As Eric from BBI posted about the QBs in another thread this morning, "Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing."
The Browns know that ultimately picking the right QB is a crapshoot. Some of these guys will pan out, others will bust. Why would they pick one first, then risk Barkley not being there at #4?
The smart play is to take Barkley at #1, then at #4 pick their highest rated QB still left on the board.
And this is just a few things that are considered when taking a franchise defining QB.
Its not just.. oh well it doesnt matter.. we'll take which ever of the remaining guys who are highly rated left on the board..
If your Cleveland who hasnt had a consistent starting QB since BERNIE KOSAR and has had 28 different starting QB's since then.. they NEED to get the BEST choice for the position.. not the THIRD choice for the position
There have been strong reports they pick Darnold, some reports they pick Allen, and some that they pick Mayfield. If they are torn on all the top QB prospects, then they can wait till #4.
It's always been Darnold. Browns will leak it tomorrow is my guess.
Good one! Actually why would they take an RB if they want a QB? If you want a QB and you have the #1 oick, why screw around, just take who you want. But then again it's like you said up top...
This is not the same old Browns. They have John Dorsey as the GM now.Someone that actually KNOWS what they are doing
Do we have another top 5 pick?
Also, they have plenty of assets to move up to assure Barkley if they so choose.
Ha, what bunker are you locked in?
He's the consensus best player in the draft by most.
If they do select Barkley #1, increases chances Giants get offered "king's ransom" for #2 pick immediately after.
Quote:
is moronic. The browns don't care about Barkley. I doubt they select him at 4. the only people obsessed with Barkley are on this board.
Ha, what bunker are you locked in?
He's the consensus best player in the draft by most.
Pshaw. I can point to two analysts who don't even rate him as the top RB in the class. My bet is the browns deal the 4 pick to Buffalo.
Quote:
In comment 13930112 firedbytheboss said:
Quote:
is moronic. The browns don't care about Barkley. I doubt they select him at 4. the only people obsessed with Barkley are on this board.
Ha, what bunker are you locked in?
He's the consensus best player in the draft by most.
Pshaw. I can point to two analysts who don't even rate him as the top RB in the class. My bet is the browns deal the 4 pick to Buffalo.
2 whole analysts?
Ewwww.
combine stats are basically identical except for the fact landry crushed chubb in the 3 cone drill (6.88 v. 7.37) and the 20yd shuttle (4.19 v. 4.41)
chubb played 40 games in college and had 54.5 tackles for loss and 25 sacks
landry played 38 games in college and had 48 tackles for loss and 25 sacks
The Browns should be smart enough to realize that ANYONE'S pre-draft analysis of the QBs is far from perfect (just look at how many top QBs bust). NO ONE knows which QB will be the best!
Ultimately, the Giants havent made a good decision in years and it seems they're going to make another poor one when they waste the 2nd pick on a RB. Seems like a bad decision being made to appease Eli's feelings after fan backlash.
The Browns should be smart enough to realize that ANYONE'S pre-draft analysis of the QBs is far from perfect (just look at how many top QBs bust). NO ONE knows which QB will be the best!
So that's the solution? Everyone sucks at picking QBs so just roll the dice and take a 3rd QB left? They MUST have a guy they like above the others. Even if they're wrong, why have scouts if that's their approach? Just look at the draft guide and see who the top 4 QBs are take the remaining one. The most important position in football. OK
If they do that, they risk losing their QB because NYG and NYJ probably both go QB there.
The Browns need a quarterback.
They have needed a quarterback for decades. They aren't going to risk losing out on their guy for the sake of getting a great running back.
My money is on them taking Darnold. Because if that's the guy they covet, and they don't take him @ 1, they aren't getting him. He won't be there anymore @ 4.
Brown could take Barkley at #1 and
they can trade #4 for Giants #2
They would get both their QB of future and best player in draft ..
Brown could take Barkley at #1 and
they can trade #4 for Giants #2
They would get both their QB of future and best player in draft ..
What if the Giants don't want to trade back? Now they're stuck likely with the 3rd QB. Dumb move
Quote:
In comment 13930112 firedbytheboss said:
Quote:
is moronic. The browns don't care about Barkley. I doubt they select him at 4. the only people obsessed with Barkley are on this board.
Ha, what bunker are you locked in?
He's the consensus best player in the draft by most.
Pshaw. I can point to two analysts who don't even rate him as the top RB in the class. My bet is the browns deal the 4 pick to Buffalo.
The guys you smoke weed with in your mom's basement are not analysts.
Bush was Barkely 15 years ago. And while Bush was not a bad player, he never lived up to the hype.
Then, throw in that RBs have a much higher injury rate and much shorter careers than QBs, and you realize a RB is just as much of a risk as a QB
Vince Young, Matt Leinart, and Jay Cutler were the 3 QB's taken in the first round of that draft. Cutler had a couple of solid years, but for the most part, it was an awful and disappointing QB class. Young and Leinart were both busts.
In hindsight, Bush wasn't a bad pick at all.
Bush was Barkely 15 years ago. And while Bush was not a bad player, he never lived up to the hype.
Then, throw in that RBs have a much higher injury rate and much shorter careers than QBs, and you realize a RB is just as much of a risk as a QB
He wasn't though. Different players, playing with different talent around them. Barkley is actually a bellcow who can handle getting hit and still has close to top end speed with elite pass catching abilities. He's also a far better blocker.
Arguing whether Barkley is worth it at 2 overall is one thing but comparing him to Bush isn't.