Skip to content

Mock Draft Central... The Pro's

The Browns Board
164 20 3.8k
  • @darren15 said:

    Interesting synopsis. Here is the bottom line that I took out of this article. It summarizes the Browns needs (draft or otherwise?) at various positions on a scale of 0-10. And here is what it says:

    QB need 10 out of 10

    RB need 4 out of 10

    FB need 1 out of 10

    WR need 4 out of 10

    TE need 4 out of 10

    LT need 0 out of 10

    RT need 0 out of 10 (lot of confidence in Shon Coleman)

    OG need 0 out of 10

    OC need 0 out of 10

    Defense:

    DE 8 out of 10

    DT 7 out of 10

    OLB 9 out of 10

    ILB 1 out of 10

    CB 8 out of 10

    FS 8 out of 10

    SS 8 out of 10

    K 6 out of 10

    P 1 out of 10

    So, in order our needs are:

    1. QB

    2. OLB

    3. SS, CB, FS, DE

    4. DT

    5. Kicker

    6. WR/RB/TE

    7. ILB, P, FB

    8. T, G, C

    So, per this, except for primary need at QB, the Browns draft should be seriously defensive heavy, as beside QB the next 6 areas of need are all on defense.

    I don't think the Browns will be drafting a K or P...or LS.

    One area not covered are kick return positions. To me, that would rate right up there at about the 8 out of 10 level.

    @the-gipper said:

    Interesting synopsis. Here is the bottom line that I took out of this article. It summarizes the Browns needs (draft or otherwise?) at various positions on a scale of 0-10. And here is what it says:

    QB need 10 out of 10

    RB need 4 out of 10

    FB need 1 out of 10

    WR need 4 out of 10

    TE need 4 out of 10

    LT need 0 out of 10

    RT need 0 out of 10 (lot of confidence in Shon Coleman)

    OG need 0 out of 10

    OC need 0 out of 10

    Defense:

    DE 8 out of 10

    DT 7 out of 10

    OLB 9 out of 10

    ILB 1 out of 10

    CB 8 out of 10

    FS 8 out of 10

    SS 8 out of 10

    K 6 out of 10

    P 1 out of 10

    So, in order our needs are:

    1. QB

    2. OLB

    3. SS, CB, FS, DE

    4. DT

    5. Kicker

    6. WR/RB/TE

    7. ILB, P, FB

    8. T, G, C

    So, per this, except for primary need at QB, the Browns draft should be seriously defensive heavy, as beside QB the next 5 areas of need are all on defense.

    Fortunately this is a defense heavy draft and presents the opportunity to resolve quit a few problems on that side of the ball in a major way.

  • I feel really sorry for Kessler. Performed admirably in his first season with a banged up O line and rookie receivers including Pryor. Its like he doesn't exist to the fans or the media.

    What's clear is none of these QBs in the draft are immediate starters (I think Kizer could but he'd be very up and down) so get used to Kessler starting next year whatever happens next week.

  • If 'needeval' > 'talenteval', then 'draft' = 'fail'...

  • If 'needeval' > 'talenteval', then 'draft' = 'fail'...

    @tour2ma said:

    If 'needeval' > 'talenteval', then 'draft' = 'fail'...

    Speculation on This Morning Football on NFL Network today was on the very issue of BPA vs draft for need. Conclusion was that the vast majority of the time you go for BPA regardless of how strong any position is or how great the need in one that really isn't BPA. They also said that someone inevitably will prove this axiom once again by drafting for need above talent and get a "fail" as a result. Browns have done it so many times it is just uncanny. Put George in charge and do "the opposite".

  • @tour2ma said:

    If 'needeval' > 'talenteval', then 'draft' = 'fail'...

    Speculation on This Morning Football on NFL Network today was on the very issue of BPA vs draft for need. Conclusion was that the vast majority of the time you go for BPA regardless of how strong any position is or how great the need in one that really isn't BPA. They also said that someone inevitably will prove this axiom once again by drafting for need above talent and get a "fail" as a result. Browns have done it so many times it is just uncanny. Put George in charge and do "the opposite".

    @texasag1969 said:

    Browns have done it so many times it is just uncanny. Put George in charge and do "the opposite".

    ... or Sashi & Company...

    All those fails were in the days of "a football guy" calling the shots... Farmer... Holmgren... and on and on...

    Every time a new one was put in charge we rallied around them based upon what they'd done wherever they were before they came to us.

    Every time a new one drafted some fell away muttering, "WTF?", while others hung in there... at least one more draft. Few of our "guys" ever saw a third draft.

    Now we have "a process" full of co-equal key players with a year under their belt, time to prepare and a solid FA season in their resume.

    I like our odds...

  • @tour2ma said:

    If 'needeval' > 'talenteval', then 'draft' = 'fail'...

    Speculation on This Morning Football on NFL Network today was on the very issue of BPA vs draft for need. Conclusion was that the vast majority of the time you go for BPA regardless of how strong any position is or how great the need in one that really isn't BPA. They also said that someone inevitably will prove this axiom once again by drafting for need above talent and get a "fail" as a result. Browns have done it so many times it is just uncanny. Put George in charge and do "the opposite".

    @texasag1969 said:

    Speculation on This Morning Football on NFL Network today was on the very issue of BPA vs draft for need. Conclusion was that the vast majority of the time you go for BPA regardless of how strong any position is or how great the need in one that really isn't BPA. They also said that someone inevitably will prove this axiom once again by drafting for need above talent and get a "fail" as a result. Browns have done it so many times it is just uncanny. Put George in charge and do "the opposite".

    There undoubtedly has to be some balance between BPA and drafting for need. I mean, if say, the Buccaneers who just drafted Winston a few years ago with the #1 pick, when it was their turn to pick had a QB as the highest graded player on their board, it would make no sense for them to pick that QB.

    If your team has a Hall of Fame Left Tackle, yet the best graded player when it is your turn to pick is a Left Tackle, again, it makes no sense to take him....especially if your team has a dearth at QB, WR, DE, DB, LB etc. You move on from the absolutely highest rated player to someone else, closely rated that fits a need.

  • @darren15 said:

    Interesting synopsis. Here is the bottom line that I took out of this article. It summarizes the Browns needs (draft or otherwise?) at various positions on a scale of 0-10. And here is what it says:

    QB need 10 out of 10

    RB need 4 out of 10

    FB need 1 out of 10

    WR need 4 out of 10

    TE need 4 out of 10

    LT need 0 out of 10

    RT need 0 out of 10 (lot of confidence in Shon Coleman)

    OG need 0 out of 10

    OC need 0 out of 10

    Defense:

    DE 8 out of 10

    DT 7 out of 10

    OLB 9 out of 10

    ILB 1 out of 10

    CB 8 out of 10

    FS 8 out of 10

    SS 8 out of 10

    K 6 out of 10

    P 1 out of 10

    So, in order our needs are:

    1. QB

    2. OLB

    3. SS, CB, FS, DE

    4. DT

    5. Kicker

    6. WR/RB/TE

    7. ILB, P, FB

    8. T, G, C

    So, per this, except for primary need at QB, the Browns draft should be seriously defensive heavy, as beside QB the next 6 areas of need are all on defense.

    I don't think the Browns will be drafting a K or P...or LS.

    One area not covered are kick return positions. To me, that would rate right up there at about the 8 out of 10 level.

    @the-gipper said:

    So, in order our needs are:

    1. QB

    2. OLB

    3. SS, CB, FS, DE

    4. DT

    5. Kicker

    6. WR/RB/TE

    7. ILB, P, FB

    8. T, G, C

    One area not covered are kick return positions. To me, that would rate right up there at about the 8 out of 10 level.

    Nice conversion list Gip. I like it.#3.can also solve a kick return position at same time. If we take 1 position out of #6, which position before the Kicker at 5?

  • @the-gipper said:

    So, in order our needs are:

    1. QB

    2. OLB

    3. SS, CB, FS, DE

    4. DT

    5. Kicker

    6. WR/RB/TE

    7. ILB, P, FB

    8. T, G, C

    One area not covered are kick return positions. To me, that would rate right up there at about the 8 out of 10 level.

    Nice conversion list Gip. I like it.#3.can also solve a kick return position at same time. If we take 1 position out of #6, which position before the Kicker at 5?

    @gumby73 said:

    Nice conversion list Gip. I like it.#3.can also solve a kick return position at same time. If we take 1 position out of #6, which position before the Kicker at 5?

    Well, despite Woody slobbering all over Peppers, he does intrigue me as a potential decent DB....and as a return man.

    If he dropped to #33 I would not be opposed to him.

  • @gumby73 said:

    Nice conversion list Gip. I like it.#3.can also solve a kick return position at same time. If we take 1 position out of #6, which position before the Kicker at 5?

    Well, despite Woody slobbering all over Peppers, he does intrigue me as a potential decent DB....and as a return man.

    If he dropped to #33 I would not be opposed to him.

    @the-gipper said:

    Well, despite Woody slobbering all over Peppers, he does intrigue me as a potential decent DB....and as a return man.

    If he dropped to #33 I would not be opposed to him.

    If we take Adoree Jackson instead can we get the white horse thrown in. Swagger will be riding "6" White Horses when he scores 😆

  • @the-gipper said:

    Well, despite Woody slobbering all over Peppers, he does intrigue me as a potential decent DB....and as a return man.

    If he dropped to #33 I would not be opposed to him.

    If we take Adoree Jackson instead can we get the white horse thrown in. Swagger will be riding "6" White Horses when he scores 😆

    @gumby73 said:

    If we take Adoree Jackson instead can we get the white horse thrown in. Swagger will be riding "6" White Horses when he scores 😆

    Right.....we need a returner.....and a multi skilled one would be great!......But, Id take Adore or Samuel over Peppers, cause they've already shown they can do the other work(besides return).....

  • @gumby73 said:

    If we take Adoree Jackson instead can we get the white horse thrown in. Swagger will be riding "6" White Horses when he scores 😆

    Right.....we need a returner.....and a multi skilled one would be great!......But, Id take Adore or Samuel over Peppers, cause they've already shown they can do the other work(besides return).....

    @mudfly said:

    Right.....we need a returner.....and a multi skilled one would be great!......But, Id take Adore or Samuel over Peppers, cause they've already shown they can do the other work(besides return).....

    Yep

  • Really I thought Mosart's came in & saved Tabor a job. But what else can Mosart's add? He'd have to beat out a RB? Even with Mosart's,it was not the kick offs we could not roster..But even Tramon Williams was brought in for That "Rare Ac-cation" we forced a PUNT. Any of them back there looked up as if they were scared the moon was falling 🥷

  • Right....it's been a few years since we've had a decent returner.....Benji did ok for a couple then got skeered.....and the rest have sucked.....(tho Gilbert averaged 28 yds per ko)...but didnt wanna be back there and the Browns obliged...

    You'd think that if we were drafting 4 WR's, then one or 2 of those guys would double as a returner....

    Louis aint it.....and Coleman is, what, too valuable???....or something.....

  • Kinda surprised Duke never took over the return role...

  • @gumby73 said:

    If we take Adoree Jackson instead can we get the white horse thrown in. Swagger will be riding "6" White Horses when he scores 😆

    Right.....we need a returner.....and a multi skilled one would be great!......But, Id take Adore or Samuel over Peppers, cause they've already shown they can do the other work(besides return).....

    @mudfly said:

    Right.....we need a returner.....and a multi skilled one would be great!......But, Id take Adore or Samuel over Peppers, cause they've already shown they can do the other work(besides return).....

    Fair enough. I just know we need a returner. Even Woody has questioned Pepper's coverage skills (while still slobbering all over him)

  • http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000802040/article/casserly-mock-draft-40-brownsjags-trade-nets-two-qbs?campaign=tw-cf-sf72801788-sf72801788

    Casserley's draft ...please dont trade to 4 for a 2nd round talent ....stay at 12 and get OJ Howard

  • http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000802040/article/casserly-mock-draft-40-brownsjags-trade-nets-two-qbs?campaign=tw-cf-sf72801788-sf72801788

    Casserley's draft ...please dont trade to 4 for a 2nd round talent ....stay at 12 and get OJ Howard

    @darren15 said:

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000802040/article/casserly-mock-draft-40-brownsjags-trade-nets-two-qbs?campaign=tw-cf-sf72801788-sf72801788

    Casserley's draft ...please dont trade to 4 for a 2nd round talent ....stay at 12 and get OJ Howard

    But since that pick may have Hall of Fame talent....you make that deal.

  • According to the chart moving from 12 to 4 would cost our fourth rounder

  • According to the chart moving from 12 to 4 would cost our fourth rounder

    @londonbrown said:

    According to the chart moving from 12 to 4 would cost our fourth rounder

    Polian this morning says that if the Browns want to move up that far from 12 to take MT, that they are going to have to pay on the order of what the Redskins paid to move up to get RGIII....or what the Eagles paid to move up to get Wentz.. In other words, two first round picks plus. Especially, he said, if the deal is being made with another AFC team. His comment was "if you want to get better at our expense (meaning as a rival AFC team), you are going to have to pay a premium.

    So, while the draft trade chart values may say a 4th rounder is all it would take to move up....the actual human beings in the rooms are going to want to be lavished beyond all avarice.

  • @londonbrown said:

    According to the chart moving from 12 to 4 would cost our fourth rounder

    Polian this morning says that if the Browns want to move up that far from 12 to take MT, that they are going to have to pay on the order of what the Redskins paid to move up to get RGIII....or what the Eagles paid to move up to get Wentz.. In other words, two first round picks plus. Especially, he said, if the deal is being made with another AFC team. His comment was "if you want to get better at our expense (meaning as a rival AFC team), you are going to have to pay a premium.

    So, while the draft trade chart values may say a 4th rounder is all it would take to move up....the actual human beings in the rooms are going to want to be lavished beyond all avarice.

    @the-gipper said:

    Polian this morning says that if the Browns want to move up that far from 12 to take MT, that they are going to have to pay on the order of what the Redskins paid to move up to get RGIII....or what the Eagles paid to move up to get Wentz.. In other words, two first round picks plus. Especially, he said, if the deal is being made with another AFC team. His comment was "if you want to get better at our expense (meaning as a rival AFC team), you are going to have to pay a premium.

    So, while the draft trade chart values may say a 4th rounder is all it would take to move up....the actual human beings in the rooms are going to want to be lavished beyond all avarice.

    And that's why this FO wont do it