To see what they can do. Coleman had a great game yesterday. Way too many franchises fail when they take a QB early when they cannot surround that player with the supporting cast they need. I do not see anything wrong with what the Browns did in the draft. It is hard to change a losing culture like that and it sure as hell isn't happening over night. You have to give them a chance.
Strikes me as really, really unlikely that you'd clean house because of one scouting eval like that, before a draft.. Those people were fired because there was a regime change. Someone with a bad taste in their mouths leaks this now to imply that they were fired BECAUSE of their want of Wentz.
That was a good trade for the Browns. I would not have put all my eggs in the Wentz basket. They got more bodies in and several extra premium picks -- an extra 1, 2, and 3. And then with another trade they got another 2 and a 3. All for not taking a QB they didnt love.
Strikes me as really, really unlikely that you'd clean house because of one scouting eval like that, before a draft.. Those people were fired because there was a regime change. Someone with a bad taste in their mouths leaks this now to imply that they were fired BECAUSE of their want of Wentz.
That was a good trade for the Browns. I would not have put all my eggs in the Wentz basket. They got more bodies in and several extra premium picks -- an extra 1, 2, and 3. And then with another trade they got another 2 and a 3. All for not taking a QB they didnt love.
I did not like the top of this draft at all.
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
RE: Whether they were right or not on Wentz is immaterial
Not because he isn't capable but because he doesn't have a great supporting cast. He has nice WRs but that is really where it ends. His OL, RB, and defense could all use a serious upgrade. That is a lot to ask of one person.
The Browns have issues so I do not see an issue with them stockpiling picks to play the numbers game while, at the same time, bringing in new players that haven't been part of the losing culture.
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
Yes, they dont have a QB. Does that mean they have to take one at #2? Of course not. Drafting for need is a huge mistake. They'll pick high again this year, and can take a QB that the current management has had a fair chance to scout for a full year.
Also, I could just as easily argue that this is the umpteenth time the Browns have gone into a season with a borderline NFL roster. And if you look at it that way, getting the extra picks fills a need.
And have a lot of picks next year including two potential top 10 picks. I like Goff alot haven't seen much of Wentz to say whether he was deserving of the pick or not. I will say Goff is my favorite QBbcoming out since Luck. I'm glad Goff isn't a Eagle his accuracy/touch is Rodgers/Brees like.
You dont do it at #2 overall. You dont do it in the 3rd round. If anything I think the Browns have been guilty of taking fairly uninspiring QBs in the first round simply because of need and availability. Couch, Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel -- all blah. You knew they were blah when the Browns took them. But they needed a QB, so WTF amirite?
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
Yes, they dont have a QB. Does that mean they have to take one at #2? Of course not. Drafting for need is a huge mistake. They'll pick high again this year, and can take a QB that the current management has had a fair chance to scout for a full year.
Also, I could just as easily argue that this is the umpteenth time the Browns have gone into a season with a borderline NFL roster. And if you look at it that way, getting the extra picks fills a need.
In not suggesting you draft on need. I've argued as much each season The outlier being QB. If you don't have a QB, find one should be priority #1 - so that you don't end up over drafting...Cody Kessler.
$6.75 guaranteed over 3 years for him. They'll cut him next year with a $1.75 cap hit. I would've taken that gamble if I were them. They'll always be within striking distance of a top prospect, so whats another year?
$6.75 guaranteed over 3 years for him. They'll cut him next year with a $1.75 cap hit. I would've taken that gamble if I were them. They'll always be within striking distance of a top prospect, so whats another year?
2 years, sorry.
RE: Why don't we give Hue Jackson and company some time
To see what they can do. Coleman had a great game yesterday. Way too many franchises fail when they take a QB early when they cannot surround that player with the supporting cast they need.
Which franchises have failed after drafting a good QB in the first round?
In not suggesting you draft on need. I've argued as much each season The outlier being QB. If you don't have a QB, find one should be priority #1 - so that you don't end up over drafting...Cody Kessler.
Whereas I think QB is the last position you draft for need at. Because, particularly with high picks, you're basically committing to a course with that QB over the next 5 or so years. QB decisions are franchise-direction movers, and you cant force a pick like that even if your need is huge.
but Coleman will be a great pick for them. Did you see the 2nd TD yesterday? The guy is an explosive and very strong runner. He'll be a TD machine and impact player for years.
RE: RE: Whether they were right or not on Wentz is immaterial
They are building for the long term, and if they didn't love Goff or Wentz, trading down could yield better dividends than forcing the pick.
Jackson really liked Kessler. While the third round may have been early for him, I think you have to keep a little perspective there. They did trade way down in Round Three before taking him. And even if his ceiling really is "game manager/solid career backup" as advertised, getting that with the 93rd pick isn't bad value. The upside of Kessler playing so soon is that the Browns will get a thorough read on him before the 2017 Draft, when they will probably have their pick of what should be a deeper QB class. The downside is that he's stepping into a dumpster fire that has already broken two veteran QBs, when even Jackson has said he's not remotely ready.
Cleveland's true head-scratchers came at the bottom of the fourth round. Kindred and DeValve have the look of "Moneyball" picks, since they don't appear to have been on anyone's radar that early. Contrarianism is fine, but the edge a team get by swimming against the tide is that they can, in theory, draft players later than they have them graded. The Browns may have thrown away that edge by sticking rigidly to their own board. Then again, maybe the Browns graded both players in the top 100, and considered them steals already at 129 and 138. Besides, the 129th and 138th picks are basically dart-throws anyway.
RE: Why don't we give Hue Jackson and company some time
To see what they can do. Coleman had a great game yesterday. Way too many franchises fail when they take a QB early when they cannot surround that player with the supporting cast they need. I do not see anything wrong with what the Browns did in the draft. It is hard to change a losing culture like that and it sure as hell isn't happening over night. You have to give them a chance.
I agree with this. They started something like 14 rookies in the first week. Seems like they made a decision to wait on a QB and build the team first. I am not saying they are on the right track, it is just that we don't know in the first year of a complete rebuild.
Seemed LA picked the hometown boy instead of bettrr playrt. Wentz will be a good QB if he kerps away from those crazy hits. He will learn how to avoid them. I believe the Eagles got their longterm QB.
If you can't trust your scouts, then what have you got? You have a baseball guy running your operations.
Disaster.
That was a good trade for the Browns. I would not have put all my eggs in the Wentz basket. They got more bodies in and several extra premium picks -- an extra 1, 2, and 3. And then with another trade they got another 2 and a 3. All for not taking a QB they didnt love.
I did not like the top of this draft at all.
Gotta feel they'll be picking another QB high next spring.
That was a good trade for the Browns. I would not have put all my eggs in the Wentz basket. They got more bodies in and several extra premium picks -- an extra 1, 2, and 3. And then with another trade they got another 2 and a 3. All for not taking a QB they didnt love.
I did not like the top of this draft at all.
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
If you can't trust your scouts, then what have you got? You have a baseball guy running your operations.
Disaster.
it's jibe, not jive, soul brother.
The Browns have issues so I do not see an issue with them stockpiling picks to play the numbers game while, at the same time, bringing in new players that haven't been part of the losing culture.
Quote:
The point is, the Browns fired their scouts just before the draft because their reports didn't jive with what the brain trust wanted.
If you can't trust your scouts, then what have you got? You have a baseball guy running your operations.
Disaster.
it's jibe, not jive, soul brother.
For someone who has trouble spelling "dog," you've sure got a lot to say.
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
Yes, they dont have a QB. Does that mean they have to take one at #2? Of course not. Drafting for need is a huge mistake. They'll pick high again this year, and can take a QB that the current management has had a fair chance to scout for a full year.
Also, I could just as easily argue that this is the umpteenth time the Browns have gone into a season with a borderline NFL roster. And if you look at it that way, getting the extra picks fills a need.
Quote:
Except, this will be the upteenth time the Browns go into a season without a competent QB. Anyone can accumulate draft picks. At some point you got to settle down your franchise with a guy at the helm who's going to be there.
And you don't stop trying simply because you've failed in the past.
Yes, they dont have a QB. Does that mean they have to take one at #2? Of course not. Drafting for need is a huge mistake. They'll pick high again this year, and can take a QB that the current management has had a fair chance to scout for a full year.
Also, I could just as easily argue that this is the umpteenth time the Browns have gone into a season with a borderline NFL roster. And if you look at it that way, getting the extra picks fills a need.
In not suggesting you draft on need. I've argued as much each season The outlier being QB. If you don't have a QB, find one should be priority #1 - so that you don't end up over drafting...Cody Kessler.
$6.75 guaranteed over 3 years for him. They'll cut him next year with a $1.75 cap hit. I would've taken that gamble if I were them. They'll always be within striking distance of a top prospect, so whats another year?
Quote:
The RG3 thing is more of a red flag to me
$6.75 guaranteed over 3 years for him. They'll cut him next year with a $1.75 cap hit. I would've taken that gamble if I were them. They'll always be within striking distance of a top prospect, so whats another year?
2 years, sorry.
In not suggesting you draft on need. I've argued as much each season The outlier being QB. If you don't have a QB, find one should be priority #1 - so that you don't end up over drafting...Cody Kessler.
Whereas I think QB is the last position you draft for need at. Because, particularly with high picks, you're basically committing to a course with that QB over the next 5 or so years. QB decisions are franchise-direction movers, and you cant force a pick like that even if your need is huge.
Quote:
The point is, the Browns fired their scouts just before the draft because their reports didn't jive with what the brain trust wanted.
If you can't trust your scouts, then what have you got? You have a baseball guy running your operations.
Disaster.
it's jibe, not jive, soul brother.
It's jive, whitebread. Jive means tio agree; jibe means to change course.
Quote:
In comment 13131180 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
The point is, the Browns fired their scouts just before the draft because their reports didn't jive with what the brain trust wanted.
If you can't trust your scouts, then what have you got? You have a baseball guy running your operations.
Disaster.
it's jibe, not jive, soul brother.
For someone who has trouble spelling "dog," you've sure got a lot to say.
Lol
Jackson really liked Kessler. While the third round may have been early for him, I think you have to keep a little perspective there. They did trade way down in Round Three before taking him. And even if his ceiling really is "game manager/solid career backup" as advertised, getting that with the 93rd pick isn't bad value. The upside of Kessler playing so soon is that the Browns will get a thorough read on him before the 2017 Draft, when they will probably have their pick of what should be a deeper QB class. The downside is that he's stepping into a dumpster fire that has already broken two veteran QBs, when even Jackson has said he's not remotely ready.
Cleveland's true head-scratchers came at the bottom of the fourth round. Kindred and DeValve have the look of "Moneyball" picks, since they don't appear to have been on anyone's radar that early. Contrarianism is fine, but the edge a team get by swimming against the tide is that they can, in theory, draft players later than they have them graded. The Browns may have thrown away that edge by sticking rigidly to their own board. Then again, maybe the Browns graded both players in the top 100, and considered them steals already at 129 and 138. Besides, the 129th and 138th picks are basically dart-throws anyway.
I agree with this. They started something like 14 rookies in the first week. Seems like they made a decision to wait on a QB and build the team first. I am not saying they are on the right track, it is just that we don't know in the first year of a complete rebuild.
Speaking of can't get it right, Couch? You mean Weeden.