent who really struggled due to injuries the past 18 months. Grab him and hope to develop him as a #3 or #4 WR
211.) Justin Bethel - Depth at a position of need
245.) Derrick Shelby - Depth at a position of need
247.) Rokevious Watkins - Depth at a position of need
Checked out your mock and responded to it. A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing, he's a better player than Greg Little and would be their #1 WR by year two.
Cleveland's picks:
1.) Ryan Tannehill - Groom him as the quarterback of the future in cleveland. I'd have him start the year behind Colt and coach him up a bit. Great talent.
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
37.) Doug Martin - Versatile back who does everything and reminds many of Ray Rice or Jonathan Stewart. Between the tackles runner who can catch the ball. Has bellcow potential to carry the ball 250+ times a year.
Side note: If the Browns did that with those first three picks, that's an offense worth watching.
67.) Vinny Curry - Terrific pass rusher, fits in their scheme. Has a great first step and would be a steal at 67.
100.) Andrew Datko - Browns need a right tackle. Datko is a solid candidate at this spot. The crop gets very thin after him.
118.) Ryan Steed - Good small school cornerback. Cleveland needs depth behind Joe Haden.
139.) Aaron Henry - safety Mike Adams left, adding depth in the secondary here with Henry
160.) Brian Linthicum - Browns tight ends are well below average, taking a flier on Linthicum here, a good receiver, isn't a bad idea
204.) Darius Fleming - Chris Gocong and Kaluka Maiava could be improved upon, Fleming could be brought in for camp competition.
205.) Greg Childs - Second round talent who really struggled due to injuries the past 18 months. Grab him and hope to develop him as a #3 or #4 WR
211.) Justin Bethel - Depth at a position of need
245.) Derrick Shelby - Depth at a position of need
247.) Rokevious Watkins - Depth at a position of need
1. No way you take Tannehill at 4. You said "start the year behind Colt" Try start the next couple years behind Colt. The guy looks like a WR turned QB has only 19 career starts- not alot of success at the next level when guys start few games like that- saw a stat last year on this. I'm not sold on taking any QB this year, but If I had to take a QB- I'd either go Weeden with 37 pick. Russell Wilson in the 5th-6th round or Kellen Moore with a 7th round pick. Richardson and a RT would make teams respect Cleveland's run game and take some heat off of Colt who by now folks should know is not a guy that you put in the pocket 45-50 times a game. That's not Cleveland football anyway.
2. After Blackmon and Floyd- there is a lot of 2-5 round talent. I'm not using 22 on a WR. Wouldn't mind seeing the Browns go WR in the 3rd and with one of the 4th round guys (TY Hilton). I'd rather take a tackle that could be sliding down the boards (possibly Martin) with the 22nd pick. Another guy not talked about is Janoris Jenkins- if the FO sits down with this guy and examines if he really has turned things around- he's a steal at 22 and IMO probably the best corner in this draft.
3. Think Vinny Curry is going to be a good pro- I just don't see how he makes it to the 3rd round. He can get to the QB- he's a great 2nd round option for just about every team.
-
Over at Sideline Scouting we released a seven round mock draft today with explanations for every first round pick. Scroll over the tab “mock draft results” to see specific results for the Browns. Tabs towards the top of each page to scroll through each round.
http://www.sidelinescouting.com/mock/
What do you guys think of the picks we gave Cleveland.
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
-
Pick away... nits or otherwise...
... no apologies needed...I may be being a tad rigid here, but in my mind leading a team in catches does not a #1 receiver make. The '#1' is designation I reserve for a wideout who can separate at the line of scrimmage through quickness or strength or, on rare occasions, both. And that DQ's WR's that need the slot to routinely get open in my old school mind.
Won't disagree that you can "next year" yourself to death, but to spend a 4 on Tannehill? No way... and as I said, I like the kid and was willing to spend a 2nd round pick on him before the draft were QB-crazy after the 'Skins overbid for RGIII... the next Michael Vick... minus the dogs...
Wright is a 2nd tier WR at best...
I'm sure you had criteria for rounds 2 thru 7, but you did not share them. I've neither the time nor the interest to vet your picks, but if you should chose to post your thoughts then I'll read them... and probably disagree with them...
If you want to return the favor. I'm working on an update, but here's my first Mock. Have at it Sparky...
Checked out your mock and responded to it. A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing, he's a better player than Greg Little and would be their #1 WR by year two.
Cleveland's picks:
1.) Ryan Tannehill - Groom him as the quarterback of the future in cleveland. I'd have him start the year behind Colt and coach him up a bit. Great talent.
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
37.) Doug Martin - Versatile back who does everything and reminds many of Ray Rice or Jonathan Stewart. Between the tackles runner who can catch the ball. Has bellcow potential to carry the ball 250+ times a year.
Side note: If the Browns did that with those first three picks, that's an offense worth watching.
67.) Vinny Curry - Terrific pass rusher, fits in their scheme. Has a great first step and would be a steal at 67.
100.) Andrew Datko - Browns need a right tackle. Datko is a solid candidate at this spot. The crop gets very thin after him.
118.) Ryan Steed - Good small school cornerback. Cleveland needs depth behind Joe Haden.
139.) Aaron Henry - safety Mike Adams left, adding depth in the secondary here with Henry
160.) Brian Linthicum - Browns tight ends are well below average, taking a flier on Linthicum here, a good receiver, isn't a bad idea
204.) Darius Fleming - Chris Gocong and Kaluka Maiava could be improved upon, Fleming could be brought in for camp competition.
205.) Greg Childs - Second round talent who really struggled due to injuries the past 18 months. Grab him and hope to develop him as a #3 or #4 WR
211.) Justin Bethel - Depth at a position of need
245.) Derrick Shelby - Depth at a position of need
247.) Rokevious Watkins - Depth at a position of need
A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing...
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
-
A "2nd tier WR" at #22 isn't a bad thing...
22.) Kendall Wright - Stud WR who can play inside and outside, perfect complement to Greg Little
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.
Our "tier" system must be different. I consider the first tier like the Calvin/Andre Johnson's of the world. Second tier would be the Greg Jennings, Steve Smith, Roddy White's of the world. Second tier is not a bad thing.
-
A few surprise picks, I know. But the NFL Draft is always a surprise. Overall thoughts?
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
-
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
-
Zombo said:
Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.
Zombo
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.
I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.
Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).
I actually really like Lamar Miller. I think Martin, Miller, and David Wilson are all on the exact same level. I have hard time doing my RB rankings because they're so close. Right now though I have the rankings as Martin, Wilson, and then Miller. The reasoning is because Martin is a Ray Rice type of player who can carry the load and is versatile in the passing game. He's a strong guy with surprising quickness. Wilson is a bit smaller but much more explosive. Lamar Miller was #2 on my rankings for most of the year, I love his style and think he can be a second round steal; however, Miller battled a shoulder injury all year and will be having surgery after the draft. So that little bit of a concern bumped him below Martin and Miller who are both (relatively) healthy. But all three are great players.
Media hype has nothing to do with my rankings. I don't really follow McShay or Kiper's rankings, I have my own that I keep all season. Kiper today has AJ Jenkins as an early second round pick. I don't have him in my top 100, and won't be putting him in.
Edit: Not sure where you get that Lamar Miller is the clear cut #2 RB in this draft. Most of the people I talk to don't have him at #2. I know a few draft guys I chat with have Chris Polk at #2. With running backs it's more about fit than anything when you have guys on a similar tier. Blocking schemes, current personnel, etc.
-
What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
-
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.
I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.
Honest question/Devil's advocate: Why does it matter if he doesn't contribute this year if you feel that he can be a franchise quarterback? If Colt McCoy is manning the quarterback position, you're pretty mush setting your win cap at six or seven. If you take Richardson, that's one year and 250 carries added to his career total on a (very) likely non-playoff team. Considering most runners these days only last a few years, wouldn't adding that future franchise quarterback be in the best interest of the organization if the goal is to win games? Now, as I said, I'd draft Richardson because he's BPA. But curious to hear your thoughts on that.
-
Zombo said:
Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.
Zombo
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
-
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
-
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
-
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?
Good response. IMO, he'd only sit on the bench for a season, so it's good for the next decade after that. It's a move for the future. And the Browns aren't really in the position to compete next year no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the situation. but I can understand why a fan base would want a playmaker who can come in and have a difference. Can't be fun watching the current offense that the front office has been trotting out there.
-
Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zing!
-
A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.
-
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
Zing!
Zing!
Not really a zing. I don't take it personally. I do this for a living. All fans have their opinions.
-
Zombo said:
It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.
If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.
Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.
BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.
You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.
Z
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.
No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?
I said no attempt to scout the guys making the picks, I.e. Heckert & Holmgren ... no way do they spend 4 overall on such a questionable prospect. They either get a surefire Top 5 quality starter or they trade out of there ... they would never take Tannehill at 4 ... Heckert likes to bring in guys that start right away and Holmgren isn't going to spend that high of a pick on a QB project ... he just isn't.
Z
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