Doug Pensinger - Getty Images
This picture has nothing to do with this story. I just freaking love it. Look at Fat Polamalu suck dust as Thomas makes Ike Taylor his stirm arm poster boy. I may use this picture for every story I write. (Photo by Doug Pensinger/Getty Images)
This is not a McCoy vs. Player X. This is different.
Remember the game "Mousetrap"? The game that required 5 year-olds to have engineering degrees to set up a game? You spend 30 minutes setting up then another 30 minutes to play. All that time, all that anticipation for 10 seconds of results (of course that's assuming that the piece of crap actually works and you don't have to give the ball the ol' finger wedge).
That moment when the man jumps into the tub and sets the trap in motion, it is pure freaking ecstasy.
The reasoning is simple. It was a pain in the ass to get to that point; it took time, energy, adult swear words, etc. You get the idea, this was no simple task.
For the past two seasons, Heckert and Holmgren have been setting up their Mousetrap board. Come April 26th, it's time for H&H to turn that crank and set this trap in motion.
2010 NFL DRAFT
Holmgren and Heckert were the new guys. They were taking over a roster that was filled with veteran place fillers and almost no young talent. Sure there were some pieces (Joe Thomas, Tuba Rubin, Alex Mack, DQ) but we lacked everything.
H&H wanted to start with the biggest need of all. They wanted a Quarterback in the worst way. Remember the Holmgren quote of "I wish I liked Jimmy Clasen more"? They guy was jonesing to take a QB. The one they really wanted was Bradford. They went after Bradford, and they went hard. Well we all know that the Rams passed on the deal.
So what do you do when a plan doesn't go they way you want? You adapt. That's just what H&H did. H&H looked at the draft board and decided to attack another weakness. The secondary.
H&H acquired Sheldon Brown and Chris Gocong for a 4th and 5th round picks. They then used the 1st and 2nd round picks on Joe Haden and TJ Ward. Sure we took McCoy (which lends to the thought that the Browns wanted a QB in this draft) but he was a project that had a low chance of working out.
Three fourth's of our starting secondary was picked up in one draft. This is important because it took care of a major need in one swoop. No longer would we "need" to use picks on the secondary. If someone we liked fell in our laps, we "could" take them, but we didn't have to chase a tough to fill role.
2011 NFL DRAFT
This was by far the biggest set-up. McCoy had shown the fans that he could be the possible answer. He "could" be the guy. The rational line of thinking is to give that "possible answer" weapons. Build around him and see if he can take that next step.
But H&H played it smart (more on this later). It was right in front of them. Julio Jones, the supposed "game breaking WR" that we were starving for. It was the greatest need and supposed BPA colliding. This is what is supposed to happen right? We had to take Jones.
But H&H had a plan.
Instead, Atlanta drunk off a playoff exit, decided that they needed Julio, badly. They offered the world.
Browns took the deal. They took a pick that was worth 1,600 points on the trade chart and sent it packing. What they got back was the 27th pick (680 points), 59th pick (310 pts.), 124th (48 pts.), 22nd in 2012 (780 pts.) and roughly the 118th pick in 2012 (58 pts. this will drop after compensation draft picks are awarded).
1600 points out the door and 1876 walk in. Hot damn, now we're cooking.
So H&H took those picks, moved back up and scooped up Phil Taylor, a guy they can play next to Tuba Rubin for the next six-plus years. They also picked up Jabaal Sheard, a guy who plays like a first rounder and is a keeper. Not too shabby for a late round first and second rounder.
With those two moves alone, they made their weakest link on the entire team, into one of the youngest, strongest, most exciting groups that we have had here in a long time. Sure we need help at DE, but again we leave a draft with 3/4ths of a group handled on one draft. We don't "need" to grab a defensive lineman. If someone we liked fell into our laps, we "could" pick him up, but we don't have to chase.
But the biggest thing, is that we added ammo to this season's draft.
If I had to guess, I would say that H&H didn't think Colt McCoy was the guy after his rookie season. They saw first hand what became apparent this season. Struggled on his pre-snap reads. Struggled to stretch a defense vertically. Struggled to make the throws to scare a defense. Great kid, not a great QB.
They knew before we did. So they planned ahead.
2012 NFL DRAFT
This season, they enter the draft with 3,120 points in first and second rounders alone. That doesn't even account for the 3rd and two 4th round picks. In layman's terms, the Browns are walking into a gun fight with an Uzi.
H&H have addressed the other areas of the team enough to get us by. We need a triggerman.
H&H have acquired picks while developing the other areas of their roster. They have waited patiently to spring their trap to catch that damn mouse. Now, I can't say the trap will work perfectly and we will draft our Super Bowl winning QB. Who knows, maybe the ball gets hung up going down the track and we draft a bust, I don't know.
But it's time to crank that wheel. We are leaving the 2012 NFL Draft with a Quarterback.
6 recs | 454 comments
I used to always ask my dad to play Mousetrap. He rarely wanted to.
emily522 - January 19, 2012
My daughter turned 18 this summer. She’s been mad at me for about a year over her hormones/autocracy. I will gladly play mousetrap with you and i’m not being funny or creepy. I miss her.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
I said too much…. :)
The New Kardiac Kids - January 20, 2012
I’m glad he didn’t.
emily522 - January 19, 2012
To be fair, jimmy clausen was in an absolutely dreadful situation…a head coach that didnt give a shit, and a team full of veterans (minus team leader julius peppers) that knew that year was trashed from the start.
Jonngotti - January 20, 2012
If he can be had at the right price, I take him. Not in lieu of a real starting QB, but no harm. He does have talent.
dabooo - January 23, 2012
Addressed the other areas of the team…. except the spot that directly impacts the QB position in WR. But hey those DL sure helped our offense.
Justin Kowalczyk - January 19, 2012
notthatnoise - January 19, 2012
If the team didnt end up leading the league in dropped passes by a large margin id be willing to admit that QB was the larger problem. If we also werent starting Josh Cribbs and Brian Robiskie at times this season that argument would also hold more water. We literally have the worst WRs in the NFL. And I dont think its close.
Justin Kowalczyk - January 19, 2012
It seems no one on the internet or on the radio understands the 40+ dropped passes we had and most were in key situations in key drives. Our running game was horrible most of the season also, but hey all of that is the QB’s fault, right? Colt may or not be a good QB but if you keep switching QB’s every year or other year we will never reache the SB. We need alot more on this team than people think. RGIII here this past season isn’t going to be any better than Colt was. The QB can’t catch the ball too. We need a true #1 WR and get the O-line solidified then if Colt still is so-so then we go after a QB next year. RGIII is not the second coming. Get all of the pieces first.
Jchapman18 - January 19, 2012
The Packers had the second most dropped passes this season. Their line is worse than ours.
notthatnoise - January 19, 2012
I wonder what percentage of their passes were dropped. I’d assume, maybe incorrectly, that the Pack threw a lot more passes than the Browns did this season.
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
McCoy threw 463, Seneca had 107, for a total of 570. Rodgers had 502, Flynn had 49, for a total of 551. So the Browns threw slightly more, but not really by a significant amount.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Surprising
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
Not really. I think the Packers spent more time running out the clock after they got a lead rather than playing catch-up most of the time. The Browns on the other hand …
JustBob - January 20, 2012
Dropped passes is subjective, everyone rates them differently. Hardesty had like 6 in one game on dump offs that would have gone nowhere. Funny also that the drops seemed to go flying out the window when Wallace was playing.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Assuming Hardesty’s drops would have gone nowhere is conjecture and most likely incorrect. However, I did notice that Little caught some surprisingly difficult passes when thrown by Wallace.
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
What part of this conversation isn’t speculative??
Vududawg - January 20, 2012
Agreed.
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
Colt45
Jchapman18: you are 100% correct! The Browns do NOT need another QB, yet…Give Colt some weapons. Blackmon or Jeffries with the Browns 1st pick (they could trade down & still get Alshon) and a RB with their second pick. Add a big O-lineman in the 2nd round and sign some key FA on defense. Give McCoy a fair chance next year to prove he can be the franchise QB. Hell, we have waited this long what’s one more year?
ursuline86 - January 20, 2012 via Android app
I’m all for patience, but McCoy hasn’t shown enough in 21 games that would show you he is “the guy”.
And just because we draft a QB doesn’t mean McCoy is out on the street. Maybe it is the fire that lights under his as to take his game to the next level and earn this job.
I don’t think he can. We can make all the excuses in the world (dropped passes, OLine sucks (it doesn’t), no WR’s, etc.) but at the end of the day, McCoy just isn’t a QB good enough for us to win with.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
He’s not good enough to pass up a potential stud QB at least.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Exactly correct.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
it’s Jeffery not Jeffries. I am not spelling nazi, but this misspelling of his name is common and drives me nuts.
dirtyjoe - January 20, 2012
Holmgrem needs to draft Khalil and Ashton in the first.
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
Robert Griffith IV or bust.
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
Keetnum or nobody.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
I believe Hkhahlhihlh is the proper spelling.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
.LOL at both of you.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Works ev’ry time.
North Coast Flea - January 21, 2012
Billy Dee Williams approved.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
Golly jee, I sure wish I knew more about football. Can you please explain how it works, Paul Brown?
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
WRs are a lot easier to find than an RG3.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Not to mention, I think RG3 makes Little and Norwood better. Hell you could even add in Cribbs to that.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
Definitely, I think he’s the type of guy who just gets everyone jacked up to play too. I love Luck, I’m sure he can be the surgeon that Manning is, but I don’t see him really elevating his players, I see him succeeding in spite of them.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
How do you know that? He could be the second coming of Jamarcus Russell. No one knows for sure. Plus the Browns would have to change their scheme to accomodate RGIII. He is a project and if the Broowns aren’t in the SB in two years you guys will be calling for RGIII’s head. It never ends in Cleveland. For those talking about when Wallace was in, he wasn’t any better. We need to have receivers that can get open, catch the ball and block. That crew we had last season, couldn’t do any of that. I think Little will get better, but the Cribbs experiment should be over at WR and draft a true number one WR. Norwood will be okay at a #3 WR, Little at #2. Mo needs to go just like Robiskie went. Did I mention that Colt had no off season either and it was his first full year? Give the kid another year, there will be franchise QB’s available next year too. If the Browns are going to trade up for a QB they should go all in and get Luck not RGIII.
Jchapman18 - January 20, 2012
RG3 plays nothing like Jamarcus Russell. The only similarities there are that they are both black and both play QB.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Jamarcus had a better arm and was a bigger physical presence. The biggest difference is that Robert Griffin has a desire to play football and his football intelligence and you can see it in his play, Jamarcus Russell was a waste of talent and played to get paid only. Jamarcus Russell was never a football player, he was an arse.
champion64 - January 20, 2012
RG3 is also a world-class sprinter. Literally. Jamarcus would be good at the man vs. food olympics.
rufio - January 20, 2012
hehe nice
Red-Right-88 - January 21, 2012
He was still a number one pick and a bust. He had an arm and a physical presense and apparently worthy of the number one overall pick so your similarities comment of both are black and both play QB are wrong. Everyone seems to think RGIII is the second coming and he may be but what if he isn’t? What if he is average at best as a NFL QB. Then what? We need the pieces to the puzzle first. WR, O-line, and the running game solidified then you add a franchise QB next year if Colt cannot be the guy with 21 games under his belt.
Jchapman18 - January 20, 2012
you are completing ignoring the Al Davis factor with regard to Jamarcus Russell.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
That’s the year the Browns drafted Joe Thomas, then Quinn.
Don’t forget Phil Savage’s ginormous man crush on JaMarcus.
He made zero reservations about how much he wanted him in Orange & Brown.
If anything, we should thank Al Davis for not letting Savage sell the farm for that one.
mr.saturday.night - January 20, 2012
rufio - January 20, 2012
I would agree everythime…. sans Savage.
He mortgaged the future for Brady Quinn, which leads me to believe he gave his best effort to aquiring JaMarcus.
That said,,, I’ve been wrong before!! lol
mr.saturday.night - January 21, 2012
If he mortgaged the future for Brady Quinn, why wouldn’t he do it for a player he supposedly loved at the top of the draft?
rufio - January 21, 2012
I think he is impying that Phil tried and the Raiders wouldn’t do it.
Roger Dorn - January 23, 2012
ok…Leaf is a #1 pick and a bust, but I guess we can’t compare a black player to a white bust…
No one thinks RG3 is the “second coming”. If that player is in this draft it is luck. People think RG3 can be good and better than Colt.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
Why is this about race at all?
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Because the knee-jerk comparisons to Russell or Vince Young are clearly about race. The similarities end at the fact that they are black. RG3 is much more similar in size, build and playing style to a Steve Young than to Jamarcus, yet you NEVER see that comparison.
We saw the same thing with Cam Newton last year — saw a million comparisons to Jamarcus and Vince Young. Yet you almost never saw a comparison to Big Ben who he is most similar to.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012
Wait. RGIII is . . . (gulp) black? And Cam Newton has been accused of raping people? I suppose the Robiskie is real, too, huh, buddy?
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
I see it here at DBN all the time, but if you mean anywhere else, then you are correct.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Exactly…I’d say VY is less overtly about race because he at least was a QB who could run.
I have actually made that comparison. If you want another good one (though the player is black) I saw recently, maybe Steve mcnair but a little less Bulky…
I agree. I did see a big ben comparison (gotta give credit for Walterfootball here).
Newton was also very unique as Walterfootball points out because no prospect has had his combo of size/arm/atheticism, but a more athletic Big Ben is probably the best.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
Yeah, no one is physically the same as Newton. VY is close, but Newton’s arm is better I think.
rufio - January 20, 2012
and Newton is also quite a few inches taller and bulkier…but in pure arm/speed comb, VY is probably the closest.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
Pryor is close
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
Wow, he faded into oblivion! What is he doing now?
SBP - January 21, 2012
I guess he’s on the Raiders bench
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
The way Palmer was playing, not for long.
I got yelled at during the season when I said the Raiders made our front office the past decade look average.
BuenosAires_Dawg - January 21, 2012
The funny thing is that the pieces were just starting to come together with a great RB, super fast receivers and Jason Campbell playing really well, and an exciting young developmental player on the bench. Then they go and trade their future for an old, not so good interception machine. Good grief, now they’re interviewing Marty Morningweig to be their coach.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
I don’t think the move set them back that badly. They have all those pieces still, including a healthy Jason Campbell. It was a risk, and it didn’t work, but I think that’s a trade you can justify at the time.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
Do you think there’s any chance we look at Campbell? I think he’s a UFA
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
Campbell’s going to be a little lacking in motivation, don’t you think?
BuenosAires_Dawg - January 21, 2012
Really? I think he’ll be totally motivated after getting blown off for retread, crappy Carson Palmer.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
Well, as of right now they only have a 5th round and a 6th round pick in this year’s draft, so yeah, that probably hurts.
nickjs21 - January 21, 2012
They’ll pick up a 3rd round pick as compensation for Nnamdi and another later round pick for Zach Miller. But your point is otherwise correct.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
And the best/most-invested-in players on their team aren’t getting younger. McFadden is a running back, Palmer is older, Seymor is older…
rufio - January 21, 2012
Also true. But Newton’s motion is much, much better than Pryor, and Pryor is faster in a straight line while Cam is better at lowering his shoulder and picking up those tough 2 yards.
rufio - January 21, 2012
You’re completely ignoring RG3s superior intelligence and work ethic, his 3 years as a starter, his accuracy, athleticism and leadership. So really they are absolutely nothing alike other than being black and being QBs.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Russell had maybe the biggest arm ever. RG3 does not. He has a good arm, but its not even close to comparable. And RG3 was way more accurate in college. He won’t be the number one overall pick, either.
rufio - January 20, 2012
And he could be Peyton Manning.
Let me tell ya, Blackmon could end up being Charles Rogers. If we shy away from drafting players because of previous busts, we will never make a pick.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
I think RG3 may be the 2nd coming of Doug Williams!!
how sweet would that be!!
mr.saturday.night - January 20, 2012
I would be cool with a Super Bowl.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
and I will take the team around Doug Williams
Red-Right-88 - January 21, 2012
This is the most overused, yet invalid excuse of all for Colt.
You have absolutely no way of knowing this, the 2013 draft is 15 months away.
As per our head coach, who most definitely knows more about offensive football than you do, this is false.
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
The lack of an offseason legitimately affected Colt’s play this year.
Still, at some point we should have seen the game “slow down” for him as he got his brain around the WCO, what Shurmur was trying to do, the terminology, etc.
We didn’t see that.
And no, we wouldn’t have to change our offense for RG3. It might help him succeed right off the bat, but we’d also be exposing our top pick to a beating from the likes of baltimore and pittsburgh. RG3 is tough, but no thanks on any extra hits on our first round QB.
rufio - January 21, 2012
I agree completely, your first sentence just further expounded upon what I meant. Not having an off-season certainly had an impact on him, but we’re way beyond the point that that’s still an excuse for his sub-par performance.
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
I saw it maybe (only maybe) for a couple games, but it seemed to only slow down enough for people to wonder if it was possible he didn’t completely suck…not enough to convince a ton of people that he was actually good though.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
to expand on this, it may have slowed down certain times where it looked like he was about to do something then he’d wobble it to someones knees.
-bobby- - January 22, 2012
I am 100% wanting RGIII to drop to the 4th pick. Just so I can trade him to Washington, Seattle or Dallas. If I was to trade up in the upcoming draft to get a QB, Andrew Luck is the only one there that is worth the crapshoot. I do not see that happening, so we trade the #4 to the #6, and then trade the #6 to the #7, all along picking up more draft picks. Take Ingram DE, and Sanu WR in the first, use the extra picks to load up more talent to this team on both sides of the ball, and add quality free agents… Thats what needs to be done.
J. W. - January 22, 2012
If we don’t take RG3 this would be idea. I would even keep dropping past 7 because I don’t know of any top 10 pass rushers so might as well stock pile firsts and seconds and take guys like the Perry kid from USC or Coples from UNC or Ingram, Mercillus. Like Sanu, Zack Brown, maybe even Burfict if the coaches think his head case stuff is over blown.
HenryDawg - January 22, 2012
But… If the Browns don’t want to take him at #4, why would Washington feel like they have to trade up?
nickjs21 - January 22, 2012
Excellent point.
Tampa isn’t taking him.
Bernie19Kosar - January 22, 2012
Excellent idea – build a beautiful, elaborate cruise ship, then send it to sea without a captain.
Dawg Nuts - January 22, 2012
You added nothing to the conversation.
you cant put a quarterback into an offense with AWFUL receivers (league leaders in dropped passes) and a piss poor right side of the offensive line that gave up pressure almost instantly every play forcing colt to play on his feet, followed by an inconsistent running game that offered him NO HELP, and expect him to play well.
Add to that the pathetic play calling by calling pat shurmur his plays dont stretch the field, and in addition they are EXTREMELY simplistic. if you want sources let me know ill go find them.
so ill say this too: if you are an RG3 advocate, which im assuming you are, RG3 will do slightly better, if not similar, than colt mccoy did which the awful offense put around mccoy
Jonngotti - January 20, 2012
You didn’t read his quote very carefully.
Honest question, what should have H&H done to address the WR situation?
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
THEY DID WHAT.
Did anyone else know that Browns receivers dropped passes this year?
nickjs21 - January 20, 2012
Just found that out. Shocked.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
So if I’m to understand you correctly, your solution to fix our average to sucky team is to get more average players?
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
yeah, you can. A better QB throws a more catchable ball. That leads to less dropped passes.
You also described the offense that Rodgers was running in the playoffs and at times this year when the run game failed. We may have better protection though.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
Let me put it another way.
The Green Bay Packers were second in the league in drops, and their line is worse than ours. Their offense did alright.
Our offensive line was pretty average in pass protection by every decent metric out there.
I want sources. I think the plays stretch the field just fine, it’s our quarterback who didn’t. The plays are also anything but simplistic.There are plenty of examples of good QBs elevating poor support. Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, etc. all have supporting casts about equal to ours, and they do just fine.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
I am pretty sure Cutler has the worst supporting cast in the NFL and still manages to look pretty good.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
Didn’t he have the playoffs locked up till he got hurt? Dude can play.
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
Jay Cutler would kill for the Browns offensive line. Probably the WR’s as well, and this is coming from a guy who thinks our WR’s suck.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
It’s saying something that I would not trade the Browns’ OL and WRs for the Bears’.
nickjs21 - January 20, 2012 via Android app
Remarkable, but true.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
I have always been a Cutler fan.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
and he only has one WR who really stretches the field any more than anyone we have…and his best option was his RB.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
I’m guessing his source is Michael Lombardi.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
Yeah, our plays stretch the field just fine. They are “simplistic” at times because we don’t have the ability to make especially complex reads.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Manning is the ultimate example of this. The Colts went from Super Bowl contender to #1 overall pick in the draft in one season.
North Coast Flea - January 21, 2012
The OL argument has been debunked over and over again.
We had a RT who was rated top ten in pass protection and a RG who struggled but improved in pass-pro as the season went along. Our line was average.
Better quarterbacks (Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Cutler) play with what statistically are piss poor offensive lines and get the job done. McCoy doesn’t have poise or pocket presence and he runs into sacks more often than not.
BuenosAires_Dawg - January 21, 2012
And I think we all feel like they’ll address RT and either Steinbach comes back or the two young guards should get better.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
They did by giving the offense more opportunities to get back on the field. It was obvious given the situation of the team and that offseason that we weren’t going to be playoff contenders in 2011 so why not shore up an area that had nobody to fit the system, and load up for the following year’s draft? The 2011 draft couldn’t have gone any better in my opinion.
BornAKardiacKid - January 19, 2012
Also kept the scores low enough (most of the time) that even a semi-competent offense could have won a few more games.
DaveDawg09 - January 21, 2012
I would rather get the QB first.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
im gonna guess that with the Texas A,M guy coming in as an offensive coach and possibly Sherman as an OC, that our next QB will be Tannehil.
allsides - January 19, 2012
I hope you are wrong.
Aussie Brown - January 19, 2012
I echo this sentiment. I don’t see anything special when I watch Tannehill.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
He looks like most of last years draftees, 2nd round at best QBs who crept up to desperate team. We don’t want to be that team.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
So would I, but only if there is one worth getting. I happen to think RG3 is worth it, and I hope we are able to pull the trigger this year.
I completely agree w/ getting your QB first if possible though, because if you develop the other parts of the roster first the team likely finishes middle-of-the-pack (ok but lacking a QB to get them in the playoffs) and you never sniff the top of the draft to have an opportunity to get a real QB without “trading the farm” as Holmgren says.
Vududawg - January 20, 2012
By your jaded comment I’m guessing you didn’t buy the article’s well-conveyed point that H&H adjusted pretty adeptly to what was in front of them and did the best they could have hoped to do.
So you wish we had just gotten Julio last year? Yeah he did wonders for Atl. I, for one, am extremely glad we took the picks, and am even more glad that H&H are great at discerning what’s in front of them and adjusting to make the most solid picks possible.
There are many reasons for Browns fans to be disgusted and dissenting… I just don’t think this is one of them.
Vududawg - January 20, 2012
Tony Grossi wanted Julio, enough said
He has questions about RG3 and 91% of cleveland.com said No to taking RG3 at either 2 or 4.
I’m sold.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
It is like the Seinfedl episode where George decides to dot he exact opposite of what his normal instinct tells him to do.
If the normal instinct says don’t take him, then the exact opposite is probably the better answer.
SBP - January 20, 2012
There’s no rec button on the Android SB app.
nickjs21 - January 20, 2012 via Android app
There are some implications here that I disagree with in part, but I won’t harp on them.
I do like the analogy, but I disagree with what’s being implied in the conclusion. Correct me if I’m wrong, it seems you would like us to use the acquired picks to move up to draft a QB, yes?
It’s true, we’ve beaten that to death here, but I’ll just point out, I think it’s smarter to keep all of our picks and continue to address our weaknesses. Even so, I think the Mousetrap thing still works: Only instead of RG3 at #2, we get him at #4 along with the great WR/DE/LB at #22 and #37 that we manages to keep by not needlessly moving up.
PS:
Thank god we didn’t trade up for Bradford. I can’t stress that enough. Good lord, we’d be in one hell of a shithole right now.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
If we have to trade up, then hell yes we do it.
Think of it this way. If we use they #22 pick to move up, we traded Julio Jones for Phil Taylor, Greg Little and RG3.
I do that deal 100 out of 100 times.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
this, also Julio Jones graded out as a 12-15 pick and the only reason he moved up is because people assumed we would take him at 6. These guys don’t reach and super disciplined.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
We fleeced Atlanta, the deal was awesome for us. But I like using that, for lack of a better term, retrospective reasoning when determining how to move forward with the picks we have right now.
You mentioned a deal above that you’d do every time, as would I, actually. But the truth is, that’s not the deal on the table.
Think of it this way: traded Julio Jones for Phil Taylor, Greg Little, RG3, Kendall Wright/Luke Kuechly/Whitney Mercilus.
I’ll take that deal over the one you mentioned 100 out of 100 times.
I hold firm that the best course of action is the address our weaknesses with all of our 1st and 2nd rounders. I should also say that I don’t think we’ll have to move up for RG3. But I also think it’s better not to move up even if Washington is making an offer too. On that, the only reason we’d have to move up is if Washington (or another team, say Miami) wants him, meaning we will be in a bidding war for the spot. Yes, we can offer more, but again, the more we offer the more it hurts this team, in my opinion.
I think we need to sit back at 4, let it play out and draft RG3, Blackmon, or trade down on Kalil. I think that’s going to be a key to making this team successful for the long term. I might be saying a lot of the same things over again.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I think we’re looking pretty good. If Wash and/or Mia go after a FA QB then we can sit back at 4 most likely. However I Wash or Mia calls STL or the Vikings, you can bet they’ll be calling us asking us if we want to beat it, and we have a much more attractive package, even without the other #1, just by virtue of being 4 vs. 6 or 9. Now the big question is, STL could call and say anything they want, do you call their bluff and lose the QB just so you can pick Wright/Kuelchy/Mercilus later? Even more realistically, we could keep that pick and send them our 2nd rounders for the next 2 years. They’ll still get an impact player they want, they won’t get that with Mia/Wash picks.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
That’s a good point. I addressed it in that, we’re also giving up more than those teams, and if they want him just as much as we do, I think it’ll become a bidding war, and I don’t want to be caught up in a bidding war with freaking Washington.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
Shanny’s getting older and running out of time, he may not want to wait on a rookie.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
In which case: I see us drafting RG3 at 4.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I hope so, that would be awesome.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
I think this is a bigger factor than everyone thinks. Shanahan needs to make the playoffs to keep his job or Chainsaw Dan is going to clean house again. I don’t think he can wait on a rookie QB. I think Miami and Washington will look for veteran stop gaps at QB leaving RG3 for us. That is probably wishful thinking on my part though.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
I don’t think Miami is necessarily in the market for a QB. Matt Moore had a pretty good year last year.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
well a new head coach generally means a new QB, although if Jeff Ireland stays put you will probably be right.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
RG3 won’t be there at 4.
If we draft Kalil and Wright with those first rounders instead of trading up to get RG3, we will still suck next season.
And I’m not buying the “we can draft a QB next season” talk, because we have no idea how Barkley and Jones will fare this season. They could completely crap out and the 2013 draft could be void of good QB prospects.
We can’t keep passing on QB’s waiting for the perfect situation. We have to take a risk at some point, might as well do it when it won’t cost us future picks.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that.
If RG3 isn’t there at 4, it means we draft Blackmon or trade the Kalil pick (which adds another 2nd or 1st, possibly more, we’re talking about a stud franchise LT). So, Blackmon + stud DE/LB, or trade down for DE + LB + WR.
It’s true we might struggle next season, but if you’re going to point crapping out, so could RG3. That’s a very weak argument in my opinion, mostly because it can be applied to our said drafted QB (RG3) just as much as a potentially drafted QB (Barkley/Jones).
Nowhere do I state that we should wait on a perfect situation, that’s not my argument.
Hell, even if we do suck, as you point out that we surely will if we don’t draft RG3, we’ll likely be in that position to draft a QB.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
Count me in the camp that would definitely trade up. But like you, I don’t think we’ll have to. St. Louis and Minnesota will both be in position to get a great player at a position of need. I don’t think they risk missing out on that by trading down.
notthatnoise - January 19, 2012
I think we jump to 2. I think it costs us a few mid round selections.
St. Louis has multiple needs, they dump down to four, pick up some picks and take Claiborne, Blackmon or Kalil. Pretty much whoever they like the most that Minnesota doesn’t pick.
They move down and still get a guy they would have been happy with at 2. They can’t get that with Washington.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
How much better off are we than St. Louis that we can afford to give them picks?
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
Well they have a #1 overall pick at QB so that’s why we’re doing it.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Like Henry says, they have a QB. They can afford to pass on one.
If you don’t have a QB, you need one.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
I know what you mean but they didn’t do very well this year. Regardless of a number one QB.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
It’s worth pointing out that they have a shitty one too.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I like Bradford, but he did look bad this season.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
He might be a good guy, but I don’t think he’s all that great of a QB. If I had to venture a guess, I’d say the Rams would be lucky to get Average Joe out of him at this point.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I don’t think so, he was often injured and had a terrible OC. Plus our O Line puts theirs to shame.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
his best receiver also went down for the entire year
jlim4 - January 20, 2012
The QB makes his surroundings.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
So what we’re saying here is that they had a “terrible OC”… We had none. Their #1 WR went down for the year… Again all we have a #2 and a handful of #3s…
3PON Nemo - January 20, 2012
Yeah not buying it.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Yeah, we’ll just ignore that, while we’re at it we’ll ignore their actual play too.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Isn’t McD known as a pretty decent OC?
North Coast Flea - January 21, 2012
Injured all year. He’s a good player.
Roger Dorn - January 19, 2012
If that’s the case (22 and 37 remaining completely untouched), then I’m perfectly ok with the deal.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I think we give one or the other and maybe a 2nd next year and go running to the bank with it.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
I’m ok with a few mid rounders, a third, a future third, through ’em a few 4ths and 5ths.
When we start talking about 22 and 37, or future 2nds, I turn away.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I wouldn’t touch any picks before the 4th round in future drafts.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
You can’t just give them 3rds and 4ths, they have to get one or two guys they think can start.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
They want my teams future starters, I tell ’em to eff off.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Sure you do.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
I don’t think we will have to give up the first. If we have to move the second rounder, I would still do it.
But I think St. Louis will see the chance to get their player and acquire some picks.
The price will go up if Minny falls in love with the same guy as St. Louis. We need them to go different directions.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
If Washington is bidding against us (the only real threat to make us have to move out of 4), then I think we’ll have to give up 22, possibly more. I don’t like that deal.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I have no problem with it at all. You have to look at it in the context of what you’re getting, not what you’re losing.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
But if St. Louis has to drop to 6, they won’t get Blackmon, Kalil or Claiborne.
They deal with us, they pick up some middle picks and still get their guy. It’s the advantage of picking 4th (and why losing to the Steelers was so important).
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
This is the key point. If you are a Rams fan, you are thinking you move back only a couple spots and still ensure Blackmon at 4. Moving back farther and you lose your guy.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
I read this as a reason why we DON’T have to trade up.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
It’s an argument against trading up, but if the offer behind us is to good to pass up, then they might do it.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
In which case, I let them do it, because our counter offer would have to be a helluva lot to beat the previous offer they couldn’t refuse, the one that made them pass on Kalil/Blackmon.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
I guess I am saying, they would accept less from us, and probably would prefer to accept less and only move down 2 spots.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
What I’m saying is, if they want Kalil/Blackmon that bad, we get RG3 at 4.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
I think there’s a middle ground here.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
Which is what makes the whole situation so interesting. There’s a legitimate argument to be made every way. I honestly have no idea what will happen this year, none of the scenarios thrown around would surprise me.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Concur. I just hope we end up with one of the 2 QBs.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
Third’d. I just hope we don’t end up with Claiborne/Richardson.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
I feel the same way except it’s Kalil/Richardson. We already have enough high picks invested in the O-lne as compared to the secondary.
North Coast Flea - January 21, 2012
Absolutly (totally) agree!!
ol skol dawg - January 20, 2012
St Louis is going to take Kalil — you don’t pass him up unless you have a franchise LT. He is the best LT prospect since at least Jake Long. The problem then is Minnesota — they don’t need Blackmon or Claiborne so if I am them I trade put of that spot for a kings ransom if someone is in love with RG3. .
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
They could definitely use Claiborne, their pass D stinks and they could definitely use Blackmon too (anyone could).
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
With their new defensive coordinator coming from the cover-2 school, just like Frazier, I wonder how much importance they place on a CB.
Living here in Minnesota, the vibe I get is a lot of people like Blackmon, but again that doesn’t mean much.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
You can’t just sit back and play Tampa-2 all day anymore.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Washington….watch out for the trades here.
Red-Right-88 - January 21, 2012
according to the draft value chart, which I know isn’t the perfect system, to go from 4 to 2 it would we would have to swap our 4th pick for their 2nd pick, throw in our pick at #22 and our 6th round pick. that would make the value of each pick match up. However, with that said we will probably be in a bidding war with WAS/MIA and St. Louis knows we are trading up for a QB so the price IMO would be inflated. I think it will be far more than just a few mid round selections.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
That seems right, and is a deal I don’t like.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
me neither especially because we are almost guaranteed to get to choose between Blackmon and RG3 at #4. St. Louis or Minnesota is going to take Kalil and I would be perfectly happy taking whoever is left over between RG3 and Blackmon. We will know a whole lot more about 6 weeks from now when FA starts and Washington throws a boat load of cash at Flynn.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
I’m really crossing my fingers on that one, because I really want RG3. And I want him without needlessly giving up picks.
I think if we do trade up, the next two picks are Kalil and Blackmon, and the reality will be that we never had do, but it won’t stop the insistence of otherwise.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
yeah this is what I am hoping for too. All the hand wringing and worrying about trading up and giving up bunches of picks to get RG3 is a bit premature. We have to wait for free agency. If Washington doesn’t sign a QB in FA then we can start freaking out until then it’s mostly just speculation. If the price to trade up is reasonable I would be fine with it but I doubt it will and I want nothing to do with a bidding war against a crazy person like Dan Snyder.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
Nobody is wringing their hands until after FA, then if he’s the guy you want and you think Washington might trade ahead of you to get your guy, then you trade up without even worrying about it. If anything you guys are the one wringing your hands over a couple of picks who in the grand scheme, may not be that important.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
The key here is “they me be very important”.
ol skol dawg - January 20, 2012
I agree. If all parties assume that the trade is happening for a potential franchise QB, the traditional point values for picks become less of a factor. Let’s keep in mind that the Browns received two firsts, a second, and two fourths for Julio Jones.
Having said that, of the Redskins and Dolphins, the ‘Skins are the more likely franchise to pay a FA like Flynn a ton prior to the draft because, well, that’s what Snyder does. That reduces the possibility of a bidding war at the #2 or #3 spot by a great deal. It also increases our chances of either choosing RGIII straight up if H&H like him or dealing with the Dolphins unobstructedly for our #4.
I’d love to know what H&H think of Flynn.
chitown browns fan - January 20, 2012
I’m pretty much fine with any draft strategy aside from any that involves 1) trading up or 2) picking a RB at #4.
batard - January 20, 2012
Agreed.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
agreed x 2
MF - January 20, 2012
This or taking Kalil at #4
Aussie Brown - January 21, 2012
This is the exact reason I don’t think they’ll trade down. I don’t think they want to risk missing on one of those guys, so unless Washington is really going to offer them the world, I don’t think they would be smart to make a deal.
notthatnoise - January 19, 2012
Exactly with you on all this.
rufio - January 19, 2012
Not really. We already have an idea that RG3 is going to be a top draft pick. We have no idea what will happen with Barkley and Jones from now until April 2013. As for RG3 being a bust, he carries the same risk (and in my opinion a lower risk) of busting as Barkley and Jones.
Let’s say we go 4-12 next season and we pick 4th. But two QB needy teams are picking ahead of us. You willing to mortgage the ’13 and ’14 drafts to move up then?
This is the draft in which we have the bullets to do some damage. Why sit on them?
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
It’s almost like the football gods saying Hey Cleveland, we’re actually going to give you a break and get you a near perfect scenario – you want to grow a pair and take it?
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
And I would be hesitant if we weren’t filled up with extra picks.
Extra picks are great, but you have to use them. Every season the Patriots seem to have multiple first rounders, yet somehow have WR’s starting on their defense. At some point in time, you have to cash in the chips or they’re worthless.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
They Patriots aren’t making any major mistakes. They’ll a dynasty, a perennial playoff contender.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
Yeah but they’re living off Brady’s back, they get weaker every year and eventually they’re going to get exposed as Brady starts to get older and falter. Bellichick coached Pats sucked until he fell ass backwards into Brady.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Wait now, Brady bought into the system, Bledsoe was his own guy.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
…I don’t know where to begin with this. I hate Bellichick too, but he’s damn good at what he does. Obviously, Brady is an elite QB, but to say their living off his back. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one too.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
I think Bellichick is a good coach, but you see good coaches and GMs who hit late round gold keep thinking they can do that and end up stock piling a bunch of crap. Mike Martz did the same in STL and Shanny in Denver. Eventually these guys who all at least above average coaches, their egos get the best of them.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Stock piling a bunch of “crap” that leads to 139-53 (.724) and 15-5 (.750) in the playoffs. I’ll trade our actual crap for their pseudo-crap any day.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
I see it like Henry.
Outside of Brady and the TE’s that offense is pretty weak, and their defense is God awful. How can they fail to develop any pass rushers?
Plus, where are the national talking heads that said McCourtney was better than Haden? McCortney was moved to safety because he was so bad at CB.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
When I see all of this, I can only surmise Belichik is one hell of a game planner.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
The way his handiwork is all over that team is really impressive.
rufio - January 19, 2012
Damn right.
Unless that’s all Brady’s doing too.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Tom Brady does have a lot to do with New England’s success. Belichick knows what he has in Brady and can plan accordingly.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Agreed.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Just like the Colts were, and I mean that in almost every way.
notthatnoise - January 19, 2012
The Colts aren’t a dynasty, and I mean that in almost every way.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
How are they different? They only have one super bowl to New England’s three, but it’s been 8 years since they won one. They had 8 playoff appearances between 2000 and 2010, the Colts had 10. The Colts have won 125 games in that span, the Patriots 126. What makes the Patriots a dynasty but not the Colts?
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
If you’re wondering why I picked that time period it’s the year Brady was drafted to the year before Peyton got injured.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
To me, multiple championships build a dynasty.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
So they had a four year dynasty that ended in 2004. The Colts have been to a super bowl more recently than the Patriots.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
So you can say they were a dynasty eight years ago, and even then I might quibble with it, but the current patriots simply are not a dynasty. The Colts have even won a championship more recently than the Patriots.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
That’s at your discretion. Answer the question for yourself, then decide whether you have to quibble with your answer.
Personally, the retention of Brady and Bellichick have allowed their dynasty to remain in tact, knowing those two guys played major roles in the first 3 Super Bowls. But, that is just my opinion.
The word dynasty can be ambiguous when applied to football teams.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
How about we quantify a dynasty. I have no clue who is correct in this disaggrement.
ol skol dawg - January 20, 2012
Two Jayme Mitchells. Boom. Dynasty.
Doc's Kid - January 20, 2012
Championship(s)!
North Coast Flea - January 21, 2012
That’s fair.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Agree 100 percent. Grab a QB now or it will be 2 late. If RG3 goes to someone else and is fabulous we will all feel awlful. It’s better to try and fail than never try at all.
rdy - January 19, 2012 via iPhone app
You sir may say intelligent things over and over a million times. I wish we all would, and most of us do.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
I need to correct something, I meant to say: I don’t like retrospective reasoning.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
I think I agree with you.
emily522 - January 20, 2012
Great read B19K, I 100% agree with everything you said, especially how they’ve been building this thing systematically. We went from not knowing who would play anywhere on our DL to have one of the most promising DLines. We have some needs, but we seem so close to filling in all the holes, and starting to double down on some positions (Skrine, Patterson at CB).
If Holmgren was willing to give a whole draft to get Bradford, what’s he willing to give up to get Luck? I would prefer to give just a couple of picks to get RG3 but I could still see him selling out if he thinks Luck is the guy.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Thanks. I’m pretty sure Indy won’t trade Luck. So I think we go after RG3.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
Here we are again, with the perfect guy in our lap…..
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
No disrespect, I love this article. And I would like to have Griffin. See if he’s the real deal. But the things Holmgren said to that Wash reporter screamed….“Let him know (Snyder) we will entertain a package”. In your own scenario, creating more positive impact on this team by trading down could still be a possibility. Holmgren likes to play the later round gem finder. I’m tethering my expectations at this point.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
My understanding is that it was just a fan, not a reporter.
So far, Holmgren has been pretty up front with his feelings. I don’t think he does a whole lot of BS’ing.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
Oops, fan.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
I don’t think Holmgren is careless enough to tip his hand to our competition in the draft.
Simmsinns - January 19, 2012
He’s been pretty open when it comes to QB’s. The Clausen comment comes to mind.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
He felt bad about the Clausen comment. He was being too honest and it may have even caused Clausen to drop more than he already did. That comment revealed that he doesn’t bs alot on this stuff.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
I don’t Holmgren felt heat like he did in laid back Seattle (and the were teetering around .500 when he got there) and he probably knows that he doesn’t have forever to make a move. He said they got their guy in the 3rd year in Seattle, made the SB in their 7th. He’s right on schedule. BTW, they got screwed out of that ring. Effen cheating steelers.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Damn straight.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
HEAR HERE. And Refs.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
Don’t know what the Steeler ownership has on the NFL and it’s commish, but it was extremely evident during that Super Bowl. My brother, who happens to be a Steeler fan (the one thing I really hate him for by the way) watched that game with me. He was pissed that the ref’s had to cheat to give Pittsburgh the game, and that they didn’t legit and all. I remind him of this to this day, that they are NO different than Belicheat, stealing a Super Bowl from St Louis.
J. W. - January 22, 2012
BTW, I’m just a bad typist.
J. W. - January 22, 2012
Are you sure he’s really a Steeler fan? Most of them think they always get the short end of the stick. You should attempt to convert him, he may have hope.
HenryDawg - January 22, 2012
I swear I’m not this bad of a typist – I think when the screen refreshes it makes words I think I typed, not type?
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Sorry, I think your Steelers reference took us to a place where we forgot everything else you said.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
Do H&H even have a track record when it comes to drafting Qb’s? Farve and Hassleback were acquired via trade and McNabb was in Philly when Heckert took over. This makes me very worried about them drafting a qb and while we are at it what about offensive players in general?
GrillGuy - January 19, 2012
Heckert and Shurmur where in the room when there Super Bowl contending team took a QB in the second round.
What that means to me is that they understand the importance of the Quarterback position. If they were ever in the situation that they “needed” a QB, I think he would have pulled the trigger.
Bernie19Kosar - January 19, 2012
“Heckert and Shurmur where in the room when there Super Bowl contending team took a QB in the second round.”
I’m losing you here. What are you referring to?
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
Oh okay, you are referring to Kevin Kolb. Also noteworthy that they trades for that pick (the 2nd rd pick the Browns sent to Dallas for Brady Quinn ironically).
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
Holmgren’s career has been built on the back of Hall of Famers. I’m pretty sure he knows a good QB when he sees it.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
Holmgren knows QBs.
rufio - January 19, 2012
Yup. He’s worked with 3 of the best of all time.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
I know that they know Qb’s but can they project one from the college systems to the pros is my question?
GrillGuy - January 20, 2012
Well no one can do it perfectly or even most of the time, but they should be about as good as you can be.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
As well as anyone can do it, sure. If there is one thing to trust Holmgren with, its this.
rufio - January 20, 2012
I’d be interested to know how we projected Cam Newton last year — we worked him out but never seemed to be that interested.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012
I would too but I don’t think we’ll ever know. And gun to my head I’d say that Cam doesn’t get a whole lot better for another 5+ years. I think teams will figure him out a little next year.
Now if his coaches all of a sudden put him into the Tebow offense, he would kill it. But if you do that you’re also putting your franchise QB and #1 overall pick in position to get beat up every week.
rufio - January 20, 2012
In my disbelief at his wild success I was saying the same thing after week 4 this season… but no one could slow him down too well all year. Defenses seemed to learn (and exploit) DA pretty early – like around week 9 or so. Do you really think there’s something that all those teams missed that would shut him down?
Vududawg - January 22, 2012
Individual teams slowed him down pretty well this year. No one is going to shut Cam Newton down completely, but they could make things harder for him by playing confusing defenses, taking away the deep ball, and hitting him hard when he runs. Its the Tebow gameplan except Newton won’t look completely hopeless when you do it right. Newton also has a relatively high sack% and int% so dialing up a blitz every now and then could work for teams who gamble.
I haven’t watched his games against the Lions, Falcons, Saints, or Titans so I don’t know exactly what teams were doing when they did a good job against him.
rufio - January 22, 2012
I really like Tannehill. But I also really like McCoy. Oh my head hurts.
lightninmcqueen - January 19, 2012 via mobile
My head would hurt too, stuck with those choices.
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
You just took the words out of my mouth.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 20, 2012 via mobile
Where’s that guy who liked Keetnum….I wish he would weigh in on this.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
lol! Keetnum
HenryDawg - January 19, 2012
I’m glad someone remembered. Lol.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 19, 2012
I would like Keenum, but only as a 6th, 7th or UDFA project. and only if we didnt get RG3
Gabe Durrant - January 20, 2012
If we’re talking these sorts of guys I think I would rather draft depth and keep Colt as the named opening day starter.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
right, if we get rg3, I don’t want another qb taking up space, but if HH aren’t sold on him and go into the year with Colt as the starter, I wouldn’t mind seeing Keenum in camp
Gabe Durrant - January 20, 2012
I’ld rather see him than Wallace.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
I will be disappointed if the Browns use both first round picks to move up for RGIII. I would very much prefer that they draft two BPAs to improve the team overall, then go for one of the lower-ranked QBs. My personal favorite for that is Kirk Cousins who would look very good as a third round pick. I am comfortable with the notion of going into next season with McCoy as the starting QB not because I think that he is the guy who will take this team to the super bowl, but because I do not think that RGIII is a quarterback of a generation that is worth two first round picks. And I think the team needs a large influx of talented players at a number of positions. And no, I am not advocating drafting Richardson at No. 4.
I would, of course, want the Browns to entertain any offers for the No. 4 pick. If anyone this year is as
crazyeager as the Falcons were last year, I’d be glad to take their first round pick next year, plus a two this year.JamesPowell - January 19, 2012
Just so I am clear on that last thing, any trade for the No. 4 pick would, of course, include that team’s first round pick this year, as well as next year, plus whatever sugar they put on it.
JamesPowell - January 19, 2012
Rec
rufio - January 19, 2012
As much as I like RGIII I kind of like the idea of filling all the gaps we have on defense, to really put it over the top. Possibly something like trading the 4th pick to someone who would want to jump up and get Blackmon (heard the Bears are really interested), get a Quinton Coples or Courtney Upshaw with the Bears pick. Then get a Kendall Wright or Alshon Jeffrey with the Falcons pick. Then next year use the pick we would probably get from the Bears plus our pick, plus whatever else is needed, and put the house on Matt Barkley. Who knows, maybe Colt with an offseason to prepare and another weapon can show us something and we could get a Marcus Lattimore orRobert Woods.
But I really have confidence in H & H, so I won’t really doubt what they end up doing.
OSUMoneyball - January 20, 2012
Its all about defense, well almost, there has been a slight shift in these playoffs. Soon it will be a defense lead league as opposed to a QB driven league…or not.
Red-Right-88 - January 20, 2012
You need both. When the Pats won SBs they had a great D. They don’t anymore so no mo rings.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
…except that the Pats are still alive this year.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Weather forecast for NE Sunday….if it snows…Ratbirds r history.
Red-Right-88 - January 20, 2012
I thought about this kind of thing. Add two more monsters to the defense.
But then, I ask myself a question: Would I trade Haloti Ngata and Ed Reed for Peyton Manning? Of course, the chances of both first rounder turning into Pro Bowl/HOF type guys is a longshot, so is RG3 turning into Peyton Manning.
But when it comes down to it, I would rather gamble on the QB working out rather than the two defenders. Simple reasoning is that two good defensive players won’t make the impact a good QB will.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
The Browns are walking into a gun fight with an Uzi. Can’t wait for this year draft
deemac3248 - January 20, 2012
I’m really trying my best to get there this year.
I have a feeling this is the draft to get to as a Browns fan.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
I love the draft too much to want to be there in person.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
Same. You just miss out on so much up-to-the-minute info. I do wish they would stop spoiling the picks though.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Indeeb.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
ESPN did such a horrible job with this last year.
Especially Berman. F that dude.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
NFLN.
I get Eisen and Mayock.
SpecialBrownie - January 20, 2012
Yes. They did a great job last year. Just put it on NFLN and tear off the knob.
Spidey - January 20, 2012 via mobile
I love Mayock during games, IDK about the draft. He’s often very interesting, but he’s also incorrect about the coverage or the playcall a decent amount of the time. Still better than 99% of announcers.
rufio - January 20, 2012
It sucks so bad when they announce the pick a minute before the card is delivered. The first and second rounds are just tainted now.
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
The novelty gets old quickly. In between picks is dreadful.
Pluses: Free beer!
I also haven’t been for the first round, so maybe that’s a bit more exciting.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
I take back what I said before.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
I should caveat that you only get free beer in the Bud Light Fan Zone.
Roger Dorn - January 20, 2012
So you always know where it will be and don’t have to waste time looking around for it. Excellent.
JustBob - January 20, 2012
I havent had a drop of alcohol in 21 days, and I’m not sure I’d drink a free Bud Light. But that’s a whole ’nother conversation.
DaveDawg09 - January 21, 2012
How come when people say we should give McCoy another chance they forget to mention how many games he has missed in the last 2 season due to injury? The same people are pointing out how small RGIII is and how he would not survive in the AFC North.
Also, I understand wanting to give McCoy another chance but with bringing in a rookie I see McCoy probably starting at least the first 5 games or more if he ends up turning it around because Holmgren does not like playing rookie QBs.
MDBrownie - January 20, 2012
This. I am reading a book about Bradford, McCoy and Tebow. I am in the chapters on Colt and he has a history of concussions. High School, College and now the Pros. I think you can only have so many before it starts really doing damage. Hope they keep him as a back up.
Red-Right-88 - January 20, 2012
There’s a book about them? I guess because they were in the same draft. That sounds pretty interesting, especially given how young they all are, I would love to see another one in 5 years.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Not sure if this link will work:
http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Purpose-Inside-Quarterbacks-Bradford/dp/1616262893/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1327088655&sr=8-1
So far I am really disappointed we didnt get Bradford…
Red-Right-88 - January 20, 2012
thanks, and don’t worry, I think we’ll get one better
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
So here’s my question…
Assume that Luck, RGIII, and Blackmon are gone and H&H aren’t trading, who are we taking?
I would guess Khaiil but if we weren’t going after OL, who then is next?
3PON Nemo - January 20, 2012
At that point I would assume someone else would want to trade up for Kalil, but in the event that doesn’t happen, I have no idea.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
I think the chances of this scenario are slim to none.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
I assume it’s a trade down, but BPA should be Khalil or Claiborne, right?
nickjs21 - January 20, 2012
I would love to know where that mystery “H” keeps coming from in Kalil on DBN.
But you’re right, BPA is Kalil by far, than it’s either Claiborne or Richardson.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
GD it, I thought that didn’t look right.
nickjs21 - January 20, 2012
I will lose my mind if we take Matt Kalil in this scenario.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
In the extremely unlikely scenario that no one would trade up for Kalil, draft him and he have a super OL.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
and still no QB or any playmakers offense not to mention the colossal waste of using the 4th overall pick on converting a LT to a RT.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
Which is why, in all likelihood, if he somehow made it past the Rams and Vikings, we would trade down. He probably won’t even make it past those two teams. If he did, we’re in for a big pay day.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
In this peticular scenerio, I would see us trading down to the likes of the Chefs (yes I typed that on purpose) or the Cowirls
J. W. - January 22, 2012
Was “peticular” on purpose?
Dawg Nuts - January 22, 2012
well, in that scenario it doesn’t make sense to get a playmaker on offense because you would be massively reaching based on a need and wouldn’t get as high a quality of player. And like Simms said, in the extremely unlikely scenario that no one trades up for Kalil (and being stuck there is very unlikely itself), this happens.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
I guess in this extremely unlikely scenario I would rather take Claiborne b/c CBs in general are more valuable than RTs. I also have a hard time believing we would find all kinds of suitors for Kalil. The scenario is extremely unlikely and I highly doubt we have to worry about it.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
I guess this extremely unlikely scenario is really irrelevant anyways.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
I’d note here that many top LTs chosen in the top picks started their careers at RT before moving to the other side of the line after a few years. I’d cite examples, but I’m too lazy to look it up. I noticed this in doing research on past offensive draft success.
Also note that I’m not suggesting a tackle is where we should go with the fourth pick.
batard - January 20, 2012
No doubt, no point reaching for someone else when you can improve a part of your team that can never be too good, other than at LT
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
Look like hell to trade down. Claiborne, Coples would be options. Or whichever prospect rises up into being a top 5 pick between now and April.
rufio - January 20, 2012
Irsay has been throwing the RG3 name around a lot.
Red-Right-88 - January 20, 2012
You never know. Griffin could surpass Luck with a great performance at the combine. If the Colts take RG3 at #1 all hell will break loose. *though highly unlikely.
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
Andrew Luck does cocaine*
rufio - January 20, 2012
Ryan Mallet does cocaine without an asterisk.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
If that happened, then we would trade up using both first rounders…
J. W. - January 22, 2012
A lot of people have thrown around reasons for the Colts to trade down, if they did it with us, they’d still be able to get RG3.
Sadly, pigs are not flying just quite yet. (As far as I know.)
Simmsinns - January 22, 2012
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
What about a different senario! The Colts have just cleaned house. They are going to hire a new coaching staff. If you were a new coach would you want to take a chance on a rookie QB or stick with Peyton Manning? Coaches are not given much time to succeed, and you’d probably have Manning for another 4-5 years.
I ask this question because maybe, just maybe the Colts swearing they will take Luck is a smoke screen. What draft picks should we give up to move into the #1 spot to get luck?
southbound - January 20, 2012
I don’t think anyone can count on Manning at this point. It’s no guarantee he comes back at all and even if he does his contract is only for three more years. I think a new coach would love to have an insurance policy for that.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Well, if I was a new coach and worried about early success – and if the GM would let me – I’d keep Manning and draft Luck. The team can afford that with the rookie salary cap. If Manning comes back healthy, I’ve just bought time to make a good, young QB even better, and if he cracks like a thin-shelled egg in the middle of the season I have an insurance policy in place.
JustBob - January 20, 2012
They won’t keep both. That’s over $50 million in QBs.
nickjs21 - January 21, 2012
You have to remember on Defense next year we get back, Fujita and Ward. Add them to this defense and we should be even better.
champion64 - January 20, 2012
I don’t think Fujita helps much.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Me neither and TJ Ward has to be much better this year than he was last year. I think he took a few steps back from year 1 to year 2, which was probably to be expected with the scheme and position change.
PaduaDSP - January 20, 2012
I think he would look alot better with a ball hawking safety to pair him with. Let him play more like Troy P, roam around the line and make hits all over the place. Id love to see him blitz more simply because with a full head of steam id expect some forced fumbles.
Justin Kowalczyk - January 20, 2012
Ward was good playing up at the line before he got hurt.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
How can you play good when you’re on the ground every play?
The Licensed Pessimist - January 20, 2012
Every play? Okay.
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
sometimes I feel that a better DBN s/n would be Hyperbole Alert.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/2011/10/the-alleged-disappearing-act-of-tj-ward/?utm_source=bleacherreport.com&utm_medium=referral
Football Outsiders only has stats for 2010 because Ward didn’t play enough this year, but his highest similarity score was Eric Weddle: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/player/24373/tj-ward
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
The same FA Eric Weddle who’s making a gazillion dollars?
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
The Licensed Pessimist - January 20, 2012
Did you read the article NTN linked?
Bernie19Kosar - January 20, 2012
that’s what I am thinking. I can see him spelling Gocong and maybe even DQ in running situations, but he isn’t at the level of a starter on a good D.
bross09 - January 20, 2012
Good write up. H&H know what they’re doing and they’re on the right track.
Also, I hated that game as a kid. The trap always got stuck on that stupid pole. My nephew asked to play with him once (while running out of his room) and I faked taking a nap until he left me alone.
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
OT:
Oh Roberto Heredia. WHY!
SpecialBrownie - January 20, 2012
lol
Brownie's Year - January 20, 2012
Also in Indians news:
emily522 - January 20, 2012
Kipnis is from a suburb of Chicago, so being a Bulls fan is completely understandable. 6 was a lifelong frontrunner.
Simmsinns - January 20, 2012
It was mainly the Yankees thing that made me laugh.
emily522 - January 21, 2012
At least he knows who it is important to hate.
notthatnoise - January 20, 2012
Tim Couch, RG3, Bernie Kosar etc.
My heart soared when Bernie manipulated the draft to get drafted by Cleveland in the supplemental draft -way back when. After Art Modell ripped out my heart and stomped on it, I don’t know how I went on – I was in major pain when Orlando Pace was drafted a year early – and I nearly died when Tim Couch was drafted. As much as I hated Modell for steeling the browns away, I knew that the Couch decision would have an even longer lasting legacy. The Quarterback position is the last place you want to fill with a quality player!!!
Seriously – if I had been Couch I would have registered for the baseball draft and held out forever from Cleveland. The organization prior to H&H has shown only the will to pander to the dimmest fan who wants a glitzy QB and instant glory. Couch should have known that signing with Cleveland was a career death sentence. If you are (or really – if I am) ever in the position of building a football team from scratch – You (I) make the Offensive line the absolute first priority. If every Offensive lineman is awesome you can run Miss Piggy up the middle every play and she’ll finish the year with 1000yds rushing. Next comes the defense (starting with the line then the skill positions) then the skill positions on offense with the QB being last. Of course you all know this – and filling the QB role won’t happen the first year – when it does if everything else is just right, you win the SB with Trent Dilfer (sigh)
So I’ve wandered a long way from my point – Is Colt our Super Bowl QB? I don’t know. is RG3 better? maybe -he could be (as someone else mused) the second coming of Jamarcus Russel. But what I am sure of is that all of the rest pieces aren’t really in place yet. Really we can get a real skill guy on offense (seems like the place where improvement can be most dramatic is WR) We need to improve our Run defense (I don’t know why this isn’t being discussed as a more serious point) and it seems like the most impact there would be MLB. A shutdown corner or awesome safety could have repercussions all over the defense too.
The offensive line can protect a good QB and if we get RG3 it won’t be as dismal as Couch, but with the other features in place Dilfer can win even if Marino couldn’t
Royce Groff - January 20, 2012
You do realize that 3/5ths of our O line have been to the Pro Bowl and one of them goes every single year.
HenryDawg - January 20, 2012
The NFL is a “What have you done for me Lately” league. So the 3/5ths is moot, especially if ther are only on one side.
J. W. - January 22, 2012
They are but I don’t think they separate RT/LT for the pro bowl, I think its just tackle so they will almost always come from the left.
HenryDawg - January 22, 2012
I’ve been all over getting a MLB. This year many wonderful things can happen between the draft and free agency.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
We have one of the best MLB’s already.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I love DQ but the run stopping isn’t happening. He’s fast and athletic enough to play weakside. Or a rotation. However it happens, something needs to be addressed in run D.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
I’m expecting us to add a DE at some point in time, plus the assumed (hoped?) belief that Tuba, Sheard and Taylor will get better in another season in this defense.
The lack of speed we had at OLB hurt us at times this season (We can get by with Gocong at SLB with more speed at WLB, but Fujita and Gocong hurt us). Mitchell’s injury/ineffectiveness after his decent start, hurt us as well. Plus, I think the loss of Ward played a role later on in the season as well.
I’m not saying we will be great against the run next season, but I think we will be better.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
In short, MLB isn’t our problem.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
This is contrary to what every expert has said on the matter.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
I bet we gave up most of the yardage on the perimeter.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
I’ve seen a hundred guys run up the gut to the next level against this team. But maybe i’m wearing rose-colored binders.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
The problems stopping the run weren’t DQ’s fault.
rufio - January 21, 2012
I agree, I never said that. But how could a monster mike not be beneficial?
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
The same reason drafting a LT wouldn’t have much impact. We already have one.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
Because you can only play one at a time.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
Wow, when will you guys be saying “I do”. Move him or keep letting him make his million tackles from behind.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
What?
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I was saying, it sounds like you want to marry DQ to the mike. But as many teams have shown, it’s a simple fake to the next level. 75 percent of his tackles are for gain.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Moon?
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
I wish, I only ever understood 2 posts I think…lol.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Sound like Moon.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
It would be awesome, but I’m not sure I could carry on his legacy. I’m a bit Golan, a bit Moon, A bit no one but me. And a small bit of all of you.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Clever ploy, Goloon.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
Ha, I need an alter ego who agrees with everything I say….Goloon is the perfect choice.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
most of his tackles are for a gain, but because of the position of mlb/ilb, most will be. Among LBs who don’t rush the passer primarily (those guys are in the backfield more so dominate the TFL leaderboards), he ranks 4th or 5th in TFLs. I put 4th or 5th because it depends on how you define Kiwanuka as a LB who rushes the passer.
Also by looking, he clearly ranks among the top 10 of similar LBs in % of tackles behind the LOS…and he is barely above 10%.
This is also ignoring the fact that of “non-blitzing” LBs, he was one of the better players at getting to the QB.
This would have been perfectly true when he was miscast as an ILB in a 3-4 (where he had a total of 3 TFLs in his last 2 full seasons), but not in this D.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
Ok, I didn’t check stats, I still want to know why teams run up the gut on us all the time for massive yardage.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Taylor doesn’t take up as many blockers as he could. He provided a nice pass rush, but surprisingly he graded out quite a bit below average in run stopping. Considering his size, I think that’s easier to improve anyways than being able to rush the passer.
I was curious at the stats too and while I saw him make some awesome plays, I was a bit surprised at how good he actually was (and I thought he deserved consideration for the pro bowl). Its even more shocking how few big plays he made behind the LOS in the 3-4.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
I stand firm we need a headhunter at mike.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
I think we need a quicker, coverage guy at Will who can read and react well.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
That’s where I think DQ could belong….but that’s just me.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
I don’t think he is athletic enough, or good enough in coverage…but that’s also just me.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
Ok, but if he can’t handle it, blow up the LB corps. We HAVE to stop the run in the future.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
I think that because of the way the league is going, the best way to stop the run isn’t with a MLB, a DT, or a DE. It’s with a quarterback and an offense that can score. Most coaches panic quickly and go pass-happy to catch up, which is when the pass rushers “pin their ears back” and get after their QB.
Legoman0721 - January 22, 2012 via Android app
we have to stop the run, but I don’t think it makes sense to move a player out of his natural position.
bross09 - January 22, 2012
Then replace that player regardless of how much we love him.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 22, 2012
this has nothing to do with how much we love DQ. DQ does not need to be replaced, nor does he need to move to WILL LB.
bross09 - January 22, 2012
Why is replacing our best LB a way for us to get better?
Bernie19Kosar - January 22, 2012
Because our best linebacker isn’t much of a run stuffer.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 24, 2012
If 25% of a LB’s tackles were for loss he would be the greatest LB of all time.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
O.T. I got my wife hooked on HBO GoT after 2 episodes…We are buying the books. 75 percent was a nominal figure, I said I didn’t check stats. Yet through all this defense of DQ, we still allow a bunch of run yardage.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Its a team game! One guy isn’t responsible for stopping the run. Its the whole freaking defense’s responsibility.
Its not all on DQ when we do/don’t stop the run just like it isn’t all on Tebow when the Broncos win or lose.
rufio - January 22, 2012
Or McCoy
The New Kardiac Kids - January 24, 2012
especially those LBs who don’t primarily rush the passer. 54% of Ware’s tackles were in the backfield, but he lives back there anyways.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
Hmmm, maybe an ILB who doesn’t russ the passer could be something?
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Jackson made plays all over the field this season.
BuenosAires_Dawg - January 22, 2012
Yes, heaven forbid he chase people down from behind when the players around him fail to do their jobs.
rufio - January 22, 2012
I like DQ and although we play 4-3 there’s no reason we couldn’t bring in another ILB. There are possibilities for hybrid D’s and such. And because he can “chase them down”, I see no reason he couldn’t bump to will at times.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 24, 2012
I wonder if Couch made more money in football than he would have in baseball. I was leaning toward giving Colt another shot until I saw his concussion history. I would love to find a QB in Free Agency, then we could really have some fun with this draft.
Red-Right-88 - January 21, 2012
Tim Couch, RG3, Bernie Kosar, etc.
Yes I do realize that 3/5 of our OL has been to the PB and we have continued representation, To which I say it’s about (deleted) time and the Tim Couch Drafting philosophical legacy is finally fading into the past.
We may have one of the best MLB’s already – So what’s the real solution to Stinking up the league playing Run Defense?? Cleveland (even one that plays a 4/3 defense) can never have enough Fearsome Linebackers.
I was trying to be hyperbolic suggesting that Tim Couch should have tried playing Baseball – If he really had Baseball ability my comparison should have read “registered for the Caribbean Curling league” ’Cause any organization that drafts a Marquis QB before having an OL is doomed to Stink for 10 of the next 12 years.
Finally – I wanna have the Tight Ends from New England (or their equivalent) But only after we have an actual #1 WR
( shakes clenched fist impotently at Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow (jr))
Royce Groff - January 21, 2012
We have those tight ends in Moore, Watson and Smith. Whether it’s the line, QB or play calling, they aren’t living up to their potential.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Alex Smith sucks, and I am guessing that Ben Watson will be cut. Evan Moore is a wildcard at best.
The only TE we have to be excited about is Jordan Cameron.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I disagree. He is a good blocker and he can catch the ball as well. By no means is he an All-Pro but he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes. You could have a lot worse.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
Except fumbling the ball when he takes a handoff.
rufio - January 21, 2012
I don’t think he is a good running back or full back. . . .
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
I would be much happier if we added someone with some potential to fill that spot. This year is the best we could ever expect from Alex Smith.
If I can get the same production from a guy off the street IMO, that means you suck.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I agree with a guy with potential, but I am fine with him as a depth TE. If Watson retires/is cut because of the concussions, we don’t have a TE who can block all that well.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
I think Evan Moore will get better, he couldn’t stay on the field because we had to help our RT with blocking but he caught more than double the passes of the year before and had like 37 catches which is really good for his playing time. He also had 4TD which was a team high (I know that’s sad).
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
This gets my dander up, I will hold my tongue and say game-planning was sub-par this year. We all know it and we are hiring an OC. They know it too.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
What have you seen that could make you believe that our TE’s are good? Watson is not bad, can catch and doesn’t kill us blocking. But he always seems to get banged up (3 concussions this season alone), and didn’t seem to fit very well in this offense. His contract isn’t too bad next season, his final year of his deal, and wouldn’t surprise me to see him cut.
Moore is fools gold and I made my feelings on known. The only TE I really like is Jordan Cameron and that’s just because he is unknown at this time and has some potential.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
But you trust this front office who gave Moore a contract? I like our TE situation better than any other position on this team.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Other than my personal Jesus…Joe Thomas.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
I don’t think the Evan Moore contract is a good one. Even good FO’s make mistakes.
And I like our defensive line, defensive backfield and offensive line more than I like our TE’s. Hell, I will even throw in LB’s.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
So you are really saying that Jayme Mitchell and Usama Young have more promise than Alex Smith, or for that fact Evan Moore?
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
You just happen to be overlooking Joe Haden, TJ Ward and Sheldon Brown when looking at the secondary. Not to mention Tuba, Sheard and Taylor on the defensive line.
Have to look at the entire group. We don’t have a TE that would be considered above average. That means your group of TE’s suck.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
We are the Browns of late. We don’t have a group of anything that doesn’t suck somewhere. My personal opinion is that our TE’s can catch and other Cameron, they can block.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
And yes, everyone has more promise than Alex Smith.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I will just agree to disagree. I have seen the potential of our tight ends and I would replace Young, Mitchell, Adams, Pashos and any number of players in the groups you mentioned before I would replace a single TE on this team.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 21, 2012
Strawman.
rufio - January 22, 2012
I’m not being a strawman. My point was that as a “group” TE is more solid than all other units as a whole. I think there is at least one guy in all other groups on this team that bring down that group as a whole. This is to say, I feel they are more fundamentally sound as a whole. You can cherry pick all the guys you want out of the other groups but it doesn’t matter. I’m speaking of any one group as a whole.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 24, 2012
Hey Royce, please use the reply button under the message you are replying to, makes the thread much easier for us to follow. Also, we don’t use the subject line around here.
As for the rush defense question, I think a lot of it has to do with the youth of our defensive line. Three of our four starters were first year starters. They have loads of talent (Mitchell!) but are learning as they go, plus when you sport the pass defense we have, most teams will try to run.
On the QB front, if you sit around and wait for a team to develop a offensive line of Pro Bowlers, you will never take a QB. I’m not sold on Pashos holding up, but that position can be addressed without using a first rounder.
The Browns are dead in the water without a QB, we need to address this ASAP.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
Mitchell got totally snubbed for Pro Bowl votes. As Heckert said, there really is no question that he is our best pass rusher, the only real question is whether he is the best pass rusher in our division. Probably not yet the best in the league . . . yet.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
I think he will be rewarded when the defensive POY is named.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
It would obviously be best if we could grab RG3 at 4, but if we must trade I see it this way: we traded Julio Jones for Phil Taylor, Greg Little, and RG3. As long as we don’t give up a second rounder I’m happy.
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
My idea of this trade includes the other first, which is why I wouldn’t give up a second.
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
Retrospective reasoning: see above.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
What just because somebody else said something similar? You all have been saying the same things over and over. I’m just giving my 2 cents.
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
I’m not trying to criticize you personally by any means. Sorry if I offended you, that was not my intention. I was just quickly responding to what you said and pointing out that, yes, someone did say something similar. It was almost word-for-word the same, in fact. Again, that’s not to say I’m criticizing you personally, because I definitely don’t expect anyone to jump into a 300+ comment thread and read every single word. But if you’re going to leave a comment, you’ve got to be open to responses.
You’re right, we are definitely saying the same things over and over, this is further proof of that. I was just trying to point out that this particular reasoning was touched on before, and not that there was anything wrong with you stating your opinion.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
I’m just trying to agree with B19K’s article is all.
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
and believe me, no offense taken. I’ve been around here long enough, and this is the internet after all. I was just trying to clarify.
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
I’m not sure I understand the retrospective reasoning argument? If we’re looking at the value of the trade in total then what’s been said about Julio Jones = X + X + X… seems like a good way to do it.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
Using retrospective reasoning as a justification for accepting less than what w’re capable of landing is what I disagree with. (By “less”, I’m referring to what may be lost in a trade up.) I’ll try to clarify what I mean by that.
B19K said to think of it like this: “Julio Jones for Phil Taylor, Greg Little and RG3.”
While that is a good deal on paper, I don’t think it’s justification when we can get more by not trading up, given the circumstances.
I’ll cite my previous response:
I should say, when everything is said and done, all the picks associated with the trade are spent, then I get breaking down the trade like so: Julio Jones for Phil Taylor, Greg Little, (future #22 overall)
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
Something just occurred to me, our #4 pick has absolutely nothing to do with the Falcons trade, and knowing it’s a massive factor in a trade up, then it’s not truly Julio Jones = Phil Taylor + Greg Little + RG3.
It would have to be: 4th pick (Kalil/Blackmon) + Julio Jones = Phil Taylor + Greg Little + RG3
Despite the fact the what we gave up went to 2 separate teams.
Personally, I think the final equation will be the last one I mentioned in the above comment.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
No, this is the correct equation if we go through with this:
4th pick this year + Julio Jones + 3rd round pick last year (around 70th overall)
=
Phil Taylor, Greg Little, Owen Marecic, RG3 & Atlanta’s 4th rounder this year (around 120th or so).
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
I stand corrected. I let those later picks completely slip my mind.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
Who could possibly forget Owen Marecic?
KC got a good player with our pick in the 3rd round by the way — Justin Houston, who the Chiefs voted as their most valuable rookie.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
I was completely unaware of that. It’s interesting, if we were to, let’s say 10 years from now, factor in all those players taken with the picks involved in the trade, it still wouldn’t give us an accurate idea of who got the better deal. That’s because things like each individual teams’ ability to evaluate prospects and draft are such a major factor.
Which is actually another reason why that’s the wrong way to look at this. At the time of the 2011 draft, we made a great trade. We need to move forward now, and weigh any future deal on it’s own.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
I do agree with this, I also think that greater than or lesser than arguments are a little pointless. Really you’re just trying to build the best team possible. Sometimes that means just taking BPA, but other times it means trading up or down. I think not having a pre-set dogma about those sorts of things or making it a competition is the best strategy.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
Indeeb. That’s the reason I didn’t like the retrospective nature of Player = X + X ect. initially.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
I’m following you now, but I still think in this case, its OK to look at what we’re getting for not taking Jones. Also the more Heckert I read the more I can see why we did it. He doesn’t even believe in a #1 receiver. He thinks as long as you have a good QB and 3 good receivers you can play. Unless he’s smoke screening we’re not taking Blackmon in the draft. His Philly time sort of backs this up.
HenryDawg - January 21, 2012
That’s a very good point about WRs. Philly has some fast guys, but they don’t have an Andre Johnson, a Calvin Johnson, a Larry Fitzgerald, or anyone like that. Jackson is a good WR, but he’s not elite.
Doc's Kid - January 21, 2012
This is a hundred percent right. It works in reverse as well — it’s why you don’t hold onto Brian Robiskie or David Veikune just because they were 2nd round picks. If they suck, you let them go and move on.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
Yup. I think it was bross that touched on the reverse of this quite awhile back. I think he was addressing the topic of why Carolina should still take Cam Newton despite the wasted pick on Jimmy Clausen.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
What you get when you make that draft trade for picks is a percentage chance to get a good player. That fanshot up provides a good visual look at exactly what that percentage chance is.
You can’t compare player to player.
rufio - January 22, 2012
Houston was a really talented player that dropped I believe because of character issues.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
He failed a drug test at the combine.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
I thought so. I heard him mentioned possibly in the 1st before that.
bross09 - January 21, 2012
That is phenomenally stupid.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
It’s pretty hard to get dumber than that.
Maybe if someone got busted the day after they declare for the NFL draft. That would be dumber.
Okay, much, much dumber.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
That’s so dumb I almost believe his story.
notthatnoise - January 22, 2012
While I agree with your larger point, you also have to consider the diminishing returns on draft picks as your acquire more and more of them. More picks isn’t always better, and the right pick can be worth way more than several picks that are only pretty good.
We aren’t necessarily “taking less” if we trade up.
rufio - January 21, 2012
You’re right, not necessarily. I am trying to factor in value. I’ll admit, by not being fond of losing the 22nd pick, I’m also assuming that we use it to draft a valuable player, and the same with the 4th pick, whether it’s RG3 or not.
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
I don’t like losing the 22nd pick either, but the fact that it usually takes a lot to move up doesn’t mean we are necessarily taking less if we do. In fact, I don’t think we could even evaluate it until the day of the draft when we are on the clock.
rufio - January 22, 2012
You’re right. Right now it’s just a lot of speculation. Everything is bound to change by draft day.
Simmsinns - January 22, 2012
Correction, it would be: we traded Julio Jones + our 3rd round pick in the 2011 draft for Phil Taylor, Greg Little, and RG3. People always forget the 3rd round pick — not a huge deal, but it was part of the price for those players.
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t we also receive a third and 2 fourths?
StuckInPa - January 21, 2012 via Android app
I believe so.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
No, we got a first (the 27th pick last year, which traded up with a 3rd rounder for Phil Taylor at 21), a first this year (the 22nd pick), a 2nd last year (Little), a fourth last year (Owen Marecic) and another fourth (this year’s).
TheDriveStillHurts - January 21, 2012
What if the Browns drafted Blackmon at 4 and Kendall Wright at 22? They could then go defense in 2nd round, RT in 3rd, and offensive and defensive depth with remainder.
NM Dawg - January 21, 2012
Who’s going to throw the ball to those two WRs?
Dawg Nuts - January 21, 2012
What’s Ratty doing these days?
Simmsinns - January 21, 2012
Winning any election we get to vote in.
notthatnoise - January 21, 2012
Spergon.
Bernie19Kosar - January 21, 2012
No open questions then?
The New Kardiac Kids - January 22, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.