Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
All of the above, sorta. Like I've been advocating around here...draft 2 QBs this year within the first 4 rounds. I don't want to act like a scout (at this point) and say who where...but QB at 1.4 and in the 3rd or 4th makes alot of sense to me right now. Keep Hoyer and get rid of the garbage.
That is the key, if their is even a QB in this class who is thought to be a legitimate franchise QB.
Bob,
How many bookmarks are you going to make me create?!?!
Bob, i'm certainly not defending any of their picks, but i'm not really seeing any obvious opportunities that they passed up.I appreciate the regional input, amnesiac.I think where we are misconnecting, is I seem to define high first round pick differently, and don't put the two 1.22 picks in that category, and you do. Put it it this way, maybe in a different year, a higher pick (I mean, higher than 1.22) would have solved the problem for a decade, than CLE wouldn't have needed to spend multiple 1.22 picks years later for a problem that would have already been solved?
So while the high pick on a QB every year was amusing, it wouldn't be necessary. Again, we are defining HIGH pick differently. From my perspective, Couch was the only high first round pick on a QB in a decade and a half. You are going from that extreme, to the opposite end of the spectrum, and 15 in 15 years. Maybe there is some latitude in there between the diametrically opposed possibilities?Like two high picks, or three in a decade and a half? It is true that under the old salary cap, busting on Couch set the franchise back a while. There were dire salary cap repercussions to a high bust (and they had a few). But after a buffer or interval, I looked at other drafts where the Browns had a high, top 10 pick.
Not to cherry pick, but here are some that fit the criteria.
2004 - KW2 at 1.6, division nemesis PIT took Roethlisberger at 1.11. This really hurt, because it is a double whammy. CLE doesn't get him, and PIT does. But he was a MAC guy, maybe not a household name at the time, that was just one example. I'm not doing anything crazy from the psychic school of scouting like, you could have gotten Brady in the sixth! Just looking for QBs in the vicinity of where CLE made a non-QB pick in a given year.
2005 - Braylon "Brick Hands" Edwards at 1.3, after Alex Smith at 1.1, the next QB wasn't taken until green room loser but NFL hero Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers at the time, was a wild card, with some thinking he could go near the top of the draft, but once he got past the teams that might have had a QB need, he went into full blown free fall mode. I don't think it would have been called a heinous reach if CLE had taken him. Ironically, GB of all teams took him when they had Favre, who would play for like three more years (and it could have been more). Obviously they were looking ahead, and their foresight and patience paid huge dividends down the road. Not picking on CLE, drafted that low (lower than Quinn and Weedon), MANY teams were, and still are, kicking themselves.
2006 - Didn't have a top 10 pick, took Kamerion Wembley at 1.13. Speaking of being proactive, DEN did move from 1.15 to 1.11 to draft Cutler. Could CLE have made such a move?
2007 - Serial Pro Bowler Joe Thomas at 1.3 and Quinn (we know where he went by now). Terrible year for QBs. Bad intersection of a high pick (1.3) with brutal class.
2008 - No pick (traded 1.22 to DAL to draft Felix Jones?)
2009 - Alex Mack 1.21, not a high pick, and no obvious QBs in striking range of here, just for the record.
2010 - Joe Haden 1.7, another bad QB class.
2011 - Phil Taylor 1.21, I have focused on first round, but after a few potential candidates in the first two years looked at above, but not a lot of obvious viable options since 2005 (not counting a speculative trade up for Cutler in 2006), with year after year of a high pick but poor QB class or good QB option/s high but a mismatched low pick, maybe my method is too constrained and limited. If we expand to the second round, Dalton and Kaepernick were avail with the 2.3 and 2.4.
2012 - Trent Richardson 1.3 (after trade up from 1.4 - OOF!) and Weedon (we know that slot, too - pop quiz later). The only observation, and you guys must know the details better than me, but maybe Tannehill could have been a possibility, not sure if a trade down was an option. Maybe he could have done better in CLE than MIA with a superior OL, and throwing to Gordon and Cameron?
2013 - Barkevius Mingo 1.6, not a great QB class, had just got Weedon the year before, they may have been thinking about Bridgewater and Manziel already?
BTW Amnesiac, do you like any of the QBs in the top three prospects. Enough to take at 1.4, or possibly trade up? I've seen some Browns fans advocate waiting to a later round, possibly roll with Hoyer. It just seems like we have read this novel before (everybody dies in the end). Not sure if the QBs have the right stuff (I like the top three, not sure about Carr), but as we have seen through this exercise, sometimes a half decade can go by where either... A) CLE doesn't have a high first, B) bad QB class or C) both. So 2014 could be a kind of convergence where the opportunity, inclination, pick and prospect all come together, FINALLY.
Definitely not advocating a positional reach. But what if a case is more ambiguous, where they are pretty sure that one is franchise caliber, but there is some doubt (a little, not a lot). Maybe they pass, and McCarron is drafted in day three? CLE than decides to defer to 2015 on a first QB, but finishes 8-8 in 2014, and assuming they don't have two first round picks next year, lacks the ammo to move up and misses out AGAIN. Meanwhile, Hoyer and McCarron prove to be backup-types and not starter material. Oops! Now it is wait until 2016. But maybe that isn't such a great class, and you finish 8-8 again, so it wouldn't really make a difference anyways if there are 1-2 top prospects, as they don't have an extra first to move up than either. There is always 2017 or 2018?How many bookmarks are you going to make me create?!?!
I know you know I know that.
You could be right. I think you are talking deserved value, not whether they are artificially pushed up due to demand exceeding supply.
amnesiac,Bob, i'm certainly not defending any of their picks, but i'm not really seeing any obvious opportunities that they passed up.I appreciate the regional input, amnesiac.I think where we are misconnecting, is I seem to define high first round pick differently, and don't put the two 1.22 picks in that category, and you do. Put it it this way, maybe in a different year, a higher pick (I mean, higher than 1.22) would have solved the problem for a decade, than CLE wouldn't have needed to spend multiple 1.22 picks years later for a problem that would have already been solved?
So while the high pick on a QB every year was amusing, it wouldn't be necessary. Again, we are defining HIGH pick differently. From my perspective, Couch was the only high first round pick on a QB in a decade and a half. You are going from that extreme, to the opposite end of the spectrum, and 15 in 15 years. Maybe there is some latitude in there between the diametrically opposed possibilities?
Not to cherry pick, but here are some that fit the criteria.
2004 - KW2 at 1.6, division nemesis PIT took Roethlisberger at 1.11. This really hurt, because it is a double whammy. CLE doesn't get him, and PIT does. But he was a MAC guy, maybe not a household name at the time, that was just one example. I'm not doing anything crazy from the psychic school of scouting like, you could have gotten Brady in the sixth! Just looking for QBs in the vicinity of where CLE made a non-QB pick in a given year.
2005 - Braylon "Brick Hands" Edwards at 1.3, after Alex Smith at 1.1, the next QB wasn't taken until green room loser but NFL hero Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers at the time, was a wild card, with some thinking he could go near the top of the draft, but once he got past the teams that might have had a QB need, he went into full blown free fall mode. I don't think it would have been called a heinous reach if CLE had taken him. Ironically, GB of all teams took him when they had Favre, who would play for like three more years (and it could have been more). Obviously they were looking ahead, and their foresight and patience paid huge dividends down the road. Not picking on CLE, drafted that low (lower than Quinn and Weedon), MANY teams were, and still are, kicking themselves.
2006 - Didn't have a top 10 pick, took Kamerion Wembley at 1.13. Speaking of being proactive, DEN did move from 1.15 to 1.11 to draft Cutler. Could CLE have made such a move?
2007 - Serial Pro Bowler Joe Thomas at 1.3 and Quinn (we know where he went by now). Terrible year for QBs. Bad intersection of a high pick (1.3) with brutal class.
2008 - No pick (traded 1.22 to DAL to draft Felix Jones?)
2009 - Alex Mack 1.21, not a high pick, and no obvious QBs in striking range of here, just for the record.
2010 - Joe Haden 1.7, another bad QB class.
2011 - Phil Taylor 1.21, I have focused on first round, but after a few potential candidates in the first two years looked at above, but not a lot of obvious viable options since 2005 (not counting a speculative trade up for Cutler in 2006), with year after year of a high pick but poor QB class or good QB option/s high but a mismatched low pick, maybe my method is too constrained and limited. If we expand to the second round, Dalton and Kaepernick were avail with the 2.3 and 2.4.
2012 - Trent Richardson 1.3 (after trade up from 1.4 - OOF!) and Weedon (we know that slot, too - pop quiz later). The only observation, and you guys must know the details better than me, but maybe Tannehill could have been a possibility, not sure if a trade down was an option. Maybe he could have done better in CLE than MIA with a superior OL, and throwing to Gordon and Cameron?
2013 - Barkevius Mingo 1.6, not a great QB class, had just got Weedon the year before, they may have been thinking about Bridgewater and Manziel already?
BTW Amnesiac, do you like any of the QBs in the top three prospects. Enough to take at 1.4, or possibly trade up? I've seen some Browns fans advocate waiting to a later round, possibly roll with Hoyer. It just seems like we have read this novel before (everybody dies in the end). Not sure if the QBs have the right stuff (I like the top three, not sure about Carr), but as we have seen through this exercise, sometimes a half decade can go by where either... A) CLE doesn't have a high first, B) bad QB class or C) both. So 2014 could be a kind of convergence where the opportunity, inclination, pick and prospect all come together, FINALLY.
in retrospect, sure, Rodgers or Roethlisberger would've been great, maybe even Tannehill. but i don't think any of those picks would've been obvious at the time.
i philosophically beleive in always taking BPA unless there are two players that are ranked very similarly, in which case positional importance does come into play.
i have not scouted this class very closely yet, but at first blush, i'm not seeing a franchise type guy in the group.
Its early but from what we've heard we know the following:
Very interesting. QB on that team whether Hoyer or someone they draft would be pretty valuable w/ Gordon and Watkins.
You simply said:I know you know I know that.
The thought did cross my mind, but how what I said could relate to that thought (don't need an extra first to move up...) may not be obvious, so I could have made it explicit, and while doing that, expand on it a little, thanks for the prompting. To the extent CLE has a team not as bad in 2014 as their record was in 2013, but not good enough to make the playoffs (probably a realistic aspiration initially), and perhaps in some 8-8 kind of limbo, that would put the team further away from the top than the 2014 1.4, of course. Coupled with the lack of the extra first ammo (albeit a relatively low one), could be more likely to blow up a larger chunk of a future draft with the necessity to package multiple lower picks, like seconds and thirds, etc. Including just one extra pick (albeit a first) NOW would be less disruptive to the future by being both a cheaper move and one which maximally retains future picks. This is all assuming there was a QB worth such a move, if not, obviously that renders this moot, and recommends waiting or finding some other means (low pick, free agency, trade?).
You make alot of good points. If there is a franchise guy this year then yes it's probably best to see what it will take to acquire him for sure. I don't think the Browns are going to be doing that though this year.
Agree. It's not worth the risk when you could get a possibly better QB in the 3rd round.
What makes you think the front office is doing individual positional coaching hires and shoving them down Pettine's throat?
Well, I never said that.
The only opening left now is the WR coach I think unless we already have someone in the bag like we had with Shanahan.
I don't think the board has been set yet but Shanahan doesn't seem a great fit for Johnny Manziel.
wr is deep and if Mack walks as I think he will our former strong ol now looks more like a liability. If those are the options I trend more towards Jake Matthews then look for an Allen Robinson or Jordan Matthews type later.
So you think we had no clue who we would hire Shanahan before hiring positional coaches?
it limits oc options if they don't like the positional coaching hires, but apparently I have mental issues so there's that too.So you think we had no clue who we would hire Shanahan before hiring positional coaches?
You think we hired positional coaches without having Shanahan's approval?
You are not a cynic Mac.
Seriously you have mental issues dude. Get help.
the x in the shanahan offense is very heavily utilized. Gordon's value is still directly tied to his drug habit.
So you think Shanahan was interviewing assistants before he was hired? You are kind of an out-of-your mind homer.So you think we had no clue who we would hire Shanahan before hiring positional coaches?
You think we hired positional coaches without having Shanahan's approval?
You are not a cynic Mac.
Seriously you have mental issues dude. Get help.
the voice of reason is being kind.So you think Shanahan was interviewing assistants before he was hired? You are kind of an out-of-your mind homer.So you think we had no clue who we would hire Shanahan before hiring positional coaches?
You think we hired positional coaches without having Shanahan's approval?
You are not a cynic Mac.
Seriously you have mental issues dude. Get help.
I believe those Shanny bad interview rumors from earlier this week were bogus. They were definitely disputed. I don't think we should take that report as fact. Personally I think it's much more believable that Browns/Shanny agents have been negotiating for the past few days while the team kept in touch with Shanny regarding other hires.
I don't have a theory, everything about this offseason has just been... awkward. You spinning it otherwise while predictable is just an attempt to fit your positive narrative.
when Vic Carruci, another eternal optimist is reporting these rumors I think they carry a lot more legitimacy. Yeah, we don't know for sure, but that doesn't sit well.
