Browns 2010 Draft - Top 5 Needs
by Brownsyup on Jan 11, 2010 3:15 PM EST
Email
Print
I thought it might be a good idea to approach the draft from a "needs" standpoint. We've had a couple of draft threads and it is great to see the comments on various players coming into the draft. I've definitely seen a few unfamiliar names who look pretty good.
At some point in the process of creating a prioritized list of players in the draft, I hope the Browns look at holes in their talent pool and try to address them through the draft. I think the draft should be a synthesis of best-player-available (BPA) and needs of the team. So I think it might be a good idea to start with what everyone thinks are the Browns' top 5 needs on the team.
For ground rules I think everyone that posts should not just snipe at the other guy's list but also make one of their own. Also don't get sidetracked by which position should be drafted in which round, etc... this has nothing to do with that. This is just "What are the top 5 needs of the Cleveland Browns?" Prioritize your list and give a few reasons why you think these are the most important. Here is mine:
1. Quarterback - I believe this position to be one of if not THE most important position on a championship team. It takes time to develop and time to determine IF the one you have (especially a rookie) can be developed. Right now I do not believe we have a quarterback that can get the job done so this has to be addressed sooner rather than later.
2. Right Tackle - We have the beginning of a great O-line. A premiere RT would cement this unit which would make all the rest of the players on offense look better including the QB and RB.
3. Cornerback - We were burnt deep with opposing receivers wide-open time and time again this year. We need more speed at this position.
4. Running Back - Given that the offense was the worst in the league, I see offensive positions (skill and otherwise) as priorities. Provided we accept Harrison as the smaller speed back (and I have no reason not to at this point), I see the need here to be more of a sizable power running back.
5. Linebacker - I probably should be more specific about inside/outside but whatever the case may be we need some linebackers that can pass defend. We need more speed at this position if we are going to run a 3-4. Teams were ripping us up in the passing game all season long.
Note that I'm not saying this is the order in which the Browns should pick up players in the draft but the needs should inform the choices.
This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.
334 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
1. QB – As we’ve agreed before, though, the only way picking one at #7 makes sense is if the player is worthy.
2. DB – We need more talent at both safety and CB.
3. RT – We could get away with an average RG if we sandwiched him between Mack and a good RT.
4. RG – We could still use RG help, though.
5. LB – Depending on how the staff views the youth we currently have, it may be necessary to throw more talent at the wall to see what sticks.
6. Since we have so many picks I’ll add DE as the 6th need. Let’s get some youth on that line.
Good ones. I do agree with all of them. the problem is, in the draft and elite RG is few and far between and most tackles end up being pass blockers more suited for the left side. For now, I don’t think there are really any guys in the draft that are a significant upgrade from hadnot and porkchop. I do agree with QB but the only ones I would take with the 7th pick would likely be gone. DB yes and LB, yes. our ILBs are somewhat overrated and you need the ILBs on a 3-4 to b playmakers vs the pass and the run.
we could definitely use depth along the DL. that is something more for the later rounds. Suh will be gone and McCoy
http://www.footballfanspot.com/alexcarringtonscout.htm
I like this alex carrington guy. not great competition in the sun belt but from what I have heard and seen he is an Ideal 3-4 DE. I also like Rubin at NT and rogers at the other end.
I agree with most of this, but let’s not stray too far from the topic. BY is trying to limit the discussion to needs, not specific draftees.
I was just reading the whole post (I only skimmed through it) and I do have a couple of diagreements…
First of all, speed is overrated for a CB. granted I don’t want a slowpoke out there but dante hall was fast but got burned, a good receiver knows how to fool a CB if he makes poor reads. that is one of the weaknesses of haden (but I like moving haden over to safety and bulking him up). to be a shutdown corner, you need the instincts to play man coverage PLUS the speed to cover most guys.
Also, some of the best teams get the QB later after building up a team (O line and D).
Patriots: Belichick built up that D (which was already partially built from parcells and carroll) before he drafted brady.
Steelers: Built up a defense before they got Big Ben
Ravens: Built up the D and O-line Before Flacco.
yes a championship team needs a good QB but they need to get the pieces around the QB first.
Ravens: Built up the D and O-line Before Flacco.
I’ll say this with a tiny bit of sarcasm, but the Ravens built their D and didn’t bother getting a QB and they were still able to win the Super Bowl.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
that is true. The point is that getting a QB before you get pieces around them Isn’t always the best decision. that being said, we do have some of the pieces but not all.
On the other hand there is nothing wrong with building an offense that puts up points like the Saints and Colts then building a defense at a later date. I just want wins. If its by an explosive offense or an explosive defense i don’t care. Just get us wins.
by BornInThePound on Jan 12, 2010 2:51 AM EST up reply actions
Thats why I said
there is nothing wrong with building an offense. I didn’t single out one position i said the whole offense.
by BornInThePound on Jan 12, 2010 3:16 AM EST up reply actions
I should do some research on what is better to build a team around, offense or defense.
I would assume that outside of the Colts, who I throw out because Peyton Manning is a cyborg, most offenses don’t have the shelf life of great defenses.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 12, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
yes…think about the great dynasties.
browns of the 50’s
Lions of the 50’s
tom landry’s cowboys of the 70’s
steelers of the 70’s
steelers of the 21st century
pats this decade
the bears in the 40’s
Early 70’s dolphins
Packers of the 60’s
the cowboys of the 90’s
The 49ers.
The bills of the 90’s
Except for the cowboys of the 90’s and the 49ers, the rest had strong defenses as their base…strong offense does NOT a dynasty make (unless u r bill walsh)
rec’d for this:
Peyton Manning is a cyborg
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 12, 2010 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
I have crapped on Mangini a lot but he deserves credit for this.
I love our offensive line.
I love the fact that our center is an absolute monster.
I love that our team can walk up to the LOS, and run the ball right down the opposite teams throat, with no threat of a passing game.
I love that on the next down, we can do the same exact freaking thing and they can’t stop it.
I want more. I want Iupati. He is a man amongst boys. We could put him next to Alex Mack at RG and QB sneak on every single 3rd and inches for the next 6-8 years. I want to take the ball and just destroy teams. I don’t care what it takes, but I want him.
My wishlist goes like this:
1. Pass rush
2. Offensive Line
3. Running Back
4. Defensive Back
5. Defensive Line
When I look at the playoff teams they all seem to have something in common; A great QB or dominating offensive and defensive lines.
I don’t see a Manning/Brees QB in this draft.
I love that our team can walk up to the LOS, and run the ball right down the opposite teams throat, with no threat of a passing game.
I love that on the next down, we can do the same exact freaking thing and they can’t stop it.
x100
I don’t see a Manning/Brees QB in this draft.
Unfortunate, but I have to agree.
yes me too. many ppl have compared bradford to ELI manning but eli isn’t peyton. At 7, i still would have reservations about taking bradford. He has had injury problems and didn’t play under center that much…however, i love his decision making.
My reservations would be strictly about the health of the shoulder. That’s why the Browns employ doctors, though.
yes. I do think he could be a very good QB but not a manning or a brees (possibly a brees but not likely)
He could be a Brees, but the reports that say his shoulder is likely to be reinjured easily are scary.
yes just as easily as eli, who had the exact same injury.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 12, 2010 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
They will be prodding Bradford with everything they have at the combine. We’ll hear something about the results, I am sure.
I have faith more in our pass rush then at RB, DL or DB’s. WImbley might still be underacheiving some, but he is on the right track with 6.5 sacks last yr. he looked good last year for most of it. Roth got 4 sacks in 6 games…on that pace, that is almost 10 sacks for the yr. this is not fluke. he was drafted 46th overall a few years ago, and when he got consistent playing time in miami, he did very well.
Wimbley’s sack numbers tailed off after his somewhat fast start but our pass rush as a whole did not tail off. As a matter of fact it got better despite no sacks for Kam over the last few weeks. If anything, that tells me he was the focal point of the pass blocking schemes and others stepped up.
I can’t wait to see what he will do next year if we add another good rusher or two. He’ll probably get back to 10 + sacks.
I agree completely. my prediction for him is more like 8, maybe 9. He now has established rushers such as matt roth that they have to guard on every play so he won’t be as much double teamed and focused on as he was down the stretch. roth I feel can get like 8 and jackson is always good for a couple up the middle. I see us putting up good sack numbers and getting a MINIMUM of about 15-16 sacks out of our rush ends. that is actually somewhat of a strength (although some consider it a weakness.
Funny you should mention Roth. I had just bee thinking today that if I were to make a list of the guys on the current roster that I would like to see on the field again in 2010 then Roth would be one of the guys that made that list without question.
I didn’t really know who he was until we signed him, so I was expecting just a warm body to fill a roster spot. Instead we got someone who says, “Looks like there’s a tackle between me and the QB. I’d better put him on his ass so I can get to that ball-tossing queen back there.” And then he does it.
I’d rather wait a year and see what Locker and Pryor look like before grabbing a QB.
Big fan of taking O-linemen in the draft. I’d be happy if we went either O-line or DB in the first round. Not so much with other positions.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
Or their the Eagles cuz we have their GM.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 11, 2010 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
I see pryor being more of an NFL QB than locker. both are similar b/c of their scrambling ability. However, Pryor spends his time in a pro style offense and takes a lot of snaps under center.
Washington’s offense is more pro-style now than Ohio State’s.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
yes they do run somewhat of a pro style but I don’t know for certain which one runs more of a “pro-style”. its all about how you define that loose phrase. i would say pryor looked better than locker did his sophmore yr but that is unfair b/c he got hurt very early on. with that being said, pryor does look good this yr and maybe not AS good as locker but he has one yr less of experience. Both offenses are good for them, but I dunno yet how good of a coach sakisian and coaching helps development.
As a Buckeye fan, neither do I. But he will probably stay throughout his senior season. Anything can happen until then.
I didn’t see Vince Young as an NFL QB either. But the Titans are making it work. Pryor is better than Vince was at the end of his sophomore season. He is nowhere close to ready, but it is pretty pessimistic to think that after two full calendar years he wouldn’t be.
Yeah, it’s way too early to make any judgements on Pryor. I would be very surprised if he came out after next season; he just has so much to improve in the passing game. But he can certainly get there.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
He has a ways to go.
I think there is about a 5% chance he declares after this season. He has a lot of work to do.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 11, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions
Or the Eagles now that we have their GM.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 11, 2010 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
I want QB Dan LeFevour if he is there in the 3rd round.The Kid has it.Good arm,smarts,can move around and always looks down field and makes things happen.MAC QB’s in the past have been pretty good and after watching alot of replays of his games think he will be a good NFL QB.
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 11, 2010 7:56 PM EST up reply actions
I’m not sure how LeFevour translates to the NFL, but that bowl game was a joy to watch. The throw that set up the go-ahead TD in the late 4th Quarter was a throw only top 50% of NFL QBs have the talent to make.
I also love 4 year starter types. That kind of experience is so big.
On the other hand, LeFevour has struggled against good competition at times, plays in a offense that isn’t anything close to pro style and seems a little small.
3rd round sounds about right.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
The thing about him is how he throws the ball.Even when running he always has his shoulders lined up and is ready to toss downfield.I think if he is there in the 3rd or 4th we grab him and see if some magic can be worked out.He is a west coast offense type of QB.
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 1:06 AM EST up reply actions
I agree but a very good looking project QB.If we go after Hasselbeck this could be a very nice young QB to slap in the backup/learning spot.See how Hasselbeck can’t stay on the field for more then 10 games a year might not be a bad idea
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 3:48 AM EST up reply actions
No way. Not anywhere close to worth it because we already have Joe T. Even if Okung was the next Clady (and I don’t think he is) he wouldn’t be worth it with Thomas already here.
He’s not even worth taking at #7.
I don’t think he is physical enough. His value is in that he is (around) 300lbs and a nimble pass protector. We can find a guy without quite that pass blocking potential who is a better run blocker with better raw strength who can play on the right side, and we can find him much later than #7.
Ah, gotcha. Well, this Lupati guy seems like a pretty beastly fellow. Plus, I’m always all for Samoans. Especially if they have really long hair. I don’t know why, they just always seem really tough. And I’d pee my pants if I ever lined up against anyone like that on the football field.
He is a poor man’s Joe T or ryan clady. he is drafted this high b/c of the need now for an elite LT but he will likely not be elite. he could be a good starter and maybe make a pro bowl, but JT has already made 3 and I think he is on pace to be one of the best players at his position in the game (if he isn’t already) and down the road a possible HOFer (IF the browns get better and IF he stays healthy)
I hate to burst the bubble. But the Cleveland Browns finished dead last statistically on offense and defense. That means there were 31 teams out of 32 that were better. This was despite Rodney Harrison´s gargantuan effort and lets not forget that it took Jamal Lewis in excess of 30 carries to breach the 100 yard mark, and that Rodney Harrison had almost 40 touches in his record breaking foray while barely winning the game with a bone headed one dimensional approach. This was a fluke, the little guy does not have wheels, but now we´ll have to pay him starters money and he´s clawed into our roster with immediate entitlement for the unforseeable future.
If you gave the ball to your Granny 100 times she would walk for a 100 yards. Get real, please.
wow…classic…
I hate to burst your bubble but RODNEY HARRISON retired last year and is an analyst on NBC Sports’ Football Night in America. Did he come out of retirement to play for the browns?? This is definitely news to me. I follow the browns and I never heard about this. you must have some amazing sources!!
He also switched positions too?? From what I remember, Rodney Harrison was a Safety. Safeties usually do not get “carries”.
I hate to burst your bubble but the browns DID win 5 games and finished with a better record than 7 teams. they also allowed less points than 10 teams.
No one here is calling Jamal Lewis a savior, in fact many people here think he is somewhat washed up.
Oh, and on the day where “Rodney Harrison” had almost 40 touches, he ran for almost 300 yards.
Maybe that game was somewhat of a fluke but he still performed very well in the next 2 games. He has performed well when he has gotten the chance…is his whole career a fluke??
I don’t know how you can say he doesn’t have wheels, unless you define wheels a different way then everyone else. “Wheels” is slang in football for when a guy is very fast. If you are using it in that way you are completely incorrect. maybe he does not have wheels when compared to chris johnson but he is definitely faster than you and is faster than most backs. at the combine he ran about a 4.46 40 yard dash.
Harrison has very good quickness and is one of the quickest backs in this draft out of the blocks. His initial burst to the hole is excellent
does that sound like a player without wheels?? I think “Rodney Harrison” has wheels. maybe your standard for “wheels” is much higher.
Oh, don’t pay any attention to him. He’s the comic relief poster for this site.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 12, 2010 8:51 AM EST up reply actions
I feel compelled to answer more thoroughly, but I´ll reduce it to making one point.
4.46 at the NFL combine is not fast, they employ a steep curb towards the slower players.
And in scouting lingo “quick” does denote burst, while “fast” denotes speed.
I don´t deny the little guy his hard fought attention, but portraying him as an exceptional athlete would be counter productive.
Of course, ideally we could beef him up and convert him to fullback where he would absolutely DOMINATE the competition.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 13, 2010 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
he would be an exceptional athlete at fullback with a little weight. even though he is only 200 pounds, he is shorter at 5’9’’ which means he is a more bulkier 200 pounds. at 220 pounds if he still is decently fast he could make an excellent FB mooncamping. you could play him next to vickers and have total fullback domination
in fact, his 40 time was only a step or 4 slower than leon washington who is considered a burner. he would also have had the best 40 in the 2009 draft.
So you´re trying to sell me a 5´9 fullback, actually I think he may be 5´8. And with 20 extra pounds he won´t be even slower?
I´m always surprised time and again, that you guys don´t respect the fullback. Where I come from the fullback is the prime athlete, he´s the guy people dote around, respected, admired. I have the same feeling, that you all haven´t experienced upper tier football and the type of athletes that rise to the top naturally in a competitive setting. It´s the same thing with the linebackers you support, hyping up these slow lethargic defensive end sized linebackers. It makes me think, you simply don´t know the difference. The feeling is, that you haven´t experienced top of the line players at these positions.
I know you´re trying to have fun with it, but why put down the great guys that play fullback, and what they could do for us? Just by trying to make fun of mooncamping you are putting yourselves into these possibility free positions.
Who’s putting down the fullback? I love the full back position. It’s what I played back in HS. Whenever I play Madden, my favorite formations have the fullback in it. I’m all about having an elite fullback.
We’re just having fun with the idea that the fullback is the only position that matters, the only position worth drafting, signing, developing, and downright playing.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 14, 2010 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
A clue! A clue!
I love fullbacks! We have a pretty good one, too. Lawerence Vickers is a stud at the fullback position.
Well yeah, fullbacks everywhere is funny.
But I only want four that can carry the ball for a Ground Hounds rotation.
Lawrence Vickers is a good blocking back, but I´ve seen old highlights of him. He only gets the prerequisite 3 to 5 yards, that´s fine but not special.
I’d be interested in knowing more about this ground hounds rotation… Maybe some X’s and O’s and a play or two or something like that? And are there 4 specific fullbacks you’re thinking of? I’d be hard-pressed to think of 4 fullbacks that would consistently carry more than 3-5 yards that are in the NFL.
So basically we’ve gotten to the point where you’re starting to not understand yourself too? Kinda like the snake that eats itself from the tail end…..
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 16, 2010 9:12 AM EST up reply actions
Well since we own it, only we can implement it. So it might take a few centuries, knowing the Browns.
I’m excited for the day to come. Then maybe the Browns will win like… 4 Super Bowls in a row. I think you should push for it with the higher ups.
The best part will be that we won’t even have to wait four seasons for those four Super Bowls. Knowing Mooncamping, he would probably say we’d be so good we can just play next year’s super bowl the very next day.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 19, 2010 8:32 AM EST up reply actions
Quick stat for ya Moon;
Over the last four weeks of the NFL season:
Browns 900 yards rushing, or 225 YPG
Titans 603 yards rushing, or 151 YPG
Not saying that the Browns are going to have a 2,000 yard rusher, but at the end of the season, the Cleveland Browns were shoving the ball the other guys throat with ZERO passing game.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 12, 2010 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
I love that our team can walk up to the LOS, and run the ball right down the opposite teams throat, with no threat of a passing game.
The problem is, that’s not sustainable. I’d be more than happy being a 60/40 run-pass team, but we need to beef up the passing game.
by Western Reserve on Jan 13, 2010 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly. You’re not going to make the playoffs — let alone win in the playoffs — with no threat of a passing game, no matter how great of a running team you are.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 13, 2010 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
The Jets have Sanchez throwing to Braylon, so they pretty much have no threat of a passing game.
BA-ZING!
Seriously, though, we need to be able to pass more effectively.
by rufio on Jan 13, 2010 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
is there ever a bad time to make a braylon joke? i say no.
by Dawg Nuts on Jan 13, 2010 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Of course not…
PS- It’s 10:58 PM on January 13th in the year 2010. Braylon Edwards is still a douche and Michigan still sucks.
by shep615 on Jan 13, 2010 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
The Ravens just won a playoff game without any threat of a passing game. I actually think the teams that can run better than they can pass are better suited once the playoffs begin, but not as much during the regular season.
I don’t expect the Jets or Ravens to be competitive this weekend though.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
especially in colder weather cities (like New England)…and still are decent team in warmer weather. the NE game was an extremely cold game…you do have a point, but in warmer weather games, Flacco is also good so they have both. but you definitely have a good point…
Sure, you can win a playoff game by only running once in a while, especially when the opposing team turns the ball over, but that won’t happen often and you’re not going to make it far in the playoffs doing that. I know the cliche is that you have to run the ball in the playoffs to win but I just don’t think that’s true any more. The rules are so much in favor of the passing game and WR’s are much better athletes than they use to be. You win in the NFL by making big play on offense. Of course, an offense with no running game isn’t good either, so there does need to be some balance, but this idea that we can just line up and run the ball to win just isn’t going to work in this decade of the NFL.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 13, 2010 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
Yea, ultimately (which you were touching on) is that you need a good amount of everything or anything to win. There is not one specific way. A team that is insufficient in one area will struggle in the playoffs.
Not in disagreement with your basic premise, but the Ravens were also the beneficiary of four Patriots turnovers in that game.
by Western Reserve on Jan 14, 2010 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
you could argue too that the ravens forced the turnovers, but most of them were botched plays. brady looked very bad in the game.
But that has nothing to do with what we were discussing. We were talking about a team’s running and passing prowess — nothing about defense.
by Western Reserve on Jan 14, 2010 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
it has to do with your comment. if my comment doesn’t have to do with it, then maybe your comment really doesn’t either.
No. Just because your interjection was completely off topic doesn’t have any bearing on the relevance of my comment. As I said, the thread was specific to running the ball and winning in the playoffs and solely a discussion of offense. Thus, your inferences about the Ravens defense forcing turnovers had no redeeming value whatsoever.
I know you are seemingly playing a game with yourself, racing to 1000 posts or something, but your comment was just out of left field relative to the conversation.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 10:29 AM EST up reply actions
Not in disagreement with your basic premise, but the Ravens were also the beneficiary of four Patriots turnovers in that game.
that was YOUR comment. I was just replying to it and actually tying it back to offense (implying that the pats offense was inefficient against the ravens). if my comment was off topic than so was yours b/c yours is about defense too.
I am not racing to 1,000 post and that is kinda rude. You were somewhat off topic and if anything, i made your comment more on topic with offenses.
Really, the way your original comment would tie in would be because the Pats don’t have a strong running game, and the Ravens knew they were going to pass. If someone were making the argument for running = winning, that’s the point they should use.
Focusing not on whether or not the TOs were “forced” or “botched plays”, but rather that a playoff team’s defense will likely be able to stop the pass.
I would argue that ability to do either and take advantage of the other team’s defensive strength = winning. The 2000 Ravens had a strong running game, but the only reason they won was because they paired it with that defense. So yeah, it wasn’t just running.
I agree with your agreement, but disagree with the first disagreement.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 15, 2010 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with your confusedness.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 16, 2010 2:14 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Confuzled I am.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 16, 2010 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
No, he’s exactly right. The discussion was about the running and passing abilities of the offenses of those teams, not the defenses, so the fact that the Ravens defense forced turnovers had nothing to do with that discussion. If you really can’t understand that then you’re going to continue making people upset by making irrelevant comments.
I suggest that you put a little more thought in to both reading other people’s comments and your own comments in response. Make sure what you are saying is relevant to the discussion. You don’t earn any extra points based on the number of comments you make, so if you don’t have anything worthwhile to add to a discussion then it’s probably best to refrain from posting a reply.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 10:59 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
my comment, if you look closely was in fact more focusing on the inefficiencies of the pats (because they committed easy turnovers, not that baltimore really forced them). HE actually brought up the topic of forcing turnovers…if anything, since my comment actually addressed offensive inefficiencies, it is more on topic. ppl here now seem to think they can get away with accusing me with anything…
while i agree the comment wasn’t strictly on topic, i think we’re over-reacting here. its ok for a discussion to change directions.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 15, 2010 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
No, there isn’t anything wrong with a topic changing direction. That’s not the point. The point is that bross thought his comment was relevant to WR’s comment (and the general discussion) when it wasn’t, then when WR told him that he got defensive and gave a senseless response.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
Not in disagreement with your basic premise, but the Ravens were also the beneficiary of four Patriots turnovers in that game.
you could argue too that the ravens forced the turnovers, but most of them were botched plays. brady looked very bad in the game.
que?
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
You’d have to read further along back into the thread. But no need at this point to beat a dead horse.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
Right. You have to look at the whole conversation to understand the point, not just the last comment.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 10:23 PM EST up reply actions
I did read the whole thread.
WR mentioned turnovers:
Not in disagreement with your basic premise, but the Ravens were also the beneficiary of four Patriots turnovers in that game.
and bross responded:
you could argue too that the ravens forced the turnovers, but most of them were botched plays. brady looked very bad in the game.
Also about 10 hours earlier rufio wrote:
You could run into other teams who are particularly good at stopping the run or the pass or passing or running. You likely won’t face 3-4 teams with the same strengths.
Yet nobody jumped down his throat.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
yeah i i agree with you, i think people are on a witch hunt of sorts here with bross.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 16, 2010 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
If anything I was relating an offensive talk that went to defense, back to offense and offensive efficiency.
Just because when I started out on here i made some odd comments, doesn’t mean that every comment I make where I defend my position is me getting defensive and senseless.
Thank you villesigr. you actually see that mine did talk about offense and was on subject of what the previous comment was. I am just tired of being insulted and called senseless for nothing.
his comment was extremely relevant to WR’s comment. It was a direct response.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 16, 2010 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
I mean to be fair, if we are going to jump all over bross here, we have to do the same to WR.
as you stated:
The discussion was about the running and passing abilities of the offenses of those teams, not the defenses
what does this comment have to do with that?
Not in disagreement with your basic premise, but the Ravens were also the beneficiary of four Patriots turnovers in that game.
bross’s comment is a direct response to this. yes it has nothing to do with running or passing ability, but thats why he didn’t post it as a response to any of those comments. he posted a reply to this comment, and thats all he did, reply to to this comment.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 16, 2010 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
The second comment, in the context of the discussion means: I agree that running the football is important, especially in the playoffs; however the Ravens win where they mostly ran the ball and didn’t much threaten with the pass might be a bit anecdotal because Baltimore benefited from four Patriots turnovers that neither can be relied upon nor are typical in the course of trying to win football games. Thus, it is my view that the Ravens-Patriots game might not be the best example to prove the rule that running the ball is key to winning playoff games.
by Western Reserve on Jan 16, 2010 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
This is exactly right. I don’t get why that is so hard to understand.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
Because Bross comment spoke directly to that second comment. It’s hard to bring up turnovers and not invoke mentioning of defense.
Which is what Bross did and he even mentioned that most of the turnovers were botched plays and that Brady looked bad, which speaks directly to the offfense.
His comment was relevant and made sense within the context of the conversation. If you two wanted a private party that’s fine, but there was no need to jump on Bross. But hey if thats’s your prerogative.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
This is exactly right. I don’t get why that is so hard to understand.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 17, 2010 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
Many of the regular Forumites on here exhibit gang mentality in many instances
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 18, 2010 3:24 PM EST up reply actions
I agree. I just love the fact that our rushing game is that strong right now.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 13, 2010 1:14 PM EST up reply actions
1.RB or OL eather one will make me happy
2.DB
3.LB
4.DE
5.TE
Think the running style is somethign to build on.I am not sold on Harrison and think he will be asking for way to much money and we should not give it to him.Draft a RB sure there is one in the 2nd round that could work but IMO if Ingram says he is comeing out then we grab him is he is still there at #7.
Ingram I don’t think is coming out. Johnothan Dwyer might fall to the second rd. and he is really one of the few feature backs. I also like Anthony dixon From Miss St. who could fall to the 3rd or 4th round…Don’t pass on james starks either. he was a preseason second rounder until he got hurt. if he is healthy again he could be good, but b/c of the lack of a sr season he will likely fall to even the 5th round where he could be a complete steal.
Ingram has said he is going ot stay but alot can change in the next few weeks before he has to say yes or no.If he does come out there is no reason we should pass on him at all he is built and runs like a old school back.I think he will be a long term back in the NFL
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 11, 2010 7:53 PM EST up reply actions
I didn’t think Ingram was eligible. Isn’t he a true sophomore?
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I though he was a Jr. as well.They keep calling him a Jr. in the NC game
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 1:06 AM EST up reply actions
He is a Jr. His dad is a Senior.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
Not what I meant but ya funny…. They keep saying the JR running back or he is in his JR so will he come back for his last year and yes they was talking about Ingram
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 3:50 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, I thought they were referring to him as the junior because his dad is the senior. They talked about his dad lot because he was in prison for tax fraud or something.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
Tax fraud and evasion of the law.
And I also thought that was the only reason the term Jr. was used because they always talk about how he is only a sophomore winning the Heisman.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 12, 2010 11:34 AM EST up reply actions
Tim Tebow became the first sophmore to win the Heisman ever.
Sam Bradfor won after that who was (I believe) a reshirt sophomore.
Ingram won it this year as a true sophmore.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 12, 2010 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
btw, it is a random comment…but…
on one msg board we were talking about how kent state always puts out good products. yes they do not always fare that well, but i think the stability at coach might help the players develop. there always seems to be turnover in college, especially now in the MAC.
It is hard for a 4 yr starter to be in the same system really. out of the 13 teams in the MAC, only 4 have coaches that have been there for more than 4 yrs. Kent has had their coach for the longest time.
Ingram can’t come out, he is only a sophomore.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 11, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
Hey would anyone mind if I made a series of fan posts dividing the draft threads? Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad there’s a lot of discussion going on but it’s a pain to have to look for 5 new comments in a 500 post thread.
I’m thinking:
1. QB, RB, WR
2. Secondary
3. Linemen (split into offensive/defensive?)
Just press C and the browser will take you to the nearest unread comment. One of the reasons I love this site.
Though I do agree with the split threads idea.
Probably the only Cleveland Browns fan in all of Sydney, NSW.
z will simultaneously take you to the next unread comment and mark it as read.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
I had no idea. And all this time I’ve been going through these long threads trying to find that one comment… haha.
Yea, note for everyone that is new. PRESSING Z IS THE BEST THING EVER
by Roger Dorn on Jan 11, 2010 8:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
the only thing i don’t like is as i’m trying to read through all the comments that are new to me, if i follow a link and then when i come back i lose my place and all the yellow comments are gone.
sucks when it’s in the middle of a big thread that you’re going through for the second time.
oh well i guess i’m just finding something to complain about when that’s the worst i’ve got.
rec on the Z being the greatest button ever.
and this is the greatest Browns site ever, etc, etc, etc.
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
I always do “Open link in new tab” that way i can read the article and not lose the new comment feature
That’s a good idea i hadn’t thought of. Only now i have no internet explorer and use firefox instead.
and after thinking about it i just need to open a new,,, yeah, thanks for the info and i’ll stop typing now.
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
Right click on the link and select ‘open link in new tab’.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jan 12, 2010 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
also if i understand your previous comment correctly, you are using firefox, and thus holding control and clicking the link should open it in a new tab.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 15, 2010 3:38 PM EST up reply actions
Whoops… don’t know what happened.. the old Control F bracket-new, mostly only LGT. That seems like forever ago.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Yea, I think so. The earliest I remember is that when I first signed up for LGT which was before DBN even existed, comments would have the word “New” in red and I would have to refresh the entire page to figure out if any new comments showed up. Those new comments would have the red new and the comments from before the refresh would not.
Ahhh . . . LGT in the good ol’ days. Remember when every comment had “re:” at the top when you replied in a thread?
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
I’m working on a review of the team by position- and one of the components will be potential of drafting that position.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
niice…then make it as a post/topic on dawgs by nature. that way u can get constructive criticism…remember…5,000 heads are better than one.
He’s a minion. Anything he writes is front page material…
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 11, 2010 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
What? No.
He is a minion. It’s his job to write front page articles.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 11, 2010 10:49 PM EST up reply actions
oh…i have always heard minion in a negative sense…i figured front page material was good but the use of the word minion thew me off.
Scroll all the way to the bottom of the page. The very bottom. Then you’ll understand.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 11, 2010 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
Which also explains why BB is always “wrangling” you.
He is DBN’s mother essentially. (BB take this in the most positive of ways.)
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 11, 2010 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
By the way, I never thought of myself as DBN’s mother before. Thanks a lot . . . I now have a lower self-image.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2010 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
but mom, (real whiney voice) i did my homework at school, I’ve only been online for a few minutes,
i don’t want to go to bed now, i already brushed my teeth,,, really!
(attempted humor)
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
(attempted humor)
Boy, I hope most people here get that without this note. Better safe than sorry?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jan 13, 2010 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Subject: Awesome.
The fact that it’s written by RK: Super awesome.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 11, 2010 10:22 PM EST up reply actions
1. any position on D
2. RT
3. RG
I think its great that the Browns have so many pick in this years draft. I know a lot of the pick are in the later rounds. But because this draft is being considered by so many people the best draft class ever i think we will be able to find some top talent late.
agreed. 2010 and 2011 were 2 excellent recruiting years. the only star not coming out from 2011 is jake locker (and maybe heyward). Ingram is a sophmore i just found out (and also found out his dad was an NFL receiver).
I agree with those positions. the only position where i actually feel moderately comfortable is rush linebacker (although we do not have much depth)
1. QB. I am not saying we should give up on Quinn. I am not saying we should draft a guy. Quite simply, if you don’t have a QB who is competing to be in the pro bowl, you need one. I am totally fine with building the rest of the team and getting the right guy later. If we get one of those guys, we’ll probably see a big jump in wins regardless of if it is from 5 to 9 wins or 8 to 12.
2. Safety. Part of this is probably because Berry might be there and I want to take him. Still, I thought Abe Elam would be the lesser of our two safeties this year, and he ended up being the best one. It wasn’t because Elam played especially well, it was because Pool suffered what could be a career-ending injury. No more Mike Furrey at safety.
3. Corner. We don’t need any more guys who work hard and are smart but don’t have the physical skills. We have enough of them and could pick up more if we wanted. We need someone who at least has the ceiling to be the 1b. to Eric Wright’s 1a.
4. Pass rusher. I love the Matt Roth pickup. I don’t think we should part ways with Wimbley. But if we got someone who could consistently beat LTs, it would open up our whole defense. I would have listed this higher if I thought less of the guys currently on our team. I think Wimbley has the versatility to play inside, which I would love to see on some passing downs. Imagine rushing Wimbley, Roth, Rogers, and Demarcus Ware!
5. RT. I list this so low because I think Pork Chop did a really good job at RT toward the end of the year. St. Clair should be moved inside or cut. I think that between St. Clair, Fraley, Hadnot, and Womack, someone can play RG, especially if they are between Mack and a quality RT.
Also receiving votes:
WR; but with Robi and Massaquoi, I still hope we have some young guys who will make big strides. Also without a QB I trust, we probably wouldn’t get the most out of a good WR.
RB; but Harrison’s late season push (especially taking so much of the load), along with Cribbs’ Wildcatting and Davis coming back off of an injury make it less of a need.
TE: we absolutely need someone over the middle of the field in the passing game. A TE who could get into the deep seams would help, and we could retain our identity as a running team. Evan Moore’s promise pushes this down the list for me.
agreed somewhat. I agree on corner but I don’t want some speedster who is raw in man coverage. I want someone with good enough speed but also good instincts in the man.
pass rusher: yes, but as of right now that is somewhat of a luxury. I like our pass rushers. they won’t wow anybody but they produce and are talented. wimbley had a bounce back season and if he can improve that will be great. I predict about 15-16 sacks from our 2 starting OLBs. Roth i love too. look at the fact that roth got 4 sacks in 6 games. over a whole season that is like double digit sacks. plus he is not a guy that will fall off once offenses realize him b/c he has legit talent. he was drafted and produced in the limited playing time he god.
also agreed on the RT. it is also a luxury like pass rusher.
safety and QB are huge needs. I do not want us to draft a QB though unless he can be a franchise guy. none of the guys in the draft are that definite franchise guy. the closest, bradford, will likely be gone by 7.
one position you are forgetting is ILB. yes we have some depth there but DQuell jackson when fully healthy is at best only a decent starter. Bowens overperformed and i don’t think is likely to do it again. he is much slower and was not great in coverage. he is also getting older and there will likely be a dropoff this year IMO. I also do not like Maiava or Trusnik as anything else but a backup at this point.. they are great on special teams and decent, but do not get to the line quick enough. I could say this about every one of our ILBs because too often I see them making tackles 4-5 yards upfield. we need a guy who can hit the hole quickly and stop plays on the line. we also do not have a true sideline to sideline defender at ILB or a guy who can guard a receiver at all or and elite TE (maybe jackson but he can’t do it all that well).
The coaches absolutely love D’Qwell. He is very instinctive, has underrated athleticism, and is smart. Part of the reason I didn’t list ILB was because of Bowens, who played out of his mind this season. I don’t think he could replicate this season again, but he isn’t a gaping hole we need to fill. I am probably still subconsiously holding out hope for Veikune there, too.
I do like Dqwell too. he does have underrated athleticism and is smart. he makes good plays but he is not an enforcer or a big playmaker and never will be. he also isn’t a sideline to sideline defender. every 3-4 has an enforcer. the steelers have james farrior (drafted 8th) the pats have the emerging jerrod mayo (top 10 pick), the packers have hawk and barnett (both first rounders) the 49ers have takeo spikes and willis (both first rounders), the ravens have ray lewis (first rounder)….the point is, that every 3-4 has that guy with an enforcer quality that Dquell jackson does not have. he is a good player but not an enforcer…a lot of these enforcers were first rounders or top 10 draft picks.
I do think bowens will regress. he had his best season at the age of 33…i doubt he will even get half the amount of sacks he did last year (round down to 2.5 since it would b 2.75) and he will not be as effective. either way, we do not really have speed at that position. no speed (especially with bowens) at ILB makes us a slow defense becuase those guys dictate the D oftentimes in a 3-4.
I do look at it not as a gaping hole, but as a hole, that if the right guy comes along I will take it. Kinda like RT. I am okay with porkchop there but If we have the opportunity to get a good player, I will take it.
1.) Safety. We have absolutely no depth here. Elam was alright. Pool is probably done. Adams plays better at corner. Furrey isn’t a starter at S.
2.) ILB. I’m not nearly as high on D’Qwell as most. Now he is a year older and coming off injury. Bowens filled in nicely here. Fill-in LB seems to be his best role though.
3.) RB. I’m not sold on a Davis/Harrison combo. A Dwyer/Harrison combo would be much better.
4.) WR. Athletic freak please. Thank you. I’m talking sub 4.4 or 6’6 and sub 4.5.
If we are talking about 2010 draft, QBs are way down on the list for me. If someone falls a full round lower than where they were projected, maybe. Maybe.
I think the O-Line is the strength of the team. RT could be upgraded, but not a priority.
Pass rusher is a wild card- only if the right player is available at the right time in the first 3 rounds. Try to strike gold with a project in the late rounds.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I agree with u totally. safety is a HUGE need. if berry falls to us i will be ecstatic but it won’t likely happen. the problem is the major drop off between elite players and the next tier with safeties
Also ILB is a need. ppl forget about this b/c they don’t notice glaring holes. ILBs set the tone for our rush defense (like safeties do for the pass defense). our ILBs are not setting a tone and are in fact, tackling RBs 4-5 yards downfield. we just need faster Linebackers there. none of our players are bad but they can get exploited easily b/c of their lack of speed.
Also I agree with running back. I would love a dwyer/harrison combo. harrison more as a 3rd down guy b/c dwyers hands are suspect. Dwyer just runs over guys and has good speed and exlosiveness. however, he does not change directions well and will make almost no one miss. however, he still would be a likely first round pick and not fall to us. he is one of the 2 backs I feel actually could be a feature back.
The other one is Anthony Dixon from Miss st. he was a 4 year starter and although he does not have breakaway speed and is slow (about 4.56 projected 40 time) he does everything else well. good field vision and finds holes well. good change of direction and will occasionally make someone miss, even with his size. can run it through the middle very well. he can even run it outside and exploit cutback lanes fairly well. finds holes well. he has underrated hands, is consistent, is very durable, and hangs onto the ball well…plus he averaged a touchdown a game for his whole college career.
and I would love a great WR. i am not on the dez bryant bandwagon. I think the receiver that will turn out the best from this draft is damian williams. he is a flawless route runner and has deceptive speed and is a very slippery player….granted he is not an athletic freak. he is 6’1’’ and runs about a 4.45. but there is no one who really projects as a great NFL player that has those athletic freak skills…sorry. the only guy sub 4.4 as of the projections right now is Dexter McCluster who is only 5’8’’.
Scouting report on Damian Williams…IMO best WR in the draft…could surprisingly fall to the early 2nd.
He has the uncanny knack to run good routes, get open, catch the ball at its highest point, and do something with the ball after the catch. His route running and quickness and make him a huge big play threat. Yards per reception in college is often indicative of a prospect’s future success in the NFL because its often indication of their intelligence, route running, and quickness. Williams is averaging 15 yards per reception throughout his college career. He doesn’t have great straight line speed and should post a 40 time of a modest 4.45. However, he is extremely quick and has shown those skills on kick returns. He has great hands and rarely drops passes and is extremely intelligent. His intelligence and experience in a pro style offense at USC means that he could contribute in the NFL right away. He has good height, but needs to bulk up a little. He’s not a good run blocker because of his lack of good blocking form and good size. He’s not very physical and could get out muscled by NFL corners in man coverage. He really excels against zone coverage, running good routes, and finding holes in the coverage. Williams has great potential as a #1 receiver in a west coast style offense and could fit very well into other schemes because of his broad skill set.
1) RT – I think finding the last two pieces (including a RG) to add to this line will go a long way towards making the Browns a force for years to come, especially considering the youth of Thomas and Mack.
2) Safety – With Brodeny Pool probably gone, this position takes priority over corner. A nice instinctive saftey who makes a living off of turnovers, that’s the kind of guy I want!
3) Corner – In an ideal world, we’d be able to find someone like Cromartie. In Cleveland, we’ve had to work with McDonald and Hank Poteat. Let’s continue to try and build this position with talented ball hawks. Remember, in today’s league you need 3 good corners. I know we’ve got at least 1.
4) RB – I’ve got mad man-love for Gerhart as a value pick if he falls far enough, but apparently there’s this guy named Dixon…
5) LB – I feel like we need that “personality” player in terms of a Ray Lewis or Shawn Merriman. Someone who gets the guys fired up from the field. Someone who can get guys riled up. We need players who are mean, tough, and INTIMIDATING! We need monsters like….like James P. Sullivan!
agreed on number 5…I think Rolando McClain has the potential to be a ray lewis type enforcer.
4. I do like gerhart but I do not see him being a feature back. He also will not fall to where I would draft him. I would draft him with our 2nd third rounder, but b/c of the production this yr, he will get overhyped and go in the mid to early 2nd.
I do like dixon though the guy u r talking about. he finds holes better IMO than gerhart and has a better burst to the hole.
It’s possible Gerhart’s production helps his stock, but it’s also possible that teams will downgrade him once they see his 40 time (as overrated a combine test can be). At the least, I can see him as a 3’rd tail back/back up fullback role similar to Jacob Hester.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 12, 2010 8:58 AM EST up reply actions
Thing is, he is pretty fast. He has publicly said he expects to run about a 4.55 or better.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I don’t understand why people think he is some slow plodder.
The Jacob Hester comp is insane. Jacob Hester had one season with more than 94 carries. His college YPC is 4.89 on 364 carries.
Gerhart almost had that many carries this season alone (343) and had a 5.5 YPC.
The only reason that Gerhart is compared to Hester is because he is white. Gerhart isn’t a speed back. He has decent enough speed to beat you if he gets to the corner, but most of the time, he is just going to lower his head and run someone over. A better college comp is Marion Barber III (who was a 4th round draft pick).
I don’t expect him to run a 4.4, and to be quite honest I don’t care. I’m not saying that it isn’t important, but it shouldn’t be the deciding factor when you are evaluating Gerhart.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 12, 2010 2:09 PM EST up reply actions
I would think the plodder part comes from the fact that he is, indeed, “white”.
My father and I thought he was the quarterback when we first saw him, being white and wearing #7. Then we saw his stats for the night (against Arizona) and our minds just exploded.
You have to admit that its darn near impossible to find a white running back in the NFL these days. Not saying we should draft cuz of that, but I think he’s a good value as a power runner if he falls far enough.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 12, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
I do agree with the part about him being white.
by bross09 on Jan 12, 2010 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think we can all agree that Gerhart is white.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 12, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah…who knows for sure if he is 100% white…he could just b black but really pale…he could also be biracial and just look white…we will never know until we see photos of his parents and get DNA tests.
Not to hijack a joke, but this is a very vague, confusing, and over-simplified notion. There are hereditary/genetic traits that are common amongst some descendencies more than others (the basis of our ideas of “races”). These differences, being will, with the proper understanding (which we are just beginning to grasp), be able to be described and demonstrated via DNA.
I promise I’m done with the genetics discussion, though, and will not comment on it again here. If anyone wants to discuss it more you can email me danvailviaaa@hotmail.com. I like a good genetics discussion, the best way to learn about it.
agreed. there are tendencies, but they still have to do with your parents (and environment or training). it is IMO more parents and the direct line…which is why you see so many second and third generation sports players.
My neighbor has a dog named Toby. Maybe he’s half Schnauser.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jan 12, 2010 6:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t buy YPC as a differentiation between those two guys. Hester was running in the SEC. Gerhardt the Pac 10. One’s identity is based on defense, the other’s on spread offenses, a general lack of defense, and sometimes being the one team that upsets USC.
I don’t know that the Hester comparison is vailid, as I think Gerhart is much more physical and breaks a lot more tackles. But he, along with Peyton Hillis (unfotunately another white guy) are the only two I can think of off the top of my head who have filled the 3rd RB/FB role in the NFL.
damn…i have to type over…
yes ypc isn’t a difference b/c the SEC has some of the best Ds in the country and pac 10 doesn’. yes the Pac10 Ds are usually better than the big 12 but it was close this yr. the Pac 10 had a subpar defensive yr and gerhart got a lot of stats too against subpar nonconference rushing Ds. for the second half of the season notre dame was giving up about 5.5 ypc and 200 yds a game…gerhart got 7 ypc and 200 yds…still not as good of a game as Navy against ND…
gerhart just face very subpar competition. I do think gerhart is better but at the same time, who knows b/c hester faced excruciatingly tough competition. I do agree that gerhart can fill the 3rb/fb role. he will not be a feature back in the NFL and should not go higher than the mid third round.
I feel that if we decide to grab a QB, it should be in the first round and our draft needs to focus on offense. If we go defense, then the draft should be defense focus. If we get Bradford in the first then we should get Iupati in second and Sam Young or similar in the third, or Trent Williams in the second and Ducasse in the third.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 11, 2010 10:14 PM EST reply actions
Why would you focus on one side of the ball? There is so much needed on this team that to focus on one side of the ball is not going to help much.At this time with soooo many holes in this team best player if he fills a spot we need is the only way to do it.
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 1:11 AM EST up reply actions
Unless a good player has somewhat good talent around him, he won’t make an impact and his potential will go to waste. Look at Wright and DQ. They’re both very good at their position but we still had a poorly ranked secondary and run defense. I’m just using this as an example, but say when we drafted Wright, if we also drafted a better corner opposite of him, and a half decent safety behind him, that would improve our team better than having him there by himself and drafting an offensive player to make plays by himself. But all of my speculation is contingent on the right players falling to us.
If we were to take a QB with the draft, I wouldn’t want to produce another Couch. I want to draft a good RB with a RG and RT to get him some protection and run support. And I guarantee you having an offense with comprehensive components will improve our team then randomly selecting good players all over the place. On the flip side if we draft Berry or Haden in the first round, I would want Von Miller in the second and maybe javier arenas in the third. That’s what I’m thinking is the best thing for our team right now IMO. I’m not talking about using all 11 picks on offense, but at least the first 4, then next year focus on the defense. But like I said its all contingent on the right picks falling to us. If Iupati, Ducasse and trent williams don’t fall to us then just take the BPA regardless of position
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 12, 2010 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t think drafting for one side of the ball the way togo.We have parts in place now we need to add to them.WR,TE,QB,RB,RT,RG,CB,DE,OLB,FS and SS is are big holes.So why not try to fill your big problems parts first and don’t waste drafting for spots you don’t need.Seems to me both sides of the ball needs the same amoun tof work so if you focus on one side and no both will just take that much longer to build on what we have.
I never said to randomly pick players.I said best player on the board at a spot we have a need.That would help more then just taking all Defense and skip a player that is rated better at a spot on Offense that would fill a spot of need on that side of the ball.
by Brownsfan4ever on Jan 12, 2010 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
You really think Ducasse is falling that far? I could see scouts getting a close look at him in a combine/pro day setting and drooling.
I was wishfully thinking; so probably not. But i wouldn’t mind trading a combination of picks to slip into the second again and pick him up
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 12, 2010 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
Scouts, Inc. currently has him as their top OG prospect. I’ve never seen him play. I think high-to-mid second isn’t out of the question for his eventual draft position. If Braylon caught some more balls and we got the Jets’ 2nd rounder, I would be really happy to get him.
I believe its contingent on where Iupati goes. Unless two OG’s are taken in the second, which is very possible
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 14, 2010 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
CB
CB
S
RB
RG
RT
WR
TE
DE
I will admit i dont know a lot of these players that people are talking about wanting to draft, but i do watch a lot of college football, and i dont just rely on what the so-called experts say.
As for TE i dont know if anyone really has heard anything about what Jake Ballard is Ranked at but it is probably underated since Pryor never threw him the ball. However he is a very good blocker and he has excellent hands and he has decent speed.
by franklinbrownie41 on Jan 12, 2010 11:55 PM EST reply actions
but it is probably underated sincePryor never threw him the ballOSU often used pure slide protections and kept Ballard on the line to block, and he was a very inconsistent player.
Fixed.
The kid can block. No question. TEs who will be used mostly as blockers just don’t have a lot of value in my eyes. How easy would it be to pick up one of those guys off the waiver wire? Would he be better than Evan Moore, who we just got off of waivers?
I dunno, I wouldn’t hate picking him up, but I just think there will be way too many players I’d want before Ballard in rounds 1-5. Maybe he’ll run well at the combine and run good routes during the draft preseason, and prove he can be an effective receiver in the NFL. As of right now, I think I’ll pass.
When OSU used slide protection to block it was a designated play to get the ball to one of the receivers. I dont think that he was really inconsitant. On the contrary i thought he was damn good. Like i said i dont know what his draft stock is right now but i wouldnt mind picking him up later in the draft. I just think that he would be a good addition to the team. I think he could be a good #2 TE right now and could move into the #1 very easily.
by franklinbrownie41 on Jan 13, 2010 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
If Tressel really has a play where there is a one receiver progression, I would be ridiculously surprised (unless it was some sort of run/pass option for Pryor, obviously). You never say “only throw it to this guy”.
They use pure slide protections more than I’d like, and kept Ballard in more than I’d like. He’s ok, he’s not “pretty damn good”. Underrated, probably. I just don’t think what we would gain by drafting him before the 6th would be worth it; there are a ton of TEs available as FAs and on waivers, like Evan Moore.
totally agree with your statement. He didn’t get thrown the ball a lot because he was basically a blocking tight end just about all the time. and yes he was somewhat inconsistent. I wouldn’t mind taking a flier on him in the 7th. what have we got to lose? Who else do we have at that pick? I am not totally sold on moore either.
Heck, I’d use a first on him if it meant I didn’t have to see Robert Royal drop any more balls.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 13, 2010 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
Not until the staff gets someone to replace Royal. Then he’s still going to see snaps, and he’s still going to have chances to drop the ball. I don’t care who it is, just replace the guy!
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 14, 2010 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
A few that I remember. I just don’t want Royal on the roster, period.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 15, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
That’s fair. I really don’t like him. He’s not stellar at anything. He’s of below average athleticism, has bad hands, and is only an average blocker, IMO.
If we know he’s only going to block, let’s get someone who is a stellar blocker with bad hands, those guys can’t be too hard to find.
Heck, we can just package in a lineman if we want that. I remember Fraley checking in as eligible from time to time. Problem with that is that the other team knows he’s on just to block. When Royal’s in there, there’s the possiblity that we can pass, but they have the advantage in knowing it’s not going to him, so it’s a moot point.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 19, 2010 8:35 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly, we might as well go with Fraley. Or line Joe Thomas up at TE, shifting Steinbach to LT one of our guards to LG. So something like
Steinbach, Hadnot, Mack, Fraley, Womack, Thomas
across the line. I bet Joe Thomas can catch. Also, when we went with Fraley as an eligible receiver, we ran and passed against the numbers (in the box). I am against eligible linemen until we learn how to do simple math.
Steinbach, Hadnot, Mack, Fraley, Womack, Thomas
Thomas was a TE as a freshman at Wisconsin, I think.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jan 21, 2010 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
Yep.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 21, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
QB
Draft Dan LeFevour, Central Michigan.
that is all
Ever tried? Ever failed? No Matter, try again, fail again, Fail better.
Just this one. I will say it in every draft thread, though
Ever tried? Ever failed? No Matter, try again, fail again, Fail better.
by BringBackKosar on Jan 13, 2010 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
LeFevour is not like the second coming of any great QB. he also plays in a spread and never plays not in the shotgun. I like him but he will need a couple yrs of development to b a solid starter.
Who really IS the second coming of any great QB? Tom Brady? He was drafted in what, the 6th round? Drew Brees? Very last pick in the 2nd round… I doubt either of those guys prolly stood out in the draft as the second coming of any great QB. Peyton Manning was drafted pick 1 round 1… But we’ve already established he is, in fact, a robot.
All I’m saying is great QBs don’t come out of the draft, they work to become great once the draft is over. So it doesn’t make much sense to me to say people shouldn’t be high on LeFevour or anyone else cause they aren’t the second coming of any great QB.
… But if you find the second coming of any great QB, then could you call Mike Holmgren and the guys and let them know? Thanks :-)
1. DB (CB or S)
2. TE
3. ILB
4. RT
5. QB
Also would like another OL and DL in the late rounds for depth.
And since I haven’t had the chance to look through 2000 posts on the 2 draft posts, the TE I really like is McCoy from USC. Hopefully we snag him the 2nd.
Forgot about him. He looked pretty good in the few games I saw of him.
by BrownDawg1409 on Jan 14, 2010 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
Imo the things we need to focus on in this years draft would be
1) Defensive backs
2) Defensive line
3) Right side of the line
I don’t mind going to free agency to pick up a guard/tackle, a slot receiver preferably a Furrey/Joe J. type 3rd down receiver, I like our Linebacker core but I wouldn’t mind seeing us puck up a right side pass rusher, our Running backs are serviceable for next year if we use Harrison correctly, and for the love of god if we pick up a QB in the draft in the first or second round I will puke, cut DA and pick up a veteran with as short a contract as we can 1-2 years would be fine by me even if it’s someone I don’t necessarily like as a QB like Pennington.
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Jan 15, 2010 4:38 AM EST reply actions
I agree. We couldn’t stop the pass or the rush and our linebackers just got destroyed this year picking up some of the slack. Let’s not forget the we were 8th in average rushing yards all season (a lot to say with some of the running games with similar numbers). Strong o-line means we can get an even better run game and with a good quarterback, give him time to place the ball where it needs to go. Now there’s the other thing we need, a quarterback. I’m going to pick on history here and just tell the collective Browns organization FOR GODS SAKE, DO NOT DRAFT A QUARTERBACK IN THE 1ST OR 2ND ROUND. It has never worked out well for the Browns. If they want to draft a quarterback, I hope they wait and get more pressing positions first. If you look at offenses that are just one fire right now, look where they got their quarterback. Drew Brees, Brett Favre from free agency. Tom Brady came late in the draft. High profile first round QBs are not always the sure fire thing, and the Browns know it from history.
i don’t really want to draft a QB either, but i think your reasoning is without reason:
FOR GODS SAKE, DO NOT DRAFT A QUARTERBACK IN THE 1ST OR 2ND ROUND. It has never worked out well for the Browns
just because we haven’t had luck in the past doesn’t mean we wouldn’t this time, and those players have nothing to do with the current crop of players entering the draft. i don’t want a QB because i think we have bigger needs and quinn can be serviceable if other areas are improved; but if our draft team thinks a QB is the best pick, i trust in our staff at this point. it shouldn’t have anything to do with past drafts.
This. The past involved different players and different personnel; I’d hate for the current Powers That Be to become hesitant to pick a QB early because of that past – assuming that they’re convinced that an early QB pick now is the right move in the first place.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jan 19, 2010 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
It shouldn’t have anything to do with past Browns drafts.
QBs who succeed in the league are typically drafted early.
Pretty solid analysis in that link.
I’d say the browns could get a good steal with Golden Tate. He’s small but he can catch and run deep.
A good RT is Sam Young, he is a good run blocker about average pass blocker
I think Tate ends up a first rounder.
I am a fan of Sam Young later in the draft.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 21, 2010 7:14 PM EST up reply actions
I like Freddie Barnes for the pure fact that I think he really likes playing football.
No matter where he lines up, he seems to play well. Guys like that seem to stick around the NFL.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 22, 2010 12:11 AM EST up reply actions
From what I have been reading, he is about a 3rd-4th rounder.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 22, 2010 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
Today i read one where he’s projected to go 70th overall to kansas city in the 2nd round. Sam Young, a very good run blocking RT, is projected 3rd round. Those could be some steals for us if they go later than that. I’m a notre dame fan, and i know the talent they got. Clausen would be a waste and Tate is very solid and would be a good slot receiver. He’s also an ok return man in case the situation with cribbs dosen’t get solved
by DawgPound77 on Jan 23, 2010 10:51 PM EST up reply actions
OG, OT,LB,DE,CB,S. These are what is needed in this order. Don’t screw up the draft again.
The All-America Football Conference was created in June of 1944 to compete against the NFL. Even though the league outdrew the NFL in attendance, the continuing dominance of the Cleveland Browns led to the league's downfall.
I hope you’re Hindu and you are in fact reading those needs from right to left.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 23, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I would rather build my Offensive line first, due to having my RB’s & QB’s always getting hammered. If we could get a bookend RT out of free agency, then we could go and get a great safety, or corner back first. Thengo for ILB/OLB/DE’s.
The All-America Football Conference was created in June of 1944 to compete against the NFL. Even though the league outdrew the NFL in attendance, the continuing dominance of the Cleveland Browns led to the league's downfall.
I think we need to build the defensive backfield the most. the offensive line isn’t spectacular but I would say we have more need in the D-Backfield.
BMac and Mike adams are below average starters at best. elam is average at best and wright is good but that is still not good enough.
When I look at the O-Line, thomas is an elite starter, Steinbach is good to very good, Mack as of right now is good (but could be great) and porchop at RT and hadnot at guard are maybe average. overall I would say there are more gaping holes at corner and safety…especially since those are much harder to hide deficiencies at and are more isolated. I do agree we could use an upgrade on the right side, but first we need help in the D-Backfield.
the need on the right side I would say is the next biggest need…then the rest are about on the same level IMO
Our O-Line was flat out dominant for the last 5 games. Our RBs were not getting rocked in the backfield, they were running over people for great yardage, even when other teams knew we were going to try to run. We could get better at pass pro on the right side, even vs. the end of the season (because for the first 4 games, we were terrible in pass pro).
The LT through C are pro-bowl contenders every year, and we have like 4 veterans who are all great values at RG.
I am not big on drafting for need, but even if I were OL would be pretty far down the list of needs for us on my draft board.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Jim Irsay says he would welcome Peyton Manning back … at the right price
- Roddy White isn’t thrilled with Roger Goodell’s $20 million salary
- Could concussions actually kill football?
- J.T. Thomas arrested for possessing some marijuana
- Bucs hire Butch Davis as ‘special assistant,’ have no issue with his double-dipping
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
