Whats your best case scenario?
-
Best case scenario?
Kate Beckinsale AND Salma Hayeck.
Didnt Salma Hayek give her ex throat cancer from HPV? That seems like worst case scenario to me
-
Didnt Salma Hayek give her ex throat cancer from HPV? That seems like worst case scenario to me
You don't see me just chiming in and fucking with your dreams, now do you!?
-
Best case scenario?
Kate Beckinsale AND Salma Hayeck.
I'd consider trading out Hayek for Selena Gomez, but I like them on the young side. ?
Beckinsale is one of the most gorgeous woman I've ever seen. Wow she is a tasty treat.
-
I'd consider trading out Hayek for Selena Gomez, but I like them on the young side. ?
Beckinsale is one of the most gorgeous woman I've ever seen. Wow she is a tasty treat.
Can't really follow you there, but whatever you're in to.
But in keeping with my beautiful latina women, Ana De Armas would probably be my sub in for Salma.
I'm a simple man, but I'm also particular.
-
I think Best Case, that they get the exact type of LB they covet for their intended style of defense. I think Berry has done a nice job of tooling up the defensive secondary and DE in FA.
This draft we'll probably get to see what Steph, Woods and Berry believe the modern day NFL defense should look like.
-
I think Best Case, that they get the exact type of LB they covet for their intended style of defense. I think Berry has done a nice job of tooling up the defensive secondary and DE in FA.
This draft we'll probably get to see what Steph, Woods and Berry believe the modern day NFL defense should look like.
I think Best Case, that they get the exact type of LB they covet for their intended style of defense. I think Berry has done a nice job of tooling up the defensive secondary and DE in FA.
This draft we'll probably get to see what Steph, Woods and Berry believe the modern day NFL defense should look like.
You think that is a better case that nabbing 4 Hall of Famers? And winning multiple Super Bowls.....with Selma Hayek and Kate Beckinsale each giving your what they got?
Again, I say, beat that.
(does winning a 300 mill lottery do it?)
-
Andrew Berry says Browns have 114 draftable players on their big board ....
-
Andrew Berry says Browns have 114 draftable players on their big board ....
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
-
Andrew Berry says Browns have 114 draftable players on their big board ....
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
Not necessarily. They may have 10 to 15 Top 50 guys off the board whether for character or medical
-
Andrew Berry says Browns have 114 draftable players on their big board ....
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
Ummmmmm.... no....
Simply means they have 114 on our board... across 7 rounds... not the top 114.
-
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, this means that we will be using some late round draft capital to move up somewhere along the way, because that would take care of rounds 1-4 pretty much unless other teams are way off from our 114 best. EDIT: 105 go in rounds 1-3.
Ummmmmm.... no....
Simply means they have 114 on our board... across 7 rounds... not the top 114.
Ummmmmm.... no....
Simply means they have 114 on our board... across 7 rounds... not the top 114.
So if all 114 are gone by our 6th round pick so we just give 'em away??
-
So if all 114 are gone by our 6th round pick so we just give 'em away??
No...
- There are probably about 6 names we've deemed worthy of our #26.
- Up that to 10-ish for our #59.
- maybe 15 for our #89 and 91.
That 21 give or take for three rounds and four of our 9 picks.
You don't think 109 are enough to cover the balance? To cover rounds 4 - 7 when teams' big boards diverge more and more with each successive round?
If we get to a pick and no one is there... more likely early than late... then we trade down with 2022 picks as or more likely to be targeted.
-
I definitely see us pushing picks back to next year due to all the opt outs etc this year limiting the FO’s knowledge on so many prospects
But then again most other teams will want to do the same so will depend on any trade partners
Its a pretty fascinating draft for many years
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