What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Cleveland Browns (20 Viewers)

Bracie Smathers said:
Not if they have a QB ranked higher than other teams and can select them with the 4th pick.

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2018/02/browns_scot_mccloughan_doesnt.html
Click to expand...
NFL GM's don't run it like fantasy owners.  There is always "one best" and that's who they will take. 

Any article you cite is pure speculation, if not total garbage.  There's no such thing as a guy "rising" or "sliding" or teams "cooling" on a guy in February.  NFL people aren't about to tell us what they really think, and if they did it would be with the intent to obfuscate what they really think.  There is no benefit to them to be truthful in any capacity outside their own building and likely they keep some level of secrecy from many inside it.  There isn't one piece of Internet "journalism" that can be considered authoritative on any player's value or perceived value.  You're kidding yourself if you believe otherwise.

 
voiceofunreason said:
How nice that the Browns know what every other team in the league thinks. And they know that nobody will trade to 1.03 to snipe the guy they want. 

In all seriousness, you do understand how stupid it is to wait right? 
Click to expand...
Well, it's stupid from the point of taking a QB and not getting the best one, if that's your sole objective (something many Browns fans are focused on).  On the other hand, if your objective goes beyond that position, and you believe there are several available who fit the bill, it might be better to trade out of #1.  What you are comparing is the perceived value of the haul (for trading out) against the perceived difference in QBs.   How would you feel if they took Darnold #1 and then Mayfield becomes all-world for Denver?  Are you willing to say that it's impossible / very unlikely?  

 
If your plan is QB, you take your top QB even if you feel he only has a 1% chance to be better than your 3rd rated QB (talking about this draft specifically).  

Sickeningly obvious

 
ghostguy123 said:
If your plan is QB, you take your top QB even if you feel he only has a 1% chance to be better than your 3rd rated QB (talking about this draft specifically).  

Sickeningly obvious
Click to expand...
Really?  If QB1 get you a season of 3600 yds, 25 TDs, 15 ints, and QB2 gets you 3700 yds, 25 TDs and 16 ints,  THAT DIFFERENCE is worth more than an additional 1st rounder in 2019?

I'd suggest it isn't quite so obvious.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
And  when Mayfield goes at 1.02 or some one trades to 1.03 to get him, then what?

the Browns would be total fools not to take their highest rates QB at 1.01 - assuming they are interested in taking a QB.
Click to expand...
It's very conceivable that Darnold, Rosen and Mayfield could be the 1st 3 picks. Rumors are that Buffalo has their eye on Rosen and that they have the ammo with their 2 late 1st rd picks plus their 2019 1st to jump into the fray. If the browns id their guy, go get him. It would be a publicity nightmare if they get stuck with their hands in their pockets getting cute with the top 3 QB's off the board

 
:rolleyes:   

Wouldn't mind that. Kizer won't be a starter very long in the league. Kessler wasn't terrible in 2016 and hardly played last year. But he won't become a 'franchise' Qb.  He could be a decent backup. They really don't have a legit starter. 2 guys = 2 more shots at finding The Guy.

They won't do that though

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it makes 100% more sense to just run with Kizer as their #3 QB and hope he comes along than drafting multiple QBs high, or multiple QBs at all.  

 
Latest Rumor Mill article has CLE going after Bradford in FA as their bridge QB.

SI predicts Sam Bradford to sign with the Browns

If Bradford can stay healthy, he's probably the best FA QB in the market.  If they do pick up Bradford, I still want to see a QB at 1 in the draft.  CLE has the opportunity to pick exactly the franchise QB they want in April.  They need to pull the trigger on their top pick at 1.1 and let the rest of the draft fall where it may.  As soon as they try to get cute by trading the 1.1, you know the first 3 picks will go Darnold, Rosen, and Mayfield - arguably the top three QBs in this class.  CLE would most likely lose out on the top 3 QBs in this class, and most likely the top 3 QBs on their board.  Too risky to play it too cute.

 
If they trade the #1, it means they weren't planning on taking a QB at 1 or 4 anyway.

I am perfectly fine signing Bradford and drafting QB at #1.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My dream scenario if trading pick 1 down to 5 or 6, one of the QBs falling to 4, and trading down from pick 4 while staying top 10.  I think we end up with two excellent players at say 5 and 9 or whatever, along with a nice chunk of future picks (plus probably a couple more 2nds this year).

This of course is my dream scenario if we were to sign Cousins

edit.....if trading down from 4, heck, maybe even down to 6.  If not would have to be a further drop to either mid 1st or with Buffalo for their picks and more.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
daveR said:
Well, it's stupid from the point of taking a QB and not getting the best one, if that's your sole objective (something many Browns fans are focused on).  On the other hand, if your objective goes beyond that position, and you believe there are several available who fit the bill, it might be better to trade out of #1.  What you are comparing is the perceived value of the haul (for trading out) against the perceived difference in QBs.   How would you feel if they took Darnold #1 and then Mayfield becomes all-world for Denver?  Are you willing to say that it's impossible / very unlikely?  
Click to expand...
Yeah the Browns have had qb problems for roughly 35 years. Maybe that is where they should start. I can't believe anyone can't see this. I mean there's a reason qbs are traded for a ransom. Man, what is going on in this thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
voiceofunreason said:
Yeah the Browns have had qb problems for roughly 35 years. Maybe that is where they should start. I can't believe anyone can't see this. I mean there's a reason qbs are traded for a ransom. Man, what is going on in this thread.
Click to expand...
Apparently you're one of those people that believes taking a player at 1.1 makes him better.  Fine.

 
voiceofunreason said:
Apparently you think letting other teams take the top qbs and settling for whoever is left is a smart move. 
Click to expand...
First, I apologize for taking a shot at you personally.  That's not my style and I regret it.

On the topic, I think I said initially that IF THEY ARE CLOSE, it's not stupid to consider doing other things with the top pick.  To that, I add this: if they are that close, they have equal chances of busting.  

Regardless, whatever they do, I will be reduced to watching & hoping they get it right, even if they decide the QBs on the roster are sufficient.  

 
ghostguy123 said:
I would be rather skeptical of a guy who all of a sudden became a really good pass rusher in the senior bowl practices and game.  Did he really truly just "figure it out", or did he spend a month or two working his ### off to try and get drafted high for a contract when he normally isnt a hard worker?  Just seems weird.  I am never a fan of the late risers who seem to shoot up out of nowhere.  I can't come up with any specific examples offhand, but it seems those kinds of guys tend to not pan out at a high rate.
Click to expand...
Davenport was a beast in C-USA. That's how he got invited to the Senior Bowl.

He rose during the week I believe due to having to adjust to the level of competition.

C-USA isn't a power 5 and not everyone in that league has really good O linemen to hone a game against.

17.5 tackles for loss and 8.5 sacks with 30 solo tackles.

Bradley Chubb had 23 tackles for loss and 10 sacks with 39 solo tackles.

Chubb should have been playing against better competition too.

I think Davenport is going to be really good, but I'd still take Chubb 1st.

 
The Man With No Name said:
:rolleyes:   

Wouldn't mind that. Kizer won't be a starter very long in the league. Kessler wasn't terrible in 2016 and hardly played last year. But he won't become a 'franchise' Qb.  He could be a decent backup. They really don't have a legit starter. 2 guys = 2 more shots at finding The Guy.

They won't do that though
Click to expand...
To you, what makes someone a "franchise" QB?  Seriously.  What's the level?  Is it top-tier (Brady, Rodgers)?  Is it top-half (Smith, Rivers, Dalton)?  Is it "competent" (Carr, Taylor)?  It means different things for different people.

 
ghostguy123 said:
So, gotta ask, how on Earth are they supposed to know how the other teams rank the QBs, and also which teams are discussing trading up for a QB, and also how THOSE teams ranks the QBs?

Quick easy answer, they don't.  
Click to expand...
Name the one single player that we must absolutely get with the top pick, the generational player that we simply cannot pass on?

Their isn't a generational QB in this draft that we must absolutely have or they would have been identified.  Their isn't a Myles Garrett non-QB head-and-shoulders above the pack.

If Dorsey's top three QBs are ranked together without one widely ranked above the rest he has two top four picks and can trade the top pick for more than what it would take to get the third pick then you don't need to know how other teams rank the QBs.

How on earth does everyone assume Dorsey has one guy ranked so far above the others that he absolutely MUST take him with the top pick?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bracie Smathers said:
Why on earth doesn't everyone assume Dorsey has one guy ranked so far above the others that he absolutely MUST take him with the top pick?
Click to expand...
FYP - Dorsey's has been a successful GM for much longer than you or I.  He has a talented staff to help assess and analyze every player in the draft.  How can someone assume he doesn't have a guy ranked far above the others - regardless of position.  I wouldn't be surprised if he had his to 5 ranked at each position, with a cumulative ranking of the top 2 of every position that is fluidly changing as new information comes forward.  That is what I expect a successful GM to do with his free time.  If he doesn't have a top guy ranked and identified in the upcoming draft, then Jimmy hired the wrong GM candidate! (FYI - I think Dorsey is the right guy for the job.)

 
Peak said:
FYP - Dorsey's has been a successful GM for much longer than you or I.  He has a talented staff to help assess and analyze every player in the draft.  How can someone assume he doesn't have a guy ranked far above the others - regardless of position.  I wouldn't be surprised if he had his to 5 ranked at each position, with a cumulative ranking of the top 2 of every position that is fluidly changing as new information comes forward.  That is what I expect a successful GM to do with his free time.  If he doesn't have a top guy ranked and identified in the upcoming draft, then Jimmy hired the wrong GM candidate! (FYI - I think Dorsey is the right guy for the job.)
Click to expand...
I'm not assuming anything but it seems that their are common assumptions stated as near facts.

That we have one guy

That if we pass taking a guy at the top and trade that automatically we're fools

That we can't possibly trade the top pick and trade up from the 4th to 3rd for less than what we'd get by trading the top pick

I start out by saying that IF Dorsey, not that this is an absolute like many who say it isn't possible come in with.  How is and IF statement an assumption?  IF/THEN is basic binary root logic far from an assumption because it makes for more than one absolute way of seeing things.  

But if you say it is IMPOSSIBLE to trade the top pick or you are doomed then yeah, that is basically what the group think assumption is because that is an assumption.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
How on earth does everyone assume Dorsey has one guy ranked so far above the others that he absolutely MUST take him with the top pick?
Click to expand...
Drafting a QB isn't an exact science in the first place, of course, but if after spending the offseason examining all three prospects he doesn't see one that he (and his staff) thinks has the best shot at becoming a star, then I'd say the team is in real trouble. If he truly felt all of top 4 QBs were average and interchangeable then he shouldn't take one at all - but since this is supposedly a strong class that doesn't seem very realistic. Any GM that needs a QB so badly and punts on the decision because he can't decide which one he likes best should not be a GM.

I'm not trying to slam the Browns here, but their recent past of passing on guys like Wentz and Watson should put what I'm saying into perceptive. Heck, I hope they don't take a QB at all so one of the top 3 could fall to the Jets. If the Jets were in the Browns' position, I could not imagined being ok with them not taking their favorite guy at 1.

Unfortunately for the Jets' to get their choice they would need to give up too many other assets that they really need to build a team around him - but even if they did make a bold move to move up I'd still respect the position and be happy they were bold enough to address the most important position in the NFL.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
That if we pass taking a guy at the top and trade that automatically we're fools
Click to expand...
If they received an outrageous package, I do not think people would be as harsh on the decision. What I'm reading here is people saying "if they pass on a QB at 1, and then pick a QB at 4 they are fools". That's my position at least.

With that said, even trading out is likely not the right decision - sooner or later you have to grab the impact players at the top of the draft not just constantly collect assets.

 
Interesting dialogue these last few days. With the combine this week I expect it will get even more wild.

If the Browns don't come out of this offseason with a serviceable bridge QB and a rookie with high upside I'm going to be beyond disappointed. I might even finally take my ball and go home. I don't know how you can look at the cap space we have, the draft picks we have, the crop of at least four very promising college kids coming out and a laundry list of veterans available that are markedly better than anything you have on the roster today and not address the one glaring black hole on the team first and foremost.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Drafting a QB isn't an exact science in the first place, of course, but if after spending the offseason examining all three prospects he doesn't see one that he (and his staff) thinks has the best shot at becoming a star, then I'd say the team is in real trouble. If he truly felt all of top 4 QBs were average and interchangeable then he shouldn't take one at all - but since this is supposedly a strong class that doesn't seem very realistic. Any GM that needs a QB so badly and punts on the decision because he can't decide which one he likes best should not be a GM.

I'm not trying to slam the Browns here, but their recent past of passing on guys like Wentz and Watson should put what I'm saying into perceptive. Heck, I hope they don't take a QB at all so one of the top 3 could fall to the Jets. If the Jets were in the Browns' position, I could not imagined being ok with them not taking their favorite guy at 1.

Unfortunately for the Jets' to get their choice they would need to give up too many other assets that they really need to build a team around him - but even if they did make a bold move to move up I'd still respect the position and be happy they were bold enough to address the most important position in the NFL.
Click to expand...
  • That is an assumption based on what?
That his top QBs cannot possibly be ranked close together.  I don't know about Dorsey but I am far from settled on one guy at this time.  

I have only begun to really dig into Rosen's tape and I was hoping to see more but haven't.  I think Rosen's medicals will be huge but we won't have access to that info.

  • The Jets don't hold the top and fourth picks so if they don't land Cousins they would have to pay to move up.  That isn't an assumption.  Fans always moan about a trade up at the time, see Wentz, then they gloat, see Wentz.  
Dr. Octopus said:
If they received an outrageous package, I do not think people would be as harsh on the decision. What I'm reading here is people saying "if they pass on a QB at 1, and then pick a QB at 4 they are fools". That's my position at least.

With that said, even trading out is likely not the right decision - sooner or later you have to grab the impact players at the top of the draft not just constantly collect assets.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have to assume huge compensation if the Browns do two things.

  1. Move down but not too far to assure getting an impact non-QB
  2. Still get one of the QBs ranked close by trading up with Indy to the 3rd pick for less than the trade-down from #1
If they could do that, and it is possible.  Then they would have more options. 

First if they made no trades.  Take one of the QBs at #1 and hope he turns out the best and take impact player #4

If they traded down.  Move #1 for #5 or #6 (gain 2nd this year and 1st next plus lessor future pick)

Trade up from #4 to #3 (late 2nd round pick where Indy gets their guy and extra comp no risk we'd get a QB)

With #5 or #6 pick we'd select one of the four blue chip players of the draft.  Likely Minka or Saquon would be available at #5 or #6.

Scenario 1 with no trades.  QB ranked slight above others and one of the impact non-QBs

Scenario 2 QB who may even be their top ranked QB but at worst would be slightly below the top two guys but they gain a future 1st round pick and get impact non-QB with #5 or #6.

If Dorsey clearly has one QB or non-QB that he absolutely must have then he simply takes them with top pick end of discussion but I think things are more fluid and that we can't assume one guy has broken from the pack.  I don't have any clear cut favorite at this time.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
  • That is an assumption based on what?
Click to expand...
If you want to call it and assumption, it's an assumption based on the reality of what Dorsey is getting paid to do. It's his job to study and analyze college prospects and consult with his scouts. Frankly the fact that you, personally, are not able to separate which QB is the best is irrelevant - you do not have the time, resources or staff that Dorsey does.

Like I said, if Dorsey's position come draft time is "meh, I'll just take whichever QB falls to 4 since no one really knows which one will be the best" then the Browns hired the wrong guy and are in trouble.

Bracie Smathers said:
  •  
  • The Jets don't hold the top and fourth picks so if they don't land Cousins they would have to pay to move up.  That isn't an assumption.  Fans always moan about a trade up at the time, see Wentz, then they gloat, see Wentz.  
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I said. You bolded some of my text, but the part you did not addressed trading up. I do not want to give up the assets that it would take, but if Mac decides that's the best way to go then I can live with it. And like you imply, if it lands a franchise QB then it was well worth it and I hope the Browns are able to get something out of the additional assets they gained.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
If you want to call it and assumption, it's an assumption based on the reality of what Dorsey is getting paid to do. It's his job to study and analyze college prospects and consult with his scouts. Frankly the fact that you, personally, are not able to separate which QB is the best is irrelevant - you do not have the time, resources or staff that Dorsey does.

Like I said, if Dorsey's position come draft time is "meh, I'll just take whichever QB falls to 4 since no one really knows which one will be the best" then the Browns hired the wrong guy and are in trouble.

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I said. You bolded some of my text, but the part you did not addressed trading up. I do not want to give up the assets that it would take, but if Mac decides that's the best way to go then I can live with it. And like you imply, if it lands a franchise QB then it was well worth it and I hope the Browns are able to get something out of the additional assets they gained.
Click to expand...
  • So your assumption is the NFL front offices do the homework and have the top of their boards set in cement before the Combine and that they can't possibly have three QBs at the top of the board ranked close together where one has clearly separated from the pack.  If that is what you are saying I don't agree.
I also don't think he has to be sour on all top three QBs.  He can rank them near equally and it doesn't have to be a selection where he is holding his nose taking medicine.  NFL teams fail all of the time picking QBs in the draft and half fail at the top.  Over two thirds fails past the mid-point of the first round.  The odds are what they are.  Teams picking at the top are dealt the QB class they are dealt.  If one guy is clearly the top guy the it is an easy selection even if the guy fails.  If all three guys are franchise QBs then everyone wins.  More than likely one or more of the top four QBs will fail and it doesn't mean the top guy will succeed or that fourth off the board will fail.

  •  You don't want to give up draft picks.  I completely understand but if you don't get Cousins (I think you will) then your GM has stated he was open to trading up for a QB.  Compensation is what the market will bear and it is not a matter of one team ripping off the other.
Years ago I was on a West coast business trip and we had the weekend off and went to Santa Cruz to watch Pro Beach volleyball and got sunburned in 90 degree weather and decided to go to San Francisco for dinner in beach attire, shorts sandals etc. and then the sun went down.   Bitter cold.  We ran into a shop to buy jackets but we had spent most of our money and only had enough to buy the bottom of the line jackets and I'm looking at flimsy material and making comments on the poor stitch count when the girl behind the counter says.  "Their ain't no $25 Gucci's."  LOL.  She was absolutely right and I was wrong.

If the Jets don't land Cousins they will be looking to move up and their 'ain't no $25 Guccis.'  They will have to pay to move up but I think you will get Cousins.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
  • So your assumption is the NFL front offices do the homework and have the top of their boards set in cement before the Combine and that they can't possibly have three QBs at the top of the board ranked close together where one has clearly separated from the pack.  If that is what you are saying I don't agree.
Click to expand...
Of course not - by the draft they should.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
  • That is an assumption based on what?
That his top QBs cannot possibly be ranked close together.  I don't know about Dorsey but I am far from settled on one guy at this time.  

I have only begun to really dig into Rosen's tape and I was hoping to see more but haven't.  I think Rosen's medicals will be huge but we won't have access to that info.

  • The Jets don't hold the top and fourth picks so if they don't land Cousins they would have to pay to move up.  That isn't an assumption.  Fans always moan about a trade up at the time, see Wentz, then they gloat, see Wentz.  
I don't think you have to assume huge compensation if the Browns do two things.

  1. Move down but not too far to assure getting an impact non-QB
  2. Still get one of the QBs ranked close by trading up with Indy to the 3rd pick for less than the trade-down from #1
If they could do that, and it is possible.  Then they would have more options. 

First if they made no trades.  Take one of the QBs at #1 and hope he turns out the best and take impact player #4

If they traded down.  Move #1 for #5 or #6 (gain 2nd this year and 1st next plus lessor future pick)

Trade up from #4 to #3 (late 2nd round pick where Indy gets their guy and extra comp no risk we'd get a QB)

With #5 or #6 pick we'd select one of the four blue chip players of the draft.  Likely Minka or Saquon would be available at #5 or #6.

Scenario 1 with no trades.  QB ranked slight above others and one of the impact non-QBs

Scenario 2 QB who may even be their top ranked QB but at worst would be slightly below the top two guys but they gain a future 1st round pick and get impact non-QB with #5 or #6.

If Dorsey clearly has one QB or non-QB that he absolutely must have then he simply takes them with top pick end of discussion but I think things are more fluid and that we can't assume one guy has broken from the pack.  I don't have any clear cut favorite at this time.
Click to expand...
You have said so many wild things and strawmanned so many of the posts here that i cant even figure out how to comment on them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dorsey probably doesn't have a #1 QB on his board right now.

Unless they all implode between now and the end of April he probably will though.

My guess would be sometime in early April.

He'll pick him first.

And Josh Allen eats babies.

 
Peak said:
Latest Rumor Mill article has CLE going after Bradford in FA as their bridge QB.

SI predicts Sam Bradford to sign with the Browns

If Bradford can stay healthy, he's probably the best FA QB in the market.  If they do pick up Bradford, I still want to see a QB at 1 in the draft.  CLE has the opportunity to pick exactly the franchise QB they want in April.  They need to pull the trigger on their top pick at 1.1 and let the rest of the draft fall where it may.  As soon as they try to get cute by trading the 1.1, you know the first 3 picks will go Darnold, Rosen, and Mayfield - arguably the top three QBs in this class.  CLE would most likely lose out on the top 3 QBs in this class, and most likely the top 3 QBs on their board.  Too risky to play it too cute.
Click to expand...
Alex Smith is gone.  Cousins doesn't seem plausible.  The backup Philly QB isn't going anywhere.  Dorsey is the guy making the call and Hue isn't calling plays or running his offense so A.J. might price himself close to Bradford who might turn out to be the 'best' FA QB option if Minnesota doesn't sign him.  They can't sign all three.

I thought we'd wind up with Bradford before A.J. won his hearing but the numbers being thrown around on how much it would cost to sigh McCarron are not what I thought it would take.  Bradford was very good when healthy.  I have heard the top QBs will be signed within hours of FA.  It would not surprise or upset me if we wind up with Bradford.

 
daveR said:
Well, it's stupid from the point of taking a QB and not getting the best one, if that's your sole objective (something many Browns fans are focused on).  On the other hand, if your objective goes beyond that position, and you believe there are several available who fit the bill, it might be better to trade out of #1.  What you are comparing is the perceived value of the haul (for trading out) against the perceived difference in QBs.   How would you feel if they took Darnold #1 and then Mayfield becomes all-world for Denver?  Are you willing to say that it's impossible / very unlikely?  
Click to expand...


daveR said:
Really?  If QB1 get you a season of 3600 yds, 25 TDs, 15 ints, and QB2 gets you 3700 yds, 25 TDs and 16 ints,  THAT DIFFERENCE is worth more than an additional 1st rounder in 2019?

I'd suggest it isn't quite so obvious.
Click to expand...
Again, they don't run fantasy teams.  There is a massively disproportional impact a QB has on the team success compared to all the other positions.  They can't just take QB3 and plug him in for 1.8 PPG less and make that up with Barkley's 2.2 PPG.  If they are taking a QB they will have one as their "best" and they will not risk him being sniped in between those picks.  You don't settle at the most important position in all of sports.  If you get the pick wrong so be it but if you trade the pick and and up with RGIII out of it you get run out of the profession.

 
Hankmoody said:
Again, they don't run fantasy teams.  There is a massively disproportional impact a QB has on the team success compared to all the other positions.  They can't just take QB3 and plug him in for 1.8 PPG less and make that up with Barkley's 2.2 PPG.  If they are taking a QB they will have one as their "best" and they will not risk him being sniped in between those picks.  You don't settle at the most important position in all of sports.  If you get the pick wrong so be it but if you trade the pick and and up with RGIII out of it you get run out of the profession.
Click to expand...
So, you are saying you want your GM to be a "play it safe" kind of guy.  If so, Darnold is your pick.

 
also, i agree, if the GM has four players with the exact same grade, he stinks.  

the odds of that being the case are astronomical.  

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Drafting a QB isn't an exact science in the first place, of course, but if after spending the offseason examining all three prospects he doesn't see one that he (and his staff) thinks has the best shot at becoming a star, then I'd say the team is in real trouble. If he truly felt all of top 4 QBs were average and interchangeable then he shouldn't take one at all - but since this is supposedly a strong class that doesn't seem very realistic.
Click to expand...
What if he feels they are all GREAT and interchangeable? Serious question. I don't know why you'd assume they'd have to be average to be equal.

 
DallasDMac said:
What if he feels they are all GREAT and interchangeable? Serious question. I don't know why you'd assume they'd have to be average to be equal.
Click to expand...
Well if he truly thinks all 4 QBs are great and interchangeable then waiting until pick 4 would be fine I guess - but I’d also have serious concerns about his process that he still could not separate them in any meaningful way and have a guy he likes the best. 

Is it realistic in your mind that any GM would see all 4 QBs equally and not care which one he got?

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Well if he truly thinks all 4 QBs are great and interchangeable then waiting until pick 4 would be fine I guess - but I’d also have serious concerns about his process that he still could not separate them in any meaningful way and have a guy he likes the best. 

Is it realistic in your mind that any GM would see all 4 QBs equally and not care which one he got?
Click to expand...
No. Because Josh Allen kicks puppies.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Well if he truly thinks all 4 QBs are great and interchangeable then waiting until pick 4 would be fine I guess - but I’d also have serious concerns about his process that he still could not separate them in any meaningful way and have a guy he likes the best. 

Is it realistic in your mind that any GM would see all 4 QBs equally and not care which one he got?
Click to expand...
it’s unpossible.  

i hate this time of year.  

 
The last four mocks posted by Faust:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000916761/article/charles-davis-mock-draft-10-bengals-land-qb-of-future

1 Sam Darnold - QB, USC

Yes, there are questions about turnovers, but there are plenty of magical plays on tape, as well. Obviously, the Browns are hoping that pixie dust travels with him to Cleveland.

https://draftwire.usatoday.com/2018/02/21/2018-nfl-mock-draft-updated-4-round-projections-with-trades/

1. Cleveland Browns | Josh Rosen | QB | UCLA

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2018-nfl-mock-draft-josh-allen-to-giants-usc-rb-ronald-jones-lands-with-eagles/

1. Cleveland Browns Baker Mayfield, QB, Oklahoma

 The Browns already have their Josh Allen ... DeShone Kizer. Mayfield is much more polished than either of those two and should be able to start Week One. 

http://draftanalyst.com/monday-musings-pre-combine-two-round-mock

1 Cleveland Browns Saquon Barkley RB Penn State 

Analysis: I learned at the Senior Bowl that the Browns are not presently enamored with any of the top quarterbacks. Having a pair of picks in the top four is a luxury, and in Barkley they select the best player in the draft -- again.

-------------------------------------------------------

Everyone is agreed then its um...

EDIT:  He just added another mock, so the last five mocks have five different names.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000917695/article/fourround-mock-draft-allen-goes-no-1-bills-cardinals-trade-up

1 Josh Allen - QB, Wyoming

There has been scuttlebutt that GM John Dorsey likes Allen. Most folks are projecting Sam Darnold to go first overall, but I'll go with Allen, who showed great promise at the Senior Bowl.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
CBS did a recent mock with... Get this.... Us no longer owning either of our 1st round picks....

And walking out with Andrew Luck. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
Waiver Wire - Week 1
2 3
Replies
142
Views
10K
jm192
jm192
Faust
QB Dillon Gabriel, CLE
3 4 5
Replies
206
Views
9K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
Joe Bryant
  • Poll Poll
Who will be the Browns 2025 Week 1 Starting QB?
2 3
Replies
146
Views
8K
travdogg
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 20 (members: 0, guests: 20)
Back
Top