Barkley at #1?
-
No
1. QB you like the most
4. Fitzpatrick
Get back into late round one if needed and take Sony Michel
-
Dorsey found the NFL rushing leader in the 3rd round last year, hes here to fix our QB problem and knows he can find a good RB later in the draft. So no to not picking a QB at 1.
-
Okay loddies and lassies, top of the morning to yuz! Watching the difference between top QB prospects become much less of a difference has me rethinking my way over to Barkley at #1. Hear me out first; because all of this time I was right where Mark O was on the QB vrs Barkley debate only he articulated our argument way better than me. He'll still have things I agree on except the reality that even our favorite QBs have more things to worry about than Barkley has. So, here goes the overcaffeinated world according to me:
If we don't start the run on QBs at #1 overall - isn't there still only 2 draft picks before we draft again at #4? And how many weeks will this be after the team with the most money to spend on a FA QB does so? And isn't it possible this is a unique year where 2-3 QBs can be very equivalent in what they offer because they all have some concerns? Aside from that, when the 2 other teams pick before our 4th spot - what guarantee do we have they will take the 1 we are slightly favoring? Whether I agree with the drool fest over Josh Allen or not - maybe it's a good thing he can throw the ball all the way to Canada just like Jamarcus Russell could. He could be one of the QBs that goes before we pick at #4 because someone will be willing to forget he only threw 16 TD passes last year against a lesser brand of corner and pass rushers with pedestrian accuracy. I know I know he LOVES football though. All it takes is 1 team that doesn't care about short game accuracy and the tighter windows of red zones. We've already gone the bionic arm route in lieu of accuracy with Weeden, Anderson and Kizer which are 3 very good reasons we still need a QB today right? They LOVED football too before they realized their lack of accuracy in a world that requires fitting air tight windows in congested red zones them feeling like a McCoy surrounded by 65,000 Hatfields. It's been like a never ending video to the song "You Lost that Loving Feeling..."
YES, Mayfield and Darnold are my not-so-perfect faves but much to my surprise Rosen (with a lot of help from SD Tom's persistence and media examples at the combines) got me to see him in ways I was previously unwilling to - closed some serious ground on both. I don't give a rat what he said when he was 17 that has been so blow out of context to look like he just said those things 4-5 years later. And when he questioned which sport he was better between his #1 ranking in tennis vrs his #1 QB ranking in Rivals and Scout - that's not a lack of love or passion for the sport he chose at 17. It's probably something a lot of people would question. I also find it interesting that some of his previous critics at the football camp back before he was a senior in high school have made it a point to say he's a lot more mature today to the extent they've changed their opinion of him for the better. The last Head Coach he had gave him far better reviews than Justin Gilbert's college Head Coach had for all healthy consumers.
So WHY have I about faced my opinion to take a RB first especially in a draft that is so deep at the position? As I've looked at all of the RBs in the draft, a lot of them aren't going to be 3 down RBs in the NFL because they lack the 1 thing Barkley might be very underrated at. Catching the football out of the backfield aside from his ideal size to handle a bigger work load. He had 54 receptions for 632 yards and 3 TDs to go with his 1200+ yards and 18 TDs on the ground aside from his kickoff returns for TDs. If you're not impressed - you simply don't want to be. The only RB that resembles Barkley is SDSU's Rashaad Penny but there's no guarantees he's on our doorstep later in the draft. Meanwhile, Sony Michel I thought was an ideal alternative only had 9 receptions in 14-15 games while his playing weight of about 215 lbs reminds us he'll stay a part time RB.
Barkley has better gears than Duke Johnson without the history of injury Duke had at the U - which ultimately made his NFL taker understand how much of a workload he'd handle best. Right now, we don't have a scoring threat on the roster inclusive of the Josh Gordon who has only scored 1 TD in his only 10 starts since 2013. Barkley is good for the passing game and our running game without us tipping off tendencies using 2 different guys all the time. If you want to recruit the interest of a FA QB - you tell him you are going to give him Barkley like Polian equipped Peyton Manning with Marshall Faulk in his first NFL huddle and then Edge James thereafter. When Faulk went to the Rams, a little known QB named Kurt Warner at 29 years of age enjoyed a RB that could bury the blitz with TD receptions all the way to a Pro Bowl and MVP caliber season punctuated with a Superbowl Championship. For that matter, there's Dak Prescott WITH Zeke and WITHOUT Zeke - can you guess which version made him Rookie of the Year?
In adding Barkley, we don't need to draft another RB. We get our Marshall Faulk that can score from anywhere on the field in the pass game or running game. Meanwhile, as all the other teams are in those runs drafting RBs in this deep draft - this gets us looking at WRs and DBs and a dual purpose TE like Oklahoma's Mark Andrews. We also have Free Agency and the most money to spend on some yes price tags we finally HAVE to compete for (rather than overpaying the Jamar Taylor we still need to upgrade causing us to double-dip anyway). You get what you pay for and the unwillingness to compete for the better guys often causes desperate knee jerk overpayments on bums/has-beens like Dwayne Bowe and Kenny Brat.
The biggest difference between Barkley and the first QB is every top QB we consider gives us at least 1-2 more concerns than Barkley does. The good news? There's only 2 picks between who we take at #1 and when we pick again. We're going to add QBs with as much money as we have for FA as well as up as high as #4 overall. Barkley and these 2 QBs plus three 2nd round picks plus the 1st pick of round 3?
All this from a guy that was getting a huge kick out of the "Love PO tion #9" Springbreak girls gone wild caliber passion packed threads recruiting the testosterone to throw down and polarize. IMO, this is a classic example of letting some things settle before racing to a final conclusion far before it's necessary. My mind may change again but I'm enjoying the excitement of the opportunity this experienced FO (with proven success in the draft, free agency and trades) has in front of it.
Okay loddies and lassies, top of the morning to yuz! Watching the difference between top QB prospects become much less of a difference has me rethinking my way over to Barkley at #1. Hear me out first; because all of this time I was right where Mark O was on the QB vrs Barkley debate only he articulated our argument way better than me. He'll still have things I agree on except the reality that even our favorite QBs have more things to worry about than Barkley has. So, here goes the overcaffeinated world according to me:
If we don't start the run on QBs at #1 overall - isn't there still only 2 draft picks before we draft again at #4? And how many weeks will this be after the team with the most money to spend on a FA QB does so? And isn't it possible this is a unique year where 2-3 QBs can be very equivalent in what they offer because they all have some concerns? Aside from that, when the 2 other teams pick before our 4th spot - what guarantee do we have they will take the 1 we are slightly favoring? Whether I agree with the drool fest over Josh Allen or not - maybe it's a good thing he can throw the ball all the way to Canada just like Jamarcus Russell could. He could be one of the QBs that goes before we pick at #4 because someone will be willing to forget he only threw 16 TD passes last year against a lesser brand of corner and pass rushers with pedestrian accuracy. I know I know he LOVES football though. All it takes is 1 team that doesn't care about short game accuracy and the tighter windows of red zones. We've already gone the bionic arm route in lieu of accuracy with Weeden, Anderson and Kizer which are 3 very good reasons we still need a QB today right? They LOVED football too before they realized their lack of accuracy in a world that requires fitting air tight windows in congested red zones them feeling like a McCoy surrounded by 65,000 Hatfields. It's been like a never ending video to the song "You Lost that Loving Feeling..."
YES, Mayfield and Darnold are my not-so-perfect faves but much to my surprise Rosen (with a lot of help from SD Tom's persistence and media examples at the combines) got me to see him in ways I was previously unwilling to - closed some serious ground on both. I don't give a rat what he said when he was 17 that has been so blow out of context to look like he just said those things 4-5 years later. And when he questioned which sport he was better between his #1 ranking in tennis vrs his #1 QB ranking in Rivals and Scout - that's not a lack of love or passion for the sport he chose at 17. It's probably something a lot of people would question. I also find it interesting that some of his previous critics at the football camp back before he was a senior in high school have made it a point to say he's a lot more mature today to the extent they've changed their opinion of him for the better. The last Head Coach he had gave him far better reviews than Justin Gilbert's college Head Coach had for all healthy consumers.
So WHY have I about faced my opinion to take a RB first especially in a draft that is so deep at the position? As I've looked at all of the RBs in the draft, a lot of them aren't going to be 3 down RBs in the NFL because they lack the 1 thing Barkley might be very underrated at. Catching the football out of the backfield aside from his ideal size to handle a bigger work load. He had 54 receptions for 632 yards and 3 TDs to go with his 1200+ yards and 18 TDs on the ground aside from his kickoff returns for TDs. If you're not impressed - you simply don't want to be. The only RB that resembles Barkley is SDSU's Rashaad Penny but there's no guarantees he's on our doorstep later in the draft. Meanwhile, Sony Michel I thought was an ideal alternative only had 9 receptions in 14-15 games while his playing weight of about 215 lbs reminds us he'll stay a part time RB.
Barkley has better gears than Duke Johnson without the history of injury Duke had at the U - which ultimately made his NFL taker understand how much of a workload he'd handle best. Right now, we don't have a scoring threat on the roster inclusive of the Josh Gordon who has only scored 1 TD in his only 10 starts since 2013. Barkley is good for the passing game and our running game without us tipping off tendencies using 2 different guys all the time. If you want to recruit the interest of a FA QB - you tell him you are going to give him Barkley like Polian equipped Peyton Manning with Marshall Faulk in his first NFL huddle and then Edge James thereafter. When Faulk went to the Rams, a little known QB named Kurt Warner at 29 years of age enjoyed a RB that could bury the blitz with TD receptions all the way to a Pro Bowl and MVP caliber season punctuated with a Superbowl Championship. For that matter, there's Dak Prescott WITH Zeke and WITHOUT Zeke - can you guess which version made him Rookie of the Year?
In adding Barkley, we don't need to draft another RB. We get our Marshall Faulk that can score from anywhere on the field in the pass game or running game. Meanwhile, as all the other teams are in those runs drafting RBs in this deep draft - this gets us looking at WRs and DBs and a dual purpose TE like Oklahoma's Mark Andrews. We also have Free Agency and the most money to spend on some yes price tags we finally HAVE to compete for (rather than overpaying the Jamar Taylor we still need to upgrade causing us to double-dip anyway). You get what you pay for and the unwillingness to compete for the better guys often causes desperate knee jerk overpayments on bums/has-beens like Dwayne Bowe and Kenny Brat.
The biggest difference between Barkley and the first QB is every top QB we consider gives us at least 1-2 more concerns than Barkley does. The good news? There's only 2 picks between who we take at #1 and when we pick again. We're going to add QBs with as much money as we have for FA as well as up as high as #4 overall. Barkley and these 2 QBs plus three 2nd round picks plus the 1st pick of round 3?
All this from a guy that was getting a huge kick out of the "Love PO tion #9" Springbreak girls gone wild caliber passion packed threads recruiting the testosterone to throw down and polarize. IMO, this is a classic example of letting some things settle before racing to a final conclusion far before it's necessary. My mind may change again but I'm enjoying the excitement of the opportunity this experienced FO (with proven success in the draft, free agency and trades) has in front of it.
I'm not of the opinion that Barkley is bad, in fact I think he CAN be really good. But in what you propose here, everything would have to work out all together.
I think Barkley is a fair bit better than the next best back, but that doesn't mean that you can't get close production later. His workout was GREAT, but there has also been other great workouts in past from players who didn't pan out. I think changing a view based on a workout would scare me a bit.
Another thing that would worry me is his inconsistency. Ohio State is the most like an NFL defense that he faced and he didn't perform great. Was that all his fault, NO, but would still give me pause. Even these guys that "suck" or "bust" in the NFL were the best of the best in college, and the discrepancy between good and bad is small as compared to college.
But the thing that would worry me more than any other thing is settling for the 3rd best QB in your eyes. While all 3 could be good, average, or bad, when you have had bad player there for almost 20 years, and it being the most important position, you need to find your guy. And while different teams COULD have different guys at the top, and COULD have them all rated closely, I can't remember 3 being that close (And I could be wrong). What I do remember, is a few years ago that at different times, Goff, Wentz, and Lynch were all rated the best, and many were very surprised Lynch wasn't taken A LOT higher. Lynch was the 3rd taken, do you REALLY want the Browns to take that gamble where say Darnold is Goff (Pac 12), Allen is Wentz (smaller school) and Mayfield and Rosen are Lynch and Cook.
Again, I am not saying they shouldn't take Barkley, but there are certainly more things to consider more than him being able to score touchdowns and be a 3 down back.
-
No.
How many playoff games have the Cowboys won with Ezekiel Elliot?
No.
How many playoff games have the Cowboys won with Ezekiel Elliot?
You dont win the Super Bowl without making the post season.
Once in anything can happen.
-
None of the QBs are outstanding. If there was a guy you obiviously take him over the pack.
Barkley will be gone by 4. The Giants and Colts will not pass on a player like him when both their QBs have had their struggles as of late. Barkley is a game changers who can play now. The fastest way for the Browns to win is Barkley, then a QB at 4 and signing a Vet to play this season assuming Kizer cant win the job. They youre pretty much set at QB for the interim. You hope the 4 pick is ready next season.
-
When there is a generational talent at a position of need, you take him at #1.
Not only that, An identity is so needed on this team and it finally arrives in the form of Saquon Barkley. Very, very excited.
Also, we should be thanking Chubb for his excellent combine showing. That should lock him up at 3. Leaving only NYG selecting the first QB.
Man oh, man which QB to throw to J.Gordon and crew??
Dorsey doesn't agree with you. It's not looking good for the Saquon at #1 crowd currently. We've already been down this road with Po a dozen times. It's few and far between "generational" running backs win Super Bowls- and definitely not without a super talented team around them. The last one to do so was Emmett Smith, and that was over 20 years ago.
" Asked to rank the most important positions on the field correlated with winning, Dorsey started with quarterback and rattled off four more -- pass rusher, cornerback, left tackle and wide receiver -- that are directly related to the passing game."
Barkley wasn't even a better college RB than Ezekiel Elliot, but now he's a "generational" talent.
And I thought only ESPN was a front runner in the hype game. Seems NFLN is seriously kissing his butt. Hardly heard anything about Guice, Michel, and several other RBs.
Dorsey doesn't agree with you. It's not looking good for the Saquon at #1 crowd currently. We've already been down this road with Po a dozen times. It's few and far between "generational" running backs win Super Bowls- and definitely not without a super talented team around them. The last one to do so was Emmett Smith, and that was over 20 years ago.
HOF QBs have won 12 of the last 15 Super Bowls. Who is the HOF QB in this bunch? Not 1 guy is creating the buzz of a E Manning or a Ben or a Brees when they were drafted.
Marshall Faulk won in 2000 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FaulMa00.htm
Marshwan Lynch won the Super Bowl in 2013 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm
Lynch helped Wilson win one as a rookie. The Browns would be crazy to pass on Barkley.
-
None of the QBs are outstanding. If there was a guy you obiviously take him over the pack.
Barkley will be gone by 4. The Giants and Colts will not pass on a player like him when both their QBs have had their struggles as of late. Barkley is a game changers who can play now. The fastest way for the Browns to win is Barkley, then a QB at 4 and signing a Vet to play this season assuming Kizer cant win the job. They youre pretty much set at QB for the interim. You hope the 4 pick is ready next season.
None of the QBs are outstanding. If there was a guy you obiviously take him over the pack.
Barkley will be gone by 4. The Giants and Colts will not pass on a player like him when both their QBs have had their struggles as of late. Barkley is a game changers who can play now. The fastest way for the Browns to win is Barkley, then a QB at 4 and signing a Vet to play this season assuming Kizer cant win the job. They youre pretty much set at QB for the interim. You hope the 4 pick is ready next season.
Good points, but there is are a couple reasons people have Giants taking a QB. One, they won't be drafting this high again. Everything went wrong for them this year, as the team the year before was a playoff team. And 2nd, Eli is NOT Tom Brady. He isn't nearly as good, and he won't play until he's 150 like Brady.
I dont like them, but in my opinion, if they want to succeed in the future they draft the replacement. Barkley (if as good as hyped) may help them immediately, but in a year or 2 they won't have a QB. And I don't think Barkley takes them over the Eagles. Eli had a lot of problems last year, and if they want to compete in the duture, they will need their heir apparent.
The Colts have more of a chance to take Barkley in my opinion, as they already have their QB. They aren't taking one. But they haven't lit up the league in past few seasons with Luck, as they probably have more holes than Cleveland. They could certainly trade with a team who wants to come up for QB to get more assets.
But the one thing that I just don't get with people saying take Barkley at 1 and QB at 4, they either say you still get a top QB (could be true or untrue) or like you said they all have issues or aren't outstanding. Well if you passed at 1 for your franchise QB, why would you then take one 3 picks later? In those 3 picks, did he gain skill, or is it that the potentially 3rd QB on your list is better than 1st?
At 40, TB was still the most important player on your team. If they had Paxton Lynch (or even use your 3rd stringer in camp Brissett or Brian Hoyer) instead, but had Todd Gurley, Zeke, Kareem Hunt, Alvin Kamara, or Leveon Bell, you think they would have been in Super Bowl?
Does Barkley turn the Browns into a playoff team next year, and then once in have a chance? Because I GUARANTEE that the top QB (assuming at least one pans out) will help the team they are on to improve.
Everyone rags on Bortles, and he certainly hasn't lived up to 3rd pick, but when he played well (or decent) is when the Jags performed well, when he was bad, Jags were. His running helped them A LOT in postseason.
One thing that shows how important QB is, look at the "talk" about trades for 2 QB that are top 5 players at this point. They certainly aren't worth it, but Luck and Foles have BOTH been talked about for 2 1s and 2 2s, you think any of the top backs in the league would fetch anywhere close to that.
Not all directed directly to you Boo. It just is soo ironic to me how likely the same ones advocating for possibly the 3rd QB are the same ones who were up in arms that team didn't take a QB, didn't take "their" QB, or took one too late.
Even your buddy Ghoolie has said QB is most important position, and in one thread says Browns need Mayfield, another they need Jackson, and then says Barkley. Next week they will need, Penny, Charl, and either White or Benkerk. By the time of draft, he will have mentioned EVERY skill player one place or another, and then say "I told everyone, he was best player, I predicted it 100%, and I saw this guy before anyone, including his mama" I'm the only smart guy on here. Just a lot of profanity and I'll words in between.
Have a good evening buddy
-
None of the QBs are outstanding. If there was a guy you obiviously take him over the pack.
Barkley will be gone by 4. The Giants and Colts will not pass on a player like him when both their QBs have had their struggles as of late. Barkley is a game changers who can play now. The fastest way for the Browns to win is Barkley, then a QB at 4 and signing a Vet to play this season assuming Kizer cant win the job. They youre pretty much set at QB for the interim. You hope the 4 pick is ready next season.
Good points, but there is are a couple reasons people have Giants taking a QB. One, they won't be drafting this high again. Everything went wrong for them this year, as the team the year before was a playoff team. And 2nd, Eli is NOT Tom Brady. He isn't nearly as good, and he won't play until he's 150 like Brady.
I dont like them, but in my opinion, if they want to succeed in the future they draft the replacement. Barkley (if as good as hyped) may help them immediately, but in a year or 2 they won't have a QB. And I don't think Barkley takes them over the Eagles. Eli had a lot of problems last year, and if they want to compete in the duture, they will need their heir apparent.
The Colts have more of a chance to take Barkley in my opinion, as they already have their QB. They aren't taking one. But they haven't lit up the league in past few seasons with Luck, as they probably have more holes than Cleveland. They could certainly trade with a team who wants to come up for QB to get more assets.
But the one thing that I just don't get with people saying take Barkley at 1 and QB at 4, they either say you still get a top QB (could be true or untrue) or like you said they all have issues or aren't outstanding. Well if you passed at 1 for your franchise QB, why would you then take one 3 picks later? In those 3 picks, did he gain skill, or is it that the potentially 3rd QB on your list is better than 1st?
At 40, TB was still the most important player on your team. If they had Paxton Lynch (or even use your 3rd stringer in camp Brissett or Brian Hoyer) instead, but had Todd Gurley, Zeke, Kareem Hunt, Alvin Kamara, or Leveon Bell, you think they would have been in Super Bowl?
Does Barkley turn the Browns into a playoff team next year, and then once in have a chance? Because I GUARANTEE that the top QB (assuming at least one pans out) will help the team they are on to improve.
Everyone rags on Bortles, and he certainly hasn't lived up to 3rd pick, but when he played well (or decent) is when the Jags performed well, when he was bad, Jags were. His running helped them A LOT in postseason.
One thing that shows how important QB is, look at the "talk" about trades for 2 QB that are top 5 players at this point. They certainly aren't worth it, but Luck and Foles have BOTH been talked about for 2 1s and 2 2s, you think any of the top backs in the league would fetch anywhere close to that.
Not all directed directly to you Boo. It just is soo ironic to me how likely the same ones advocating for possibly the 3rd QB are the same ones who were up in arms that team didn't take a QB, didn't take "their" QB, or took one too late.
Even your buddy Ghoolie has said QB is most important position, and in one thread says Browns need Mayfield, another they need Jackson, and then says Barkley. Next week they will need, Penny, Charl, and either White or Benkerk. By the time of draft, he will have mentioned EVERY skill player one place or another, and then say "I told everyone, he was best player, I predicted it 100%, and I saw this guy before anyone, including his mama" I'm the only smart guy on here. Just a lot of profanity and I'll words in between.
Have a good evening buddy
Good points, but there is are a couple reasons people have Giants taking a QB. One, they won't be drafting this high again. Everything went wrong for them this year, as the team the year before was a playoff team. And 2nd, Eli is NOT Tom Brady. He isn't nearly as good, and he won't play until he's 150 like Brady.
NY taking a QB at 2 would create a $hitstorm. Eli would have little chance to rebound.
Eli is not Brady, but he is a 2 time Super Bowl winner. Barkley would take so much pressure of Manning, but if they pass on Barkley the Colts have no RB. Frank Gore will not be resigned.
-
Dorsey doesn't agree with you. It's not looking good for the Saquon at #1 crowd currently. We've already been down this road with Po a dozen times. It's few and far between "generational" running backs win Super Bowls- and definitely not without a super talented team around them. The last one to do so was Emmett Smith, and that was over 20 years ago.
HOF QBs have won 12 of the last 15 Super Bowls. Who is the HOF QB in this bunch? Not 1 guy is creating the buzz of a E Manning or a Ben or a Brees when they were drafted.
Marshall Faulk won in 2000 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FaulMa00.htm
Marshwan Lynch won the Super Bowl in 2013 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm
Lynch helped Wilson win one as a rookie. The Browns would be crazy to pass on Barkley.
HOF QBs have won 12 of the last 15 Super Bowls. Who is the HOF QB in this bunch? Not 1 guy is creating the buzz of a E Manning or a Ben or a Brees when they were drafted.
Marshall Faulk won in 2000 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FaulMa00.htm
Marshwan Lynch won the Super Bowl in 2013 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm
Lynch helped Wilson win one as a rookie. The Browns would be crazy to pass on Barkley.
Brady didn't create ANY buzz before the draft. Brees was a 2nd rounder. Wilson didn't warrant even a 2nd. Mannings and Ben, yea maybe. Cam Newton created that buzz, so did RG3. And lets certainly not forget the freak coming in that was next big thing in Jamarcus Rusell. There was also real debate on 1st pick between Peyton and Ryan Leaf. If you think you can just spot a HOF before a snap in NFL, you are sadly mistaken, BUT how some have talked about Barkley, he is the pick for you. He is already 10 times better than Jim Brown according to posts on this board.
-
So....relating football to the game of Chess. The QB = the Queen. And the RB= the Knight. We want to draft the Knight....and take any ol' Queen that falls to us.
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
If your top qb is Rosen, i think you have to take him at 1. If to qb is Allen or Mayfield, you can enjoy taking Barkley first, and take qb at 4.I
However, with more than enough picks, why not send a few to the Giants or Colts in order to switch our 4th for the 2nd or 3rd so there is no question that you get both top players of your choosing.
There are so many ways Browns can have their cake and easily t it too.
-
So....relating football to the game of Chess. The QB = the Queen. And the RB= the Knight. We want to draft the Knight....and take any ol' Queen that falls to us.
-
None of the QBs are outstanding. If there was a guy you obiviously take him over the pack.
Barkley will be gone by 4. The Giants and Colts will not pass on a player like him when both their QBs have had their struggles as of late. Barkley is a game changers who can play now. The fastest way for the Browns to win is Barkley, then a QB at 4 and signing a Vet to play this season assuming Kizer cant win the job. They youre pretty much set at QB for the interim. You hope the 4 pick is ready next season.
Good points, but there is are a couple reasons people have Giants taking a QB. One, they won't be drafting this high again. Everything went wrong for them this year, as the team the year before was a playoff team. And 2nd, Eli is NOT Tom Brady. He isn't nearly as good, and he won't play until he's 150 like Brady.
I dont like them, but in my opinion, if they want to succeed in the future they draft the replacement. Barkley (if as good as hyped) may help them immediately, but in a year or 2 they won't have a QB. And I don't think Barkley takes them over the Eagles. Eli had a lot of problems last year, and if they want to compete in the duture, they will need their heir apparent.
The Colts have more of a chance to take Barkley in my opinion, as they already have their QB. They aren't taking one. But they haven't lit up the league in past few seasons with Luck, as they probably have more holes than Cleveland. They could certainly trade with a team who wants to come up for QB to get more assets.
But the one thing that I just don't get with people saying take Barkley at 1 and QB at 4, they either say you still get a top QB (could be true or untrue) or like you said they all have issues or aren't outstanding. Well if you passed at 1 for your franchise QB, why would you then take one 3 picks later? In those 3 picks, did he gain skill, or is it that the potentially 3rd QB on your list is better than 1st?
At 40, TB was still the most important player on your team. If they had Paxton Lynch (or even use your 3rd stringer in camp Brissett or Brian Hoyer) instead, but had Todd Gurley, Zeke, Kareem Hunt, Alvin Kamara, or Leveon Bell, you think they would have been in Super Bowl?
Does Barkley turn the Browns into a playoff team next year, and then once in have a chance? Because I GUARANTEE that the top QB (assuming at least one pans out) will help the team they are on to improve.
Everyone rags on Bortles, and he certainly hasn't lived up to 3rd pick, but when he played well (or decent) is when the Jags performed well, when he was bad, Jags were. His running helped them A LOT in postseason.
One thing that shows how important QB is, look at the "talk" about trades for 2 QB that are top 5 players at this point. They certainly aren't worth it, but Luck and Foles have BOTH been talked about for 2 1s and 2 2s, you think any of the top backs in the league would fetch anywhere close to that.
Not all directed directly to you Boo. It just is soo ironic to me how likely the same ones advocating for possibly the 3rd QB are the same ones who were up in arms that team didn't take a QB, didn't take "their" QB, or took one too late.
Even your buddy Ghoolie has said QB is most important position, and in one thread says Browns need Mayfield, another they need Jackson, and then says Barkley. Next week they will need, Penny, Charl, and either White or Benkerk. By the time of draft, he will have mentioned EVERY skill player one place or another, and then say "I told everyone, he was best player, I predicted it 100%, and I saw this guy before anyone, including his mama" I'm the only smart guy on here. Just a lot of profanity and I'll words in between.
Have a good evening buddy
Even your buddy Ghoolie has said QB is most important position, and in one thread says Browns need Mayfield, another they need Jackson, and then says Barkley. Next week they will need, Penny, Charl, and either White or Benkerk. By the time of draft, he will have mentioned EVERY skill player one place or another, and then say "I told everyone, he was best player, I predicted it 100%, and I saw this guy before anyone, including his mama" I'm the only smart guy on here. Just a lot of profanity and I'll words in between.
Have a good evening buddy
Ghoolie has not chimed on who he likes. Whoever the Browns pick wont be the guy. But if Ghoolie likes Rosen, avoid him at a cost like Paxton Lynch and Tribisky.
With Crowell gone the Browns have a vacancy at RB. To me, Barkley is the perfect compliment to Duke. Barkley ran a 4.41 40, great hands, size. Ive been calling for him at 1 for weeks only because none of the QBs are outstanding IMO.
Thanks Gunz
-
Good points, but there is are a couple reasons people have Giants taking a QB. One, they won't be drafting this high again. Everything went wrong for them this year, as the team the year before was a playoff team. And 2nd, Eli is NOT Tom Brady. He isn't nearly as good, and he won't play until he's 150 like Brady.
NY taking a QB at 2 would create a $hitstorm. Eli would have little chance to rebound.
Eli is not Brady, but he is a 2 time Super Bowl winner. Barkley would take so much pressure of Manning, but if they pass on Barkley the Colts have no RB. Frank Gore will not be resigned.
NY taking a QB at 2 would create a $hitstorm. Eli would have little chance to rebound.
Eli is not Brady, but he is a 2 time Super Bowl winner. Barkley would take so much pressure of Manning, but if they pass on Barkley the Colts have no RB. Frank Gore will not be resigned.
It may create a problem, for 1 or 2 years, and the rookie would sit. No team is going to be that loyal to a player when they are thinking about their future. Look what they did last year when they had no chance. They SHOULD think about their future.
And yes like I already said, Colts may very well need a RB. They also need a lot of other things, and COULD trade that pick or look at helping their porous defense. They aren't just a RB away. They get Barkley, they may score 1-2 TD more a game (that's A LOT), they would have to outscore opponents as their DEFENSE was a fair amount worse than Browns.
You failed to read ANYTHING beyond that paragraph apparently.
I guess I have to use other sport analogies. Even if I don't like him, best basketball player in the league. Lebron. Even having the best player, they arent the best team. If they had a top pick, should they pick the best athlete in draft even if it doesn't help them get over the top, when what they need is a PG? Or maybe your flavor is baseball, Mike Trout is best player, yet they don't make postseason, but should they draft another C.F. because he is best player in draft even those they need a SP. OR maybe you like hockey? I dont, but isn't Ovechkin supposed to be best player. They should draft another scorer, even though the reason they have never won is because they have a bad goalie?
The idea of ANY team sport isn't to have the PLAYER at a position, it's to have the best team. You may not have the best player at any position, but the right team. You have to figure out how to assemble the best team, and while Barkley may get you 2000 yards and 25 TD total, if you don't have the complementary pieces it's all for naught. While maybe another back gets you 1500 and 15 TDs while the other pieces are better, you could be in good position
-
HOF QBs have won 12 of the last 15 Super Bowls. Who is the HOF QB in this bunch? Not 1 guy is creating the buzz of a E Manning or a Ben or a Brees when they were drafted.
Marshall Faulk won in 2000 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FaulMa00.htm
Marshwan Lynch won the Super Bowl in 2013 https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm
Lynch helped Wilson win one as a rookie. The Browns would be crazy to pass on Barkley.
Brady didn't create ANY buzz before the draft. Brees was a 2nd rounder. Wilson didn't warrant even a 2nd. Mannings and Ben, yea maybe. Cam Newton created that buzz, so did RG3. And lets certainly not forget the freak coming in that was next big thing in Jamarcus Rusell. There was also real debate on 1st pick between Peyton and Ryan Leaf. If you think you can just spot a HOF before a snap in NFL, you are sadly mistaken, BUT how some have talked about Barkley, he is the pick for you. He is already 10 times better than Jim Brown according to posts on this board.
Brady didn't create ANY buzz before the draft. Brees was a 2nd rounder. Wilson didn't warrant even a 2nd. Mannings and Ben, yea maybe. Cam Newton created that buzz, so did RG3. And lets certainly not forget the freak coming in that was next big thing in Jamarcus Rusell. There was also real debate on 1st pick between Peyton and Ryan Leaf. If you think you can just spot a HOF before a snap in NFL, you are sadly mistaken, BUT how some have talked about Barkley, he is the pick for you. He is already 10 times better than Jim Brown according to posts on this board.
Wilson caught a break landing on a great defense and having a stud RB like Marshawn Lynch.
There was definitely buzz about Ben and Manning. Ben played at Miami of Ohio and got attention.
-
Even your buddy Ghoolie has said QB is most important position, and in one thread says Browns need Mayfield, another they need Jackson, and then says Barkley. Next week they will need, Penny, Charl, and either White or Benkerk. By the time of draft, he will have mentioned EVERY skill player one place or another, and then say "I told everyone, he was best player, I predicted it 100%, and I saw this guy before anyone, including his mama" I'm the only smart guy on here. Just a lot of profanity and I'll words in between.
Have a good evening buddy
Ghoolie has not chimed on who he likes. Whoever the Browns pick wont be the guy. But if Ghoolie likes Rosen, avoid him at a cost like Paxton Lynch and Tribisky.
With Crowell gone the Browns have a vacancy at RB. To me, Barkley is the perfect compliment to Duke. Barkley ran a 4.41 40, great hands, size. Ive been calling for him at 1 for weeks only because none of the QBs are outstanding IMO.
Thanks Gunz
Ghoolie has not chimed on who he likes. Whoever the Browns pick wont be the guy. But if Ghoolie likes Rosen, avoid him at a cost like Paxton Lynch and Tribisky.
With Crowell gone the Browns have a vacancy at RB. To me, Barkley is the perfect compliment to Duke. Barkley ran a 4.41 40, great hands, size. Ive been calling for him at 1 for weeks only because none of the QBs are outstanding IMO.
Thanks Gunz
He has though in other threads. He said in one that Lamar Jackson is the guy you have to get. The Browns would be stupid if they didn't take him. Then in another thread he said Mayfield is the only pick. When called out about the change, well he was obviously joking about Jackson, and saying that what the dumb Browns would so. Then he said Barkley is the only choice for the Browns, and if they don't take him at 1, it will haunt them forever.
The Browns should get Barkley, Mayfield, and Ridley. Have picks 1,2, and 5. Trade next year's 1st and Joe Thomas and Corey Coleman for 2. Remind you, those 2 are the worst players in the league to him, but to him the worst players are worth that?
But he certainly has said who they should draft.
Since the last one he said was Barkley, you still on that train for him?????? LOL
-
Brady didn't create ANY buzz before the draft. Brees was a 2nd rounder. Wilson didn't warrant even a 2nd. Mannings and Ben, yea maybe. Cam Newton created that buzz, so did RG3. And lets certainly not forget the freak coming in that was next big thing in Jamarcus Rusell. There was also real debate on 1st pick between Peyton and Ryan Leaf. If you think you can just spot a HOF before a snap in NFL, you are sadly mistaken, BUT how some have talked about Barkley, he is the pick for you. He is already 10 times better than Jim Brown according to posts on this board.
Wilson caught a break landing on a great defense and having a stud RB like Marshawn Lynch.
There was definitely buzz about Ben and Manning. Ben played at Miami of Ohio and got attention.
Wilson caught a break landing on a great defense and having a stud RB like Marshawn Lynch.
There was definitely buzz about Ben and Manning. Ben played at Miami of Ohio and got attention.
I said there was buzz for them. I think you need bi focals or something man lol
But there have been GREAT buzz for Leaf, Russell, RG3, etc- they didn't turn out to be HOF.
You see the point, whether there is buzz or not doesn't matter. Buzz doesn't make a football player. And certainly not a HOF. Or since you are in that draft, just as much buzz for Rivers as Eli and Ben, and he had a HOF RB, remind me as I'm drawing a blank, how many Super Bowls did they win?
In fact (now I am truly drawing a blank) who is the last great HOF caliber back to win a SB? Faulk maybe?
-
Wilson caught a break landing on a great defense and having a stud RB like Marshawn Lynch.
There was definitely buzz about Ben and Manning. Ben played at Miami of Ohio and got attention.
I said there was buzz for them. I think you need bi focals or something man lol
But there have been GREAT buzz for Leaf, Russell, RG3, etc- they didn't turn out to be HOF.
You see the point, whether there is buzz or not doesn't matter. Buzz doesn't make a football player. And certainly not a HOF. Or since you are in that draft, just as much buzz for Rivers as Eli and Ben, and he had a HOF RB, remind me as I'm drawing a blank, how many Super Bowls did they win?
In fact (now I am truly drawing a blank) who is the last great HOF caliber back to win a SB? Faulk maybe?
I said there was buzz for them. I think you need bi focals or something man lol
But there have been GREAT buzz for Leaf, Russell, RG3, etc- they didn't turn out to be HOF.
You see the point, whether there is buzz or not doesn't matter. Buzz doesn't make a football player. And certainly not a HOF. Or since you are in that draft, just as much buzz for Rivers as Eli and Ben, and he had a HOF RB, remind me as I'm drawing a blank, how many Super Bowls did they win?
In fact (now I am truly drawing a blank) who is the last great HOF caliber back to win a SB? Faulk maybe?
Leaf could very well make the HOF. He has consistently played at high level for a number of season. Marino did not win a ring, but is in the HOF.
You might want to go back and review what you wrote Chief.
You said, "Buzz, yeah maybe" There was no maybe about it. Both Ben and Manning were highly touted and regarded as top flight QBs, NY moved up to get Manning. Rivers was on a team that went 14 - 2 coached by Marty. Kieding missed the winning FG for the win. I was there. No, Rivers has not won a ring, but you cant count SD out of making the post season since Rivers has been there.
The only player right now ready for the NFL is Barkley. All the QBs are projects. Take a project at 1 or take a project at 4.
-
So....relating football to the game of Chess. The QB = the Queen. And the RB= the Knight. We want to draft the Knight....and take any ol' Queen that falls to us.
So....relating football to the game of Chess. The QB = the Queen. And the RB= the Knight. We want to draft the Knight....and take any ol' Queen that falls to us.
Who is the King?
Barkley is the Queen your most valuable weapon.
X and Y WRs are the Bishops because they run crossing routs
Slot WR is the Kinight for curl routes.
Rooks the TEs because they block at the LOS and run seam routes.
The Pawns are the OL.
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