My Thoughts and Opinions on the Draft
-
of those six 4 are starters going into next year and great depth at the area's of the game they want to concentrate on with the other 2. Trading away 5,6,@7 rounders to move up in the higher rounders(1-4) is pure brilliance. That pick we got from the ravens is just that. U think they can find quality players at 6&7??? But loading up on those assets going into next year gives us nice sweeteners to move up for say a player they really wantin the 4th or 1st. Selling a 3rd was pretty steep but for ur qb of the future it's well worth the gamble. I'd give the Browns FO a solid A-. Definitely a top 5 draft class.
Good teams final players that can be solid contributers and some cases stars. Look at the seahawks, there team is build with mid round picks who turned into great players. You can't play the lotto when you give away your tickets and constantly trading up to get a better player, say in the third round (which is the only one I am really complaining about) is pointless when you consider the drop off in talent and the % chance to hit on a player isn't much different. Ya trade awy the 7th rounder for a 6th next year, you know if you actually have drafted at least 7 players. But when you start off with the ability to draft 10 and you walk away with 6, there is an issue there. We will have 10 next year (as it currently stands) we need to come away with 8.
Good teams final players that can be solid contributers and some cases stars. Look at the seahawks, there team is build with mid round picks who turned into great players. You can't play the lotto when you give away your tickets and constantly trading up to get a better player, say in the third round (which is the only one I am really complaining about) is pointless when you consider the drop off in talent and the % chance to hit on a player isn't much different. Ya trade awy the 7th rounder for a 6th next year, you know if you actually have drafted at least 7 players. But when you start off with the ability to draft 10 and you walk away with 6, there is an issue there. We will have 10 next year (as it currently stands) we need to come away with 8.
But the thing is, and forgive me if I am reading it wrong, but I don't believe that I am, the 3rd isn't the only one you are complaining about. You say that is the only one you are complaining about, but then in the same post you are complaining about them trading the 7th for a 6th next year. You keep on saying in this thread about were not following Seattle's model, well where does it say that we have to, were supposed to, or were going to? Maybe someone said that and I missed it, if so then I will be glad to admit that I am wrong, but if you are just saying that they got these good players by getting them late in drafts so we should follow that because they won the Super Bowl last year, well the problem with that is a couple things: 1. we don't have the same personnel department as them to find these gems as them and thinking that all of these players are just going to be home runs is crazy. 2. Why dont we follow the Ravens? Giants? Packers? Or the 1974 Steelers Draft, lets follow that game plan. Best draft of all time. That worked out good, so we can do that.
The fact is teams do their best to scout for what will help their team and what they think is the best players. Do you think any team went in saying lets get this player because hes going to be a bust? When the Browns took Manziel do you think they were thinking, "Hmm, were taking him but we think Bridgewater or Carr is going to be better," Of course not. Teams evaluate differently and some evaluate better, but give this FO a chance before you say they did it wrong. If they traded up or down they had a reason for it, and I trust them.
-
Good teams final players that can be solid contributers and some cases stars. Look at the seahawks, there team is build with mid round picks who turned into great players. You can't play the lotto when you give away your tickets and constantly trading up to get a better player, say in the third round (which is the only one I am really complaining about) is pointless when you consider the drop off in talent and the % chance to hit on a player isn't much different. Ya trade awy the 7th rounder for a 6th next year, you know if you actually have drafted at least 7 players. But when you start off with the ability to draft 10 and you walk away with 6, there is an issue there. We will have 10 next year (as it currently stands) we need to come away with 8.
yea good teams don't need starters from the 3rd and 4th rounds they can draft quantities and develop these high potential raw assets. Unfortunatelybthe Browns haven't been in this situation for along time. They are following Seatle blueprint pretty well actually.
yea good teams don't need starters from the 3rd and 4th rounds they can draft quantities and develop these high potential raw assets. Unfortunatelybthe Browns haven't been in this situation for along time. They are following Seatle blueprint pretty well actually.
Seahawks started doing it right around when Carrol showed up, so they were not in any better position than we are in right now.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
Would you be all over the seahawk model had they not won the Superbowl?
If it was Denver, would you then be on their jock?
Or do you prefer to take 12 long shot players over 6 better talents?
Hoping for a diamond in the rough is fun, ut the more talented players go off the board first for a reason.
-
I vemehently disagree.End the draft with 6 players. I guess I can't be mad that we manage to trade a 7th rounder for a 6th rounder next year, but it still just highlights my point, that Farmer needs to NOT do what he did this year come next draft, and that is trade away our picks just to move up a few spots. Once is fine for a special player, but you can't do that for half your draft. We end up with 6 players on 10 draft picks.
We started with 10 picks. Got 6 solid prospects at positions that needed help, and scheme fits. Parlayed another 3 picks next year, including an extra #1 from a struggling franchise. All 6 of those picks are expected to not only make the team, bit contribute on more than special teams.
If farmer runs a draft like this every year, he'll be better than Ozzie and his compensatory pick formula.
Yes, of course....the picks need too pan out. So do every other teams. But farmer definitely has a plan for maintaining draft currency while selecting the types of players his coaches said they needed.
Just because he didnt get every position in one draft does nothing to discredit the great job he did. Besides, we don't play games next week. There's still trades to be made, more FA signings, camp cuts, and UDFAs (we brought in 3 WRs last I checked).
To panic and scrap the plan to take Watkins would have been the same old browns. What you just saw was a real GM. Furthermore, Watkins nor Evans are not Gordon. Its relatively rare for a rookie WR to come in and light it up, even to half Gordon's production in 14 games last year.
Its pretty obvious that they wanna play defense and run the ball....throw when necessary.
I vemehently disagree.
We started with 10 picks. Got 6 solid prospects at positions that needed help, and scheme fits. Parlayed another 3 picks next year, including an extra #1 from a struggling franchise. All 6 of those picks are expected to not only make the team, bit contribute on more than special teams.
If farmer runs a draft like this every year, he'll be better than Ozzie and his compensatory pick formula.
Yes, of course....the picks need too pan out. So do every other teams. But farmer definitely has a plan for maintaining draft currency while selecting the types of players his coaches said they needed.
Just because he didnt get every position in one draft does nothing to discredit the great job he did. Besides, we don't play games next week. There's still trades to be made, more FA signings, camp cuts, and UDFAs (we brought in 3 WRs last I checked).
To panic and scrap the plan to take Watkins would have been the same old browns. What you just saw was a real GM. Furthermore, Watkins nor Evans are not Gordon. Its relatively rare for a rookie WR to come in and light it up, even to half Gordon's production in 14 games last year.
Its pretty obvious that they wanna play defense and run the ball....throw when necessary.
What I am saying is that there was a HUGE need, that he could have filled with his own formula, but he traded away picks to move up and grab players that he didn't need. I have already stated that I am giving him the benafit of the doubt on Bilgert and Manziel. I assume a team was trying to and jump us for Gilbert and we know the Chiefs were going to take Manziel. But why spend the 6th to get West. Was RB such a huge need, and was the next on the board so bad or was Wests value so good, that it really required us to trade up? I don't think so.
But the thing is, and forgive me if I am reading it wrong, but I don't believe that I am, the 3rd isn't the only one you are complaining about. You say that is the only one you are complaining about, but then in the same post you are complaining about them trading the 7th for a 6th next year. You keep on saying in this thread about were not following Seattle's model, well where does it say that we have to, were supposed to, or were going to? Maybe someone said that and I missed it, if so then I will be glad to admit that I am wrong, but if you are just saying that they got these good players by getting them late in drafts so we should follow that because they won the Super Bowl last year, well the problem with that is a couple things: 1. we don't have the same personnel department as them to find these gems as them and thinking that all of these players are just going to be home runs is crazy. 2. Why dont we follow the Ravens? Giants? Packers? Or the 1974 Steelers Draft, lets follow that game plan. Best draft of all time. That worked out good, so we can do that.
The fact is teams do their best to scout for what will help their team and what they think is the best players. Do you think any team went in saying lets get this player because hes going to be a bust? When the Browns took Manziel do you think they were thinking, "Hmm, were taking him but we think Bridgewater or Carr is going to be better," Of course not. Teams evaluate differently and some evaluate better, but give this FO a chance before you say they did it wrong. If they traded up or down they had a reason for it, and I trust them.
I'm saying we should follow the formula because they have been saying that is the type of thing they want to run. And I don't blame them for wanting to run it. The Seahawks and 49ers do it every year and it has worked great for them. Also, and I have already said this, I can agree with trading a 7th round pick for a 6th, or even a 6th for a 5th, if we have come out of the draft with a good amount of players. We came out with 6 in a year where we started with 10 picks. We should have come out of it with 8. Who was taken after our pick that Farmer really wanted to go undrafted. We don't know, but it would be stupid to think that he had to cross a lot of names off a list by the time the 7th round was over. Who was he targetting as a UDFA that turned him down or signed else where before he could call? Who knows. But in the deepest draft of the last decade we came out with 6 of our 10 picks when we should have had 8 players. You want to do this in a draft like last years and am more than fine with that. Last years draft was shit. But in a year like this one, you keep and use as many picks as possible, because the odds of hitting on someone in those late rounds just went up.
-
I vemehently disagree.
We started with 10 picks. Got 6 solid prospects at positions that needed help, and scheme fits. Parlayed another 3 picks next year, including an extra #1 from a struggling franchise. All 6 of those picks are expected to not only make the team, bit contribute on more than special teams.
If farmer runs a draft like this every year, he'll be better than Ozzie and his compensatory pick formula.
Yes, of course....the picks need too pan out. So do every other teams. But farmer definitely has a plan for maintaining draft currency while selecting the types of players his coaches said they needed.
Just because he didnt get every position in one draft does nothing to discredit the great job he did. Besides, we don't play games next week. There's still trades to be made, more FA signings, camp cuts, and UDFAs (we brought in 3 WRs last I checked).
To panic and scrap the plan to take Watkins would have been the same old browns. What you just saw was a real GM. Furthermore, Watkins nor Evans are not Gordon. Its relatively rare for a rookie WR to come in and light it up, even to half Gordon's production in 14 games last year.
Its pretty obvious that they wanna play defense and run the ball....throw when necessary.
What I am saying is that there was a HUGE need, that he could have filled with his own formula, but he traded away picks to move up and grab players that he didn't need. I have already stated that I am giving him the benafit of the doubt on Bilgert and Manziel. I assume a team was trying to and jump us for Gilbert and we know the Chiefs were going to take Manziel. But why spend the 6th to get West. Was RB such a huge need, and was the next on the board so bad or was Wests value so good, that it really required us to trade up? I don't think so.
But the thing is, and forgive me if I am reading it wrong, but I don't believe that I am, the 3rd isn't the only one you are complaining about. You say that is the only one you are complaining about, but then in the same post you are complaining about them trading the 7th for a 6th next year. You keep on saying in this thread about were not following Seattle's model, well where does it say that we have to, were supposed to, or were going to? Maybe someone said that and I missed it, if so then I will be glad to admit that I am wrong, but if you are just saying that they got these good players by getting them late in drafts so we should follow that because they won the Super Bowl last year, well the problem with that is a couple things: 1. we don't have the same personnel department as them to find these gems as them and thinking that all of these players are just going to be home runs is crazy. 2. Why dont we follow the Ravens? Giants? Packers? Or the 1974 Steelers Draft, lets follow that game plan. Best draft of all time. That worked out good, so we can do that.
The fact is teams do their best to scout for what will help their team and what they think is the best players. Do you think any team went in saying lets get this player because hes going to be a bust? When the Browns took Manziel do you think they were thinking, "Hmm, were taking him but we think Bridgewater or Carr is going to be better," Of course not. Teams evaluate differently and some evaluate better, but give this FO a chance before you say they did it wrong. If they traded up or down they had a reason for it, and I trust them.
I'm saying we should follow the formula because they have been saying that is the type of thing they want to run. And I don't blame them for wanting to run it. The Seahawks and 49ers do it every year and it has worked great for them. Also, and I have already said this, I can agree with trading a 7th round pick for a 6th, or even a 6th for a 5th, if we have come out of the draft with a good amount of players. We came out with 6 in a year where we started with 10 picks. We should have come out of it with 8. Who was taken after our pick that Farmer really wanted to go undrafted. We don't know, but it would be stupid to think that he had to cross a lot of names off a list by the time the 7th round was over. Who was he targetting as a UDFA that turned him down or signed else where before he could call? Who knows. But in the deepest draft of the last decade we came out with 6 of our 10 picks when we should have had 8 players. You want to do this in a draft like last years and am more than fine with that. Last years draft was shit. But in a year like this one, you keep and use as many picks as possible, because the odds of hitting on someone in those late rounds just went up.
What I am saying is that there was a HUGE need, that he could have filled with his own formula, but he traded away picks to move up and grab players that he didn't need. I have already stated that I am giving him the benafit of the doubt on Bilgert and Manziel. I assume a team was trying to and jump us for Gilbert and we know the Chiefs were going to take Manziel. But why spend the 6th to get West. Was RB such a huge need, and was the next on the board so bad or was Wests value so good, that it really required us to trade up? I don't think so.
I'm saying we should follow the formula because they have been saying that is the type of thing they want to run. And I don't blame them for wanting to run it. The Seahawks and 49ers do it every year and it has worked great for them. Also, and I have already said this, I can agree with trading a 7th round pick for a 6th, or even a 6th for a 5th, if we have come out of the draft with a good amount of players. We came out with 6 in a year where we started with 10 picks. We should have come out of it with 8. Who was taken after our pick that Farmer really wanted to go undrafted. We don't know, but it would be stupid to think that he had to cross a lot of names off a list by the time the 7th round was over. Who was he targetting as a UDFA that turned him down or signed else where before he could call? Who knows. But in the deepest draft of the last decade we came out with 6 of our 10 picks when we should have had 8 players. You want to do this in a draft like last years and am more than fine with that. Last years draft was shit. But in a year like this one, you keep and use as many picks as possible, because the odds of hitting on someone in those late rounds just went up.
I heard Detroit was going to go after Gilbert, that's why we moved.
The Ravens and a couple others were zeroing in on West . . . and Casserly just said on NFLNetwork that he thinks West is going to be the steal of Day 2 . . . that he'll end up beating out Tate at RB.
41 TD's and 2500 yds . . . yeah, smaller school, but 225 lbs at 5'9" has got to be tough to bring down.
-
Would you be all over the seahawk model had they not won the Superbowl?
If it was Denver, would you then be on their jock?
Or do you prefer to take 12 long shot players over 6 better talents?
Hoping for a diamond in the rough is fun, ut the more talented players go off the board first for a reason.
Would you be all over the seahawk model had they not won the Superbowl?
If it was Denver, would you then be on their jock?
Or do you prefer to take 12 long shot players over 6 better talents?
Hoping for a diamond in the rough is fun, ut the more talented players go off the board first for a reason.
I don't give a shit about them winning the super bowl. The Seahawks are doing the same thing as the 49ers and both are very successful doing that.
I still can't stress this enough, I like all the players we got. I'd give them all B grades or better. But like you are also saying more talented players go off the board first. So why are we high fiving over trading up for a late 3rd round RB (the one trade I am really complaining about) when we could have gotten a similar player at our first 4th round pick, while then also keeping a hold of that 6th rounder? And why is the deepest draft of the decade are we going to trade a pick for next year, even if it is a 7th round pick? How much better of a value do we get from trading an early 7th in this years deep draft where we need all the help we can get this year, for what is likely going to be a late 6th round pick in a draft that isn't likely to be as deep. Also consider that value when you compare it to getting a rookie next year vs. having a guy with 1 year unders his belt.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
What I am saying is that there was a HUGE need, that he could have filled with his own formula, but he traded away picks to move up and grab players that he didn't need. I have already stated that I am giving him the benafit of the doubt on Bilgert and Manziel. I assume a team was trying to and jump us for Gilbert and we know the Chiefs were going to take Manziel. But why spend the 6th to get West. Was RB such a huge need, and was the next on the board so bad or was Wests value so good, that it really required us to trade up? I don't think so.
I'm saying we should follow the formula because they have been saying that is the type of thing they want to run. And I don't blame them for wanting to run it. The Seahawks and 49ers do it every year and it has worked great for them. Also, and I have already said this, I can agree with trading a 7th round pick for a 6th, or even a 6th for a 5th, if we have come out of the draft with a good amount of players. We came out with 6 in a year where we started with 10 picks. We should have come out of it with 8. Who was taken after our pick that Farmer really wanted to go undrafted. We don't know, but it would be stupid to think that he had to cross a lot of names off a list by the time the 7th round was over. Who was he targetting as a UDFA that turned him down or signed else where before he could call? Who knows. But in the deepest draft of the last decade we came out with 6 of our 10 picks when we should have had 8 players. You want to do this in a draft like last years and am more than fine with that. Last years draft was shit. But in a year like this one, you keep and use as many picks as possible, because the odds of hitting on someone in those late rounds just went up.
I heard Detroit was going to go after Gilbert, that's why we moved.
The Ravens and a couple others were zeroing in on West . . . and Casserly just said on NFLNetwork that he thinks West is going to be the steal of Day 2 . . . that he'll end up beating out Tate at RB.
41 TD's and 2500 yds . . . yeah, smaller school, but 225 lbs at 5'9" has got to be tough to bring down.
I heard Detroit was going to go after Gilbert, that's why we moved.
The Ravens and a couple others were zeroing in on West . . . and Casserly just said on NFLNetwork that he thinks West is going to be the steal of Day 2 . . . that he'll end up beating out Tate at RB.
41 TD's and 2500 yds . . . yeah, smaller school, but 225 lbs at 5'9" has got to be tough to bring down.
I don't think it's going to be so much of him beating out Tate and more so them splitting carrys for the season. Give one the ball more WK1 then the other the ball more WK2. But once again like I have said, I like West. I just don't like that we traded up for him cause I think we could have gotten someone how equal value at RB or another position at or original pick.
-
I heard Detroit was going to go after Gilbert, that's why we moved.
The Ravens and a couple others were zeroing in on West . . . and Casserly just said on NFLNetwork that he thinks West is going to be the steal of Day 2 . . . that he'll end up beating out Tate at RB.
41 TD's and 2500 yds . . . yeah, smaller school, but 225 lbs at 5'9" has got to be tough to bring down.
I don't think it's going to be so much of him beating out Tate and more so them splitting carrys for the season. Give one the ball more WK1 then the other the ball more WK2. But once again like I have said, I like West. I just don't like that we traded up for him cause I think we could have gotten someone how equal value at RB or another position at or original pick.
I don't think it's going to be so much of him beating out Tate and more so them splitting carrys for the season. Give one the ball more WK1 then the other the ball more WK2. But once again like I have said, I like West. I just don't like that we traded up for him cause I think we could have gotten someone how equal value at RB or another position at or original pick.
At the time, I think the top three (maybe more) RB's were off the board.
I want to see what the kid can do against NFL talent myself, I remember Morris with NYG being a tough little bugger many years back, could be the same thing here.
-
Would you be all over the seahawk model had they not won the Superbowl?
If it was Denver, would you then be on their jock?
Or do you prefer to take 12 long shot players over 6 better talents?
Hoping for a diamond in the rough is fun, ut the more talented players go off the board first for a reason.
I don't give a shit about them winning the super bowl. The Seahawks are doing the same thing as the 49ers and both are very successful doing that.
I still can't stress this enough, I like all the players we got. I'd give them all B grades or better. But like you are also saying more talented players go off the board first. So why are we high fiving over trading up for a late 3rd round RB (the one trade I am really complaining about) when we could have gotten a similar player at our first 4th round pick, while then also keeping a hold of that 6th rounder? And why is the deepest draft of the decade are we going to trade a pick for next year, even if it is a 7th round pick? How much better of a value do we get from trading an early 7th in this years deep draft where we need all the help we can get this year, for what is likely going to be a late 6th round pick in a draft that isn't likely to be as deep. Also consider that value when you compare it to getting a rookie next year vs. having a guy with 1 year unders his belt.
I don't give a shit about them winning the super bowl. The Seahawks are doing the same thing as the 49ers and both are very successful doing that.
I still can't stress this enough, I like all the players we got. I'd give them all B grades or better. But like you are also saying more talented players go off the board first. So why are we high fiving over trading up for a late 3rd round RB (the one trade I am really complaining about) when we could have gotten a similar player at our first 4th round pick, while then also keeping a hold of that 6th rounder? And why is the deepest draft of the decade are we going to trade a pick for next year, even if it is a 7th round pick? How much better of a value do we get from trading an early 7th in this years deep draft where we need all the help we can get this year, for what is likely going to be a late 6th round pick in a draft that isn't likely to be as deep. Also consider that value when you compare it to getting a rookie next year vs. having a guy with 1 year unders his belt.
Well your answer is right in your question. You wanna know why you trade up for someone and give up the 6th when you can get someone similar at our 1st 4th round pick. Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it. The next back wouldn't have dont so in all likelihood. See the difference now. Its all about the QUALITY of what you get in the picks HB, not the QUANITY.
I am sure that someone from this draft class from each round 6-7 is going to make some kind of impact. But for everyone one of them there is 25 that wont. You cant just assume it will be on our team, You cant assume that it will be on Seattle or SF either. Lets just move on and give these new players and FO our full suport, after this roller coaster weekend, I think they all deserve it
-
I don't give a shit about them winning the super bowl. The Seahawks are doing the same thing as the 49ers and both are very successful doing that.
I still can't stress this enough, I like all the players we got. I'd give them all B grades or better. But like you are also saying more talented players go off the board first. So why are we high fiving over trading up for a late 3rd round RB (the one trade I am really complaining about) when we could have gotten a similar player at our first 4th round pick, while then also keeping a hold of that 6th rounder? And why is the deepest draft of the decade are we going to trade a pick for next year, even if it is a 7th round pick? How much better of a value do we get from trading an early 7th in this years deep draft where we need all the help we can get this year, for what is likely going to be a late 6th round pick in a draft that isn't likely to be as deep. Also consider that value when you compare it to getting a rookie next year vs. having a guy with 1 year unders his belt.
Well your answer is right in your question. You wanna know why you trade up for someone and give up the 6th when you can get someone similar at our 1st 4th round pick. Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it. The next back wouldn't have dont so in all likelihood. See the difference now. Its all about the QUALITY of what you get in the picks HB, not the QUANITY.
I am sure that someone from this draft class from each round 6-7 is going to make some kind of impact. But for everyone one of them there is 25 that wont. You cant just assume it will be on our team, You cant assume that it will be on Seattle or SF either. Lets just move on and give these new players and FO our full suport, after this roller coaster weekend, I think they all deserve it
Well your answer is right in your question. You wanna know why you trade up for someone and give up the 6th when you can get someone similar at our 1st 4th round pick. Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it. The next back wouldn't have dont so in all likelihood. See the difference now. Its all about the QUALITY of what you get in the picks HB, not the QUANITY.
I am sure that someone from this draft class from each round 6-7 is going to make some kind of impact. But for everyone one of them there is 25 that wont. You cant just assume it will be on our team, You cant assume that it will be on Seattle or SF either. Lets just move on and give these new players and FO our full suport, after this roller coaster weekend, I think they all deserve it
How are you so certain that a West is going to come in and un seat Tate. Im not sure he can do that. I like him as a prospect, but that doesn't make him better than Tate. More importantly how do we know any of the RB take in the 4th won't be better than West, or for that matter a RB Farmer had rated just under West won't end up being better than West. Hell, Crowell, who we just signed as a priority UDFA with a signing bonus, in all likely hood could be better than West. If any position in the NFL is proven to be the biggest gamble and crab shoot from round to round, its the RB position, and we traded up to get one.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
I give this draft a B-grade mostly because i don't agree with their strategy. I liked the trade initially but not after I found out about Gordon. Had I known, I either pick a WR at 4 (Evans) or ask for a 1st rounder plus Buffalo's disgruntled receiver (which they traded to SF). As for the second round and initial 3rd round pick, I think they were reaches. I'm OK with the RB and 4th round pick but they could have used the 7th on a receiver.
-
That crossed my mind, why take Buffalo's 4th rounder next year, take the wr instead from them. As Buffalo was giving the farm away that should have been an easy sell.
-
I also think they should have played the QB's dropping to their favor. Pick the best one at 26 (they are all gambles) and keep the 3rd rounder. Our second shoud have gone to a better ILB and the two thirds should have been OG's.
-
That crossed my mind, why take Buffalo's 4th rounder next year, take the wr instead from them. As Buffalo was giving the farm away that should have been an easy sell.
That crossed my mind, why take Buffalo's 4th rounder next year, take the wr instead from them. As Buffalo was giving the farm away that should have been an easy sell.
I thought the same thing at first but I'm assuming Farmer and co weren't real high on Stevie. I'm not too terribly concerned about the WR spot, as most are. We gave Hawkins a pretty generous contract (which I assume they believe he'll earn with his play) and Burleson will be back before preseason. While we might not have world beaters outside, we have enough to get by. Plus it looks like we'll be running the ball quite a bit.
Basically I like where we're at but then again I'm the optimistic type.
-
This crop cannot fail us.
Gilbert is fucking AMAZING.
Manziel is the HOPE.
Bitonio, the CRUDGEL.
Kirksey is the PRESENCE.
West is the TORQUE.
Desir is the HAWK.
I believe these six will start and be missing pieces we needed to stake a claim to the AFCN.
QB/OL/RB - ILB/CB/FS
-
We have youth at a lot if positions, depth too. Not a pressing needs to use all 10 picks. Get the guys you want early in the draft AND we're set next year. I'm cool with that.
-
Great end to farmers first draft... F+
He's tanked it... For next years draft- that's the "plus"
WR 1, pot busted
WR 3/2 arm surgery
And no drafted receivers... Am I missing anything ?
That old ass steeler D gets major break week 1... Bastards
Great end to farmers first draft... F+
He's tanked it... For next years draft- that's the "plus"
WR 1, pot busted
WR 3/2 arm surgery
And no drafted receivers... Am I missing anything ?
That old ass steeler D gets major break week 1... Bastards
I very rarely post, but I read a lot. Your are a total f'n idiot. We built this DFense to be the top 5, and the OFense will run the crap out of the ball. Shan runs a 2 tight end set, with either Qb there, they will have recievers. Go troll somewhere else.
-
That crossed my mind, why take Buffalo's 4th rounder next year, take the wr instead from them. As Buffalo was giving the farm away that should have been an easy sell.
That crossed my mind, why take Buffalo's 4th rounder next year, take the wr instead from them. As Buffalo was giving the farm away that should have been an easy sell.
I agree, I would have much prefered that trade. I assume that he was part of the trade conversation and the Browns turned it down. Most likely they tried to pull out the 1st round when they tried to include Stevie or something like that. But I would have called them the next day and said (We will give you OUR 4th round pick for Stevie. We keep yours. Lets see who picks lower come next year."
-
Well your answer is right in your question. You wanna know why you trade up for someone and give up the 6th when you can get someone similar at our 1st 4th round pick. Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it. The next back wouldn't have dont so in all likelihood. See the difference now. Its all about the QUALITY of what you get in the picks HB, not the QUANITY.
I am sure that someone from this draft class from each round 6-7 is going to make some kind of impact. But for everyone one of them there is 25 that wont. You cant just assume it will be on our team, You cant assume that it will be on Seattle or SF either. Lets just move on and give these new players and FO our full suport, after this roller coaster weekend, I think they all deserve it
How are you so certain that a West is going to come in and un seat Tate. Im not sure he can do that. I like him as a prospect, but that doesn't make him better than Tate. More importantly how do we know any of the RB take in the 4th won't be better than West, or for that matter a RB Farmer had rated just under West won't end up being better than West. Hell, Crowell, who we just signed as a priority UDFA with a signing bonus, in all likely hood could be better than West. If any position in the NFL is proven to be the biggest gamble and crab shoot from round to round, its the RB position, and we traded up to get one.
How are you so certain that a West is going to come in and un seat Tate. Im not sure he can do that. I like him as a prospect, but that doesn't make him better than Tate. More importantly how do we know any of the RB take in the 4th won't be better than West, or for that matter a RB Farmer had rated just under West won't end up being better than West. Hell, Crowell, who we just signed as a priority UDFA with a signing bonus, in all likely hood could be better than West. If any position in the NFL is proven to be the biggest gamble and crab shoot from round to round, its the RB position, and we traded up to get one.
I don't mean to sound rude to you Harry Buffalo, so sorry if that is what I am doing, but do you know how to read? You take what I wrote and say that I said West is going to unseat Tate. That really makes me question if you can read, or at least comprehend what you read. This is the direct quote of what I wrote. "Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it" I did not say he was GOING to come in and start over Tate, I did not even say I wanted him to, actually I didnt even say I think I thought he could, I said if its possible that he can then the trade is worth it. The team obviously think he can or they wouldn't have made the trade.
-
How are you so certain that a West is going to come in and un seat Tate. Im not sure he can do that. I like him as a prospect, but that doesn't make him better than Tate. More importantly how do we know any of the RB take in the 4th won't be better than West, or for that matter a RB Farmer had rated just under West won't end up being better than West. Hell, Crowell, who we just signed as a priority UDFA with a signing bonus, in all likely hood could be better than West. If any position in the NFL is proven to be the biggest gamble and crab shoot from round to round, its the RB position, and we traded up to get one.
I don't mean to sound rude to you Harry Buffalo, so sorry if that is what I am doing, but do you know how to read? You take what I wrote and say that I said West is going to unseat Tate. That really makes me question if you can read, or at least comprehend what you read. This is the direct quote of what I wrote. "Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it" I did not say he was GOING to come in and start over Tate, I did not even say I wanted him to, actually I didnt even say I think I thought he could, I said if its possible that he can then the trade is worth it. The team obviously think he can or they wouldn't have made the trade.
I don't mean to sound rude to you Harry Buffalo, so sorry if that is what I am doing, but do you know how to read? You take what I wrote and say that I said West is going to unseat Tate. That really makes me question if you can read, or at least comprehend what you read. This is the direct quote of what I wrote. "Well if its even possible that West can come in and start over Tate, then that means you upgraded yet another position. So then that trade up was worth it" I did not say he was GOING to come in and start over Tate, I did not even say I wanted him to, actually I didnt even say I think I thought he could, I said if its possible that he can then the trade is worth it. The team obviously think he can or they wouldn't have made the trade.
I dont know, can you read? My point is that if he doesn't, if a RB that could have been had later performs better, if West doesn't perform, it makes the trade worthless. Considerly how closely ranked alot of the RB were at that point and considering how much of a gamble RB tend to be from round to round, I'm saying it wasn't worth it right now. Yes is a season or two we will find out if the trade is worth it. We will find out if someone taken after West does better, or if WEst out performs them all. But given the value that was on the board at the time from what I saw, and the history of RB being found all over the draft and the position becoming such a gamble in terms of production from round to round, I stand by my statement that the trade was stupid.
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