7 ROUND Browns Mock Draft
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 8, 2010 11:23 PM EST
Email
PrintOver at Mocking the Draft I participated in a mock where each team had a representative from an SB nation blog. Here is who I got the Browns...
1. Joe Haden, CB, Florida
The Browns secondary is attrocious. Joe Haden is the best DB right now and is a pretty good value at 7. Sounds like a pretty good pick, right? With Joe Haden and Eric Wright, the Browns have two good starting corners.
2. Demaryius Thomas, WR, Georgia Tech
With Dez Bryant, Golden Tate, and Damian Williams gone, Thomas is definitely the best receiver left. Thomas is way better than Massoquoi and Robiskie out of college. He is the top blocking receiver in the draft and he is a great big-play threat. He is also very big (6'3 230) and has great speed for his size. His only downsides are his lack of production because of the run heavy offense he played in and his rawness as a route runner. Thomas would probably step in as our #1 receiver.
WR Demaryius Thomas Highlights/Lowlights 2009 Georgia Tech (via ProDraftParty)
3a. Ciron Black, T/G, LSU
via nffootballreport.files.wordpress.com
At this point, people have called Black overrated for so long that he has become underrated. Of course, he can't pass protect good enough to play LT, but he is a mauler and could excel at right tackle or guard. He has ideal size for a right tackle (6'5 330) and would most likely start for us by Week 3.
The Pit 2010 Senior Bowl South Practice (via DraftBreakdown)
3b. Major Wright, FS/SS, Florida
It's no secret that the Browns secondary is bad. With Joe Haden as my first pick, I decided to take a safety to assist the secondary even more. If Brodney Pool is back, that is good, but he won't last much longer with all the concussions. Let me remind you guys that Mike Furrey started at safety this year for us. Mike Furrey. Major Wright is a brutal hitter that still needs a little work in coverage but he has great potential. Plus, wouldn't it be cool to have two DBs named Wright?(kidding.) If Pool retires, Wright will start immediately.
Major Wright vs. Oklahoma (via AloDraft)
4. John Jerry, G, Ole Miss
via djrebel.files.wordpress.com
Already having Ciron Black, some of you may question this pick. However, Jerry is a good value here and can probably be a starter in this league. He is very strong and has excelled at right tackle in college but will still have to make the shift to guard in the NFL. He is a dominant run blocker and is pretty good in pass protection as a guard. He and Ciron Black could possibly fill in the only holes on the Browns already young Offensive line.
5a. Jason Worilds, DE/OLB, Virginia Tech
via i.cdn.turner.com
Worilds is a good pass rushing DE that will have to swich to 3-4 OLB in the pros. His speed off the edge is one of his best attributes. The Browns have a pretty good group of young OLBs, but there is still room for improvement.
DE/OLB Jason Worilds Highlights/Lowlights 2009 Virginia Tech vs Nebraska/UT (via ProDraftParty)
5b. Walter Thurmond, CB/FS, Oregon
Before his season-ending injury, many people thought that Thurmond would be a better prospect than former teammate Jairus Byrd. A lot of draft gurus even considered Thurmond the top CB in this class. If he ends up recovering fine, I think this would be a steal.
5c. Andrew Quarless, TE, Penn State
via d.yimg.com
Tight end is a pretty big need for the Browns. Quinn is a QB that likes to throw to TEs. But with tight ends like Gresham, Gronkowski, and Dickson all going early I had to wait and draft a TE later. Quarless has the skills necessary to be succesful in the NFL, he just needs to put it all together. He may have small character concerns, but nothing big.
6a. Blair White, WR, Michigan State
v
White is not a flashy receiver. He won't wow you with his 40 time, vertical jump, size. But he is one of the those receivers that just knows how to get open. I think he will be a nice 3rd down or slot receiver that will be a QB's good friend.
Blair White Top Ten Wide Receiver 2010 NFL Draft (via dwid1984)
6b. Clifton Geathers, DT/DE, South Carolina
via thebigspur.com
A surprise to skip his senior year, Geathers has potential that matches his size. Character issues may cause him to drop.
7. Brandon Deaderick, DE, Alabama
Deaderick had a very disappointing season, but I don't blame him; He got shot in the arm and missed no time! Deaderick is said to be a hard worker and a great fit for a 3-4 defense.
Undrafted Free Agents
Doug Worthington- DE, OSU
Ryan Perriloux- QB, Jackson State
Damian Fletcher- RB, Southern Miss
Keiland Williams- RB, LSU
This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.
520 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like it. White kind reminds me of Brian Brennan. Thomas is intriguing. Big Tech fan and I loved watching this guy. If Haden is off the board, I would draft Derrick Morgan. Quarles was underutilized. We need 2 dbs early.
Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder
So you wAnt us to draft two DBs early or to take Tech players?
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
I like it also.
All except for the WR in the 2nd round.
The Browns should be banned from drafting WRs in the 2nd round.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
Thomas is way better than the last 2
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 11:15 AM EST up reply actions
I understand your point but thomas really is a good talent. we should not hold off on certain positions b/c of our history. the lions were smart to take calvin johnson. it would be smart to take thomas.
Ugh. Really? You are such a joke killer.
Jeez.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 9, 2010 3:51 PM EST up reply actions
I could not tell by the tone of your voice if it was a joke. honestly many people think that here. I would not want them to go WR in the 2nd but I would not throw a fit and would not point to previous drafts (unless they totally reached in the 2nd…but I would throw a fit about any reach)
Comments neither have tone or voice.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 9, 2010 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
I know…that was the point I was trying to make. if it was a joke, it was pretty unclear because you are not the only one who has expressed that opinion…
If it truly was a joke, it should have been a little more clear.
I figure the actual part about banning was a joke, but the message that they shouldn’t doesn’t come across as one.
I’m sorry that you can’t handle sarcasm. I’ll try to dumb down my jokes.
Like this: Why did the chicken cross the road? To get away from terrible and dumb criticism!
Haha!
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 9, 2010 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
you know what SB. I understand sarcasm and can handle it…when I can hear the tone in the voice.
-sarcasm: an Ironical Taunt
-Irony: the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning.
both of these rely on the tone of the voice. they convey something and then mean the opposite. the listener/viewer is supposed to understand it by the tone.
on the internet, sarcasm does not come across well. I have found this out too. you have to use overexaggerated sarcasm. the sarcasm you used was fairly dry. It is not completely ludicrous but it is somewhat close to fact (because some do believe that this is a valid opinion like RD showed below).
when you use sarcasm on the internet, it is best to use something where it doesn’t sound anything like anyone could construe as truthful, some wildly radical statement. It makes sarcasm less fun but sarcasm just doesn’t work well on the internet…
there is no need to dumb down the jokes…it wasn’t a mensa joke to begin with. what would be best is the use of a more exaggerated sarcasm.
In theater, you are taught to speak louder than you normally would, almost yell at times. when you do not have a microphone on you and speak normally, only the front row can hear you. also in theater, you tend to look very pale on stage so even guys are supposed to wear a fair amount of makeup. it is greatly overexaggerated but it is done to seem normal.
This applies to, to sarcasm on the internet. If you want it to be clear an come across well then you have to exaggerate. otherwise you will be that kid whose lines are not heard in the back of the theatre.
yeah in all honesty i didn’t think you were joking either. there are people here who really believe we shouldn’t draft a WR in the second round because of our past history, so when someone says it, it isn’t obvious that its a joke. maybe you should try to come up with better jokes.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 9:51 AM EST up reply actions
yes…if someone wants to have a ridiculous theory through sarcasm, it shouldn’t be one actually held by people….it should be something about how donte stallworth was so amazing and was awesome and we shouldn’t have cut him…thats a good example…
Bross is an amazing commenter and can’t let things go.
Sarcastic enough for you?
And your example was actually facetious. Sarcasm intends to hurt.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 10, 2010 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
facetious and sarcasm do use some similar techniques. sarcasm is not always intended to hurt but oftentimes is.
ALL I am saying is that sarcasm on the internet requires a more exaggerated theory. I appreciate the fact that you were trying to make a joke but this is a theory held by people. therefore, drier sarcasm like this does not always work, in fact in this instance it has failed to do its purpose.
it should be something about how donte stallworth was so amazing and was awesome and we shouldn’t have cut him
Weren’t you the one who was saying weeks ago that the Browns should keep Stallworth for next year?
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
Right. I thought he was serious as well, because other people have made similar comments.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
I believe it in the way i believe where i’m sitting on the couch matters in an indians game.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
It’s perfectly reasonable to be against drafting a WR high this year because you think the team has greater needs, or because you think we need to add veteran WR’s to go with our two youngs players, or many other perfectly legitimate reasons. What’s silly is being against drafting WR’s in the second round because someone thinks the Browns just have bad luck with second round receivers based on past drafts; that’s obviously irrelevant.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
yeah thats all i meant. I personally think we would be better served adding a vet than drafting another rookie.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
that would be outstanding
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 7:44 PM EST up reply actions
The Lions would have been smarter to select Joe Thomas over Calvin.
by Roger Dorn on Feb 9, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Agree with the 2nd round bad luck at wideout. Quarless had issues his sophmore year, got in Joes doghouse, and rebounded and played well. He can block and would be a steal if he lasted into the 5th round. I think he goes in the 4th.
Defense is emphasized which is good. Interesting to see what Holmgren will do. Maybe McCoy in the second round? Just a guess.
If we take a QB in the first four rounds, I’m going to puck….
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 12:13 AM EST up reply actions
Does anyone think that Haden looks like a muscular Obama?
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
Damn, you beat me to it.
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 Feb 9, 2010 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
Loving the late round picks, especially White and Worilds. Quarless is too small to play TE for us, IMO, but at that point, who cares? Worilds’ lack of production has me really questioning his “sleeper” status, but again, at that point who cares?
I don’t care about our previous luck in the 2nd with WRs, Thomas seems like a relatively low-risk pick for a mammoth, yet talented WR. He could become Vincent Jackson or Brandon Marshall. Obviously, he has a long way to go to get to that point, but he is already unselfish (watch him block), and seems to display some other characteristics found in a “Mangini guy”.
Not bad at all.
while it will obviously take a year or two for him to make the switch to LB, I’m a big fan of Worilds as well, that would be good value for that pick.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
It doesn’t take most DEs a year to switch to OLB. Not everyone is Veikune
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 9:21 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
rec….
but at the same time (on his point) it might take a year of transition for a later round talent like worlids…a guy like graham I see not having any transition problems.
Worilds is better than Veikune out of college.
I still think Graham would be best at DE.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 10:04 PM EST up reply actions
I do somewhat agree with worlids but at the same time, it is not out of the realm of possibility for there to be a learning curve. He did say he will obviously have a learning curve. I do not think that. however, I think it is quite possible.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on graham. he is really the same player as woodley. they have the same skill set (strength, extremely high motor, average speed, good instincts against the run, great initial burst off line), their sizes coming out are similar (woodley: 6-2, 266 Graham: 6-1, 263), and did play for the same team and put up similar stats.
(woodley, 153 Tkls, 22 Sks, about 38 TFLs, 2 ff’s ; Graham, 138 Tkls, 28 Sks, 55 Tfls, 8 ffs, 5 pDefs, and 2 blocked kicks).
Also, graham was double teamed a lot in college b/c he was really the only impact player on that defense that consistently made plays. the michigan D had alan branch and david harris to take pressure off of woodley…I think graham could end up being better (and I do think woodley is good but I do hate him b/c he was a wolverine and a steeler…wow I just realized…it is like the axis of evil…)
Graham played in a 3 man front and doesn’t have Woodley’s agility
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 10, 2010 10:04 AM EST up reply actions
Woodley didn’t have Woodley’s agility as a college prospect. He looked every bit as mobile as Graham. Every time I see Graham, I think he’s too stiff to become a LB, but then when I see him drop or make a move against the run, he proves me wrong. The kid is a player, and we could use him.
Actually a lot of guys making the switch don’t succeed right away. Using Mangini’s Patriots model you have both Tedy Bruschi and Mike Vrabel as examples.
exactly. of course their are exceptions, but it takes most guys a year to really feel comfortable in a new position.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
except that tedy bruschi was a middle linebacker in college and in the pros…but yeah, you are right about vrabel.
This is from wikipedia
Bruschi played college football at the University of Arizona as a defensive end, where he tied the NCAA Division I-A sack record with 52 quarterback sacks.
wow…I am very surprised. he always played ILB in the NFL.
I would try to make my point by criticizing wikipedia but I cannot in good conscious do that. wikipedia is almost as accurate as encyclopedia brittanica and is more accurate than encyclopedia americana.
In this case, I don’t see any reason wikipedia would be wrong, but in general you are right that a second source to wiki is probably for the best.
I don’t see the need actually for a second source. wikipedia is now about as accurate as brittanica (where ppl don’t ask for sources)
I should probably clarify that I have nothing against Wikipedia. Hell, I have an account and edit the thing myself. It’s a good resource – one among many you should use. What I have a problem with is this:
I don’t see the need actually for a second source.
I’m the kind of person who would respond to Jesus Christ descending from on high and whispering some revelation into my ear by smirking and saying “You have any proof of that?”
If you’re not always looking for a second source (and third, and fourth) then you’re just asking for someone to make a fool of you, be it Wikipedia, Britannica, your government, or whoever else controls your first source.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 11, 2010 7:02 AM EST up reply actions
the point is that people do not ask for a second source with britannica.
the whole point was pointing out that wikipedia is much more accurate than people think
The real point is……THIS IS A BROWNS BLOG NOT A DAMN PISSING MATCH ABOUT WIKIPEDIA…. get over it already.
by BornInThePound on Feb 11, 2010 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
“Dawgs By Nature: Where Vaguely Off Topic Posting Will Not Be Tolerated”?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 11, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
the point is that people do not ask for a second source with britannica.
They probably should. Regardless, I’m still not willing to equate the two.
the whole point was pointing out that wikipedia is much more accurate than people think
This we might agree on, depending on the person. And the article. Lots of variety in quality there….
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 11, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
This is easily the dumbest comment my eyes have ever witnessed.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 10, 2010 9:16 PM EST up reply actions
you know that credibility you’ve slowly started to build around here? You just lost it.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
you know what. Brittanica has about 4 errors per 100 pages, wikipedia has about 5.4.. encyclopedia americana has about 7 errors.
An investigation reported in the journal Nature in 2005 suggested that for scientific articles Wikipedia came close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopædia Britannica and had a similar rate of “serious errors”
Nature reported in 2005 that science articles in Wikipedia were comparable in accuracy to those on Encyclopædia Britannica’s web site. Out of 42 articles, only 4 serious errors were found in Wikipedia, and 4 in Encyclopædia Britannica, although more than a hundred lesser errors and omissions were found in each and Wikipedia’s articles were often “poorly structured”
the only glaring problem with wikipedia is really that sometimes there are large omissions of things that should be there but aren’t.
also wikipedia has developed (in 2007) a wikiscanner that scans when an article has been edited and changes it back (if needed) and can even track who edited it.
I’m with you on this particular issue.
Generally speaking, many people are too quick to dismiss Wikipedia. It’s all better than some people give it credit for. Those in charge at Wiki go to great lengths in order to keep their information accurate (for the most part), a lot of which people are not aware of.
yes.
I was surprised when I found out it was similarly accurate to brittanica…but it is true (and this didn’t come from wikipedia).
the only glaring complaint is b/c it is user edited, there are sometimes omissions.
Also, there are a wider array of topics covered. Errors accumulate much more on less trafficked pages, skewing perception. On just about any subject that Britannica would cover, wikipedia is heavily scrutinized. If you don’t think so, go look at the discussion pages. People debate these pages furiously, pulling from every resource available.
That said, if I needed to cite a paper I’d use the original source. Wikipedia is a great start, but more like an index of knowledge than a hard resource.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Your best defense of your statements is a study from 2005 that only covers scientific articles? Fail.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 10, 2010 11:41 PM EST up reply actions
actually, time and time again it has been proven to be similarly accurate to encyclopaedia brittanica.
I saw a study somewhere (but don’t have it on hand) where it is proven to be more accurate than encyclopedia americana.
Quote said studies. Show us that ‘time and time again’ somewhere. Until you can do so, your statements have no merit other than as one person’s opinion.
Haven’t you realized yet that “I read it somewhere” is not acceptable as a factual defense here?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 11, 2010 6:52 AM EST up reply actions
I think you’re being way too hard here. Wikipedia is a wonderful source of knowledge, on almost everything. sure from time to time an article is missing something, but bross is actually right that Wikipedia’s accuracy is on par with other major encyclopedias.
i also don’t think you understand how scientific studies work. 2005 is very, very recent, and “science” articles cover a very wide range of subjects. but, if you still think science isn’t enough, the Journal of American History, Vol. 93, No. 1, found:
…Wikipedia to be less comprehensive and detailed than American National Biography but more so than Encarta
so if you would trust encarta, trust wikipedia.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
To continue, most of the wiki-hate is born out of the earlier days of the site, when there were few editors and it wasn’t regulated as strictly. Now there is a very strict process for editing articles, and you must site your source of information in order for your edit to stay permanent.
An article in The Guardian gave reviews from experts, whose most common criticisms were writing style and omissions, but who also gave credit to wikipedia’s factual accuracy and the readily available links to the source information.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/oct/24/comment.newmedia
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:03 PM EST up reply actions
This Guardian article makes no claims as to how accurate Wikipedia is compared to any other source. (Kind of the root question, that.) Their expert ratings vary from 0 out of 10 to 8 out of 10. The averaged rating is 5.6 out of 10. Not exactly a home run.
I’d summarize this as stating that Wikipedia is kind of accurate sometimes, in isolation. Well, yes, sometimes. No news there.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 13, 2010 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
another study, this one from PC Authority, but addressing a range of subjects, found wikipedia to be the most detailed and offer the most breadth, but to have minor typos or unclear prose. So i guess if you’re looking for a beautifully written encyclopedia, go with brittanica, but if you’re looking for info, go to wikipedia.
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/93908,wikipedia-uncovered.aspx/6
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
Money quote from this Australian PC Authority article (a publication I’d never heard of before today):
We asked three experts to evaluate articles pertaining to their field, to give us an unscientific snapshot of the competing sources.No statement at all on how the articles or evaluating experts were picked.
Interesting talk here, like a dinner party conversation amongst a couple of educated friends, but not really evidence. At that, the reviews are mixed.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 13, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
another study, from a german weekly journal:
The study reviewed articles for accuracy, completeness, up-to-date information, and ease of reading. In 43 out of the 50 articles, the German Wikipedia came out on top. The German language version is one of the largest of Wikipedia’s online encyclopedias. With 673,000 articles, it’s second only to the English version.
On a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 being the best score, articles from Wikipedia’s German version received an average rating of 1.7, while Brockhaus’ average rating was 2.7.
it covered " entries from the fields of politics, economy, sports, science, culture, entertainment, geography, medicine, history and religion."
before you try to condescendingly dismiss something, do a little research.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:13 PM EST up reply actions
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/trends/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=204702694
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
This IW article discusses study results that articles in the “German version of Wikipedia are better than those in Germany’s commercial encyclopedia, Brockhaus”. Best link I could find to the primary source, an article in STERN, is http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.stern.de/computer-technik/internet/:stern-Test-Wikipedia-Brockhaus/604423.html. That’s a word salad translation of a summary, which makes any evaluation going forward a challenge.
Not being a German speaker though, not having any exposure to Brockhaus, and not knowing how the German speaking editing / contributing Wikipedian population compares to the English speaking one, this is a interesting tangent, but doesn’t seem all that relevant to me.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 13, 2010 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
look, the simple fact of the matter is that these are the only readily available types of studies done on the accuracy of wikipedia. This is enough evidence for me to trust wikipedia. I can’t give you the type of absolute evidence you want, but then again you can’t give me that type of evidence that encarta or brittanica are any better.
when it comes right down to it, the best way to check wikipedia is to check their sources, and in my experience their sources are solid. I realize there are probably articles that don’t have good sources, but i haven’t run into them yet. Sure, I wouldn’t cite wikipedia in a research paper, but if i need to look up the estimated mass of sgr A* wikipedia is great.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 13, 2010 10:07 PM EST up reply actions
my experience their sources are solid. I realize there are probably articles that don’t have good sources, but i haven’t run into them yet. S
I do like that the sources are often easily accessible. However, when going to those sources I have been dissatisfied with how the material has been translated in the wiki article. Also, there are thousands, probably millions of wiki articles that are filled with conjecture. Some of these instances include the [citation needed] warning. Others just go by and mislead the not-so-careful reader, who mistakes it for fact.
Here is a Browns-centric example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Kosar
The article explains the entire draft controversy. Not a single source given. The article attempts to report what happened between Belicheck and Kosar. Again, no sources in that part. Also, it says that Kosar has turned down feelers to run for public office. A significant claim. It is followed by the ominous “[citation needed]”.
Fleeting interest for general information. A way to look for more serious sources. Otherwise, you are fooling yourself.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 14, 2010 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
but the entire point i’ve been trying to make is that its as good as or better than any other general knowledge encyclopedia. and i still think thats true. i’m not sure how old you are or your level of schooling, but check the sources of a text book, they aren’t any better. for instance, many things written as fact in history books about native americans are based on conjecture from journals kept by fur traders.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 14, 2010 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
To the extent that text books do that, they are wrong. That doesn’t make wikipedia any more or less reliable.
I am an attorney.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
my point in bringing that up is that places that are generally considered good sources are just as (in)accurate as wikipedia, so wikipedia is catching a lot of flak unfairly.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 15, 2010 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
That Journal of American History article is interesting. (Full text without a paywall at http://chnm.gmu.edu/essays-on-history-new-media/essays/?essayid=42, BTW ) I think you cherry picked your pullquote a bit, and I could do the same:
“[American historians] would be much more distressed by the essay’s incomplete, almost capricious, coverage than by the minor errors. Dozens of standard topics – the Red Scare, the Ku Klux Klan, the Harlem Renaissance, woman suffrage, the rise of radio, the emergence of industrial unionism – go unmentioned. And he would grind his teeth over the awkward prose and slack analysis… and the sometimes confusing structure.”
The article is worthwhile reading though, if not particularly aimed at proving anything. (One author reads 25 Wikipedia biography articles selected via an unknown process and compares them without discussing the fine points of it.) The author has a lot to say both good and bad about Wikipedia. I appreciate the good reference, NTN.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 13, 2010 3:14 AM EST up reply actions
thanks to the full text link, and yeah i cherrypicked that one a bit, but the point remains, wikipedia is somewhat unbalanced in terms of space devoted to certain topics, and it can also have some bad omissions, but for the most part its factually accurate.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 13, 2010 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
But wikipedia isn’t a source in and of itself. It is a great tool to get the generic information of something that you only have fleeting interest in. It is particularly useful when it cites to relevant primary sources. But it is a cesspool of slanted, biased, incomplete, and misleading articles. And if you read it, or worse, actually use it yourself as a citation, for something you are truly interested in, you are doing a huge diservice to yourself and anyone that talks to you.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
its really not as bad as you’re making it out. even the wikipedia article on the accuracy of wikipedia cites multiple reasons why wikipedia isn’t a great primary source.
Its actually not very good for generic information, many studies have found it goes into too much depth for someone with only a small understanding of a topic. its much better for someone looking to get at details.
I have never found wikipedia to have a slanted, biased, or misleading article. incomplete? sure. but never biased.
Please read the links i’ve posted above you to see that wikipedia is a much, much better source than you are giving it credit for.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
. even the wikipedia article on the accuracy of wikipedia cites multiple reasons why wikipedia isn’t a great primary source.
This is the entire point. It isn’t a primary source. It is a fine index. A generic dumping ground of random information, of varying relevance and worth.
Look, I use wikipedia all the time. Wikipedia is awesome. I love Wikipedia. It is not something to be cited, however, in any serious discussion. And THAT is what bross originally claimed. And THAT is what I’m talking about.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I love Wikipedia. It is not something to be cited, however, in any serious discussion. And THAT is what bross originally claimed.
Despite my take on this here, I’m a fan of Wikipedia as well. But in particular, bross said Wikipedia was so good, he didn’t “see the need actually for a second source.”
I’m all for Wikipedia as one source among many, but as a single source? Nope.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 12, 2010 9:34 PM EST up reply actions
i think the original point bross made was that in this particular case a second source wasn’t necessary
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 13, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
Perhaps so, but if that’s true, then responding to the resulting criticism of Wikipedia with a full court press claiming it’s as good as (or maybe even better) most formal reference texts was a strange choice.
I’ll admit that I commented in part because I feel like bross has sometimes played very fast and loose with the declarative statements he’s made and having anything other than his opinion to back them up with when asked.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Feb 13, 2010 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
or worse, actually use it yourself as a citation
That’s the only part of this comment that I can agree with. The rest is utter BS in my honest opinion.
You don’t agree that it is a great tool and way to locate original sources?
What exactly are we disagreeing on?
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Sorry, I should have been more specific.
“But it is a cesspool of slanted, biased, incomplete, and misleading articles. And if you read it” … “for something you are truly interested in, you are doing a huge diservice to yourself and anyone that talks to you.”
It should be hardly limited to people with only “fleeting” interest in a topic, talk about a huge disservice.
I do agree, you shouldn’t cite it, and that it is a great tool.
I could go on about this, but I’d really rather not, about Wikipedia. It just seems futile, or useless rather on a football blog. We’ll have to agree to disagree.
What’s absurd about this whole thread is how things actually transpired: Dorn was actually the one who countered one of bross’ points by citing Wikipedia — in what seemed to be a rather casual discussion. Bross took Dorn at his word and the citation Dorn provided, saying he had little reason to believe either Dorn or Wikipedia was inaccurate in this instance. It was conceded as much that a second source wouldn’t hurt.
But then, somewhere along the line, someone apparently confused bross with saying Wikipedia was the Gospel and that his credibility was somehow damaged.
Overreaction much around here sometimes?
by Western Reserve on Feb 12, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions
No you are correct.
Also, Bruschi was a OLB for his first 5 seasons or so.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
The overall point though, is that I think Mangini viewed Veikune as his Tedy Bruschi and they are both making the strange transition from college DE to Pro ILB. It will not happen in one season (or maybe not at all for Veikune.)
Veikune does have all the physical tools to make the switch. It’s mostly up to him and how hard he wants to work.
Did Veikune play any downs this year?
by TheDriveStillHurts on Feb 10, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
To the best of my knowledge, it came on special teams if it came at all.
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t think so. Quite disappointing, and you wonder if it was his attitude or his ability to learn the playbook that kept him off the field.
I would think it’s a matter of learning the playbook and transitioning the correct positioning (rhyme?) to the field. I don’t think it’s easy to do after playing defensive end in college.
I would be surprised if they had a defensive scheme.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
why do you think that transition is so strange?
by The Licensed Pessimist on Feb 12, 2010 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
Most college DEs go to OLB in the 3-4 (if they transition). In the 3-4, teams usually ask the OLBs to play like a RE in a 4-3 (speed rusher).
Some teams even play a “4-3 defense” out of a 3-4 front, just with the added versatility of flipping from an “over” to an “under” front without much change.
ILBs in the 3-4 are often asked to be like traditional 4-3 LBs who don’t blitz as often (which is what a college DE should be good at). They are usually covering and making tackles against the run more than an OLB (which is where a lot of college DEs struggle to transition).
What running backs did you pass on in the 2nd? I paid attention to that draft and i think Dwyer went the pick before ours, but what about Best? Are you that confident with Jerome Harrison and James Davis? or did you not like the fact that Best has concerns about his concussions? Carlos Dunlap was another player I think you passed on. Don’t get me wrong I like Thomas, i think he’s a good pick. I’m just curious why you decided to go with Thomas.
I really liked the draft tho. The 3rd round sticks out to me, I feel you did really well getting Black and Wright. All in all I thought you did really good!
Dunlap is not really that good and WILL get in a lot of trouble off the field. I think I’ll pass.
I thought Best was gone, but I think Thomas and Best are both about as good, and WR is a bigger need for us.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
I agree about dunlap. I also think he is a little overrated as a player.
I would not have drafted best anyways. honestly I like him better than spiller, but best and harrison are similar players. they are both small guys with good hands that use their speed and agility.
For running back, I am totally in love with anthony dixon. he is like brandon jacobs Jr. (comparison: Jacobs is 265 and 6’4 Dixon is slightly under 6’1’’ and is 245…similar builds and similar speeds). he however is much more agile coming out than jacobs. he can exploit the cutback. he also is a very patient runner and has great vision. he can make guys miss in open space occasionally and has a great bust to the hole. in short, he is one of the few runners that has the makings of a guy who can handle the load regularly.
My preference at RB is Dwyer, but I think Best is a good pick as well. I’m not sold on Harrison coming back next year and playing the way he did at the end of the season.
in short, he is one of the few runners that has the makings of a guy who can handle the load regularly.
I would have to strongly disagree with this. If someone has the speed of Brandon Jacobs and can only “occasionally” make a guy miss in open space he is going to need to a complementary back.
by BornInThePound on Feb 10, 2010 2:23 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t disagree with you. I like dwyer better and in the 2nd, he is a very good option (reminds me of johnothan stewart but slightly quicker). I was just more saying best is similar to spiller, and has a similar style to harrison.
The type of guy I see complementing harrison is Anthony Dixon. I think he could end up being even better than brandon jacobs. jacobs is not an elusive guy at all. he does not have quick feet at all. Dixon is kind of like Jamal Lewis near the end of his career but even better. at that point, lewis didn’t have blazing speed, but he could barrel over anybody. he was also very agile for a back his size and could make people miss in the open field. he also had great field vision and always was able to exploit the cutback lane and make guys miss occasionally in small spaces.
Dixon will never be barry sanders, but for his size, he has incredible balance and very good agility. he will be passed over by the NFL b/c he played for a crap school and was never a star. he did however go up against some pretty great Defenses in the SEC. He might never be an every down back but he has more of that potential than CJ Spiller. spiller has much more big play potential but his best case scenario is what reggie bush plays like now.
If the guy’s anything like Jamal Lewis near the end of his career, then I don’t want him.
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 9:55 AM EST up reply actions
Dunlap reminds me way too much of other failed Florida DEs who have been drafted high lately.
Could be unfair on my part, though.
I have this argument with Florida fans all the time.
Outside of Percy Harvin, is there one Florida player that is great? Fred Taylor and Alex Brown had their moments, but for such a “power” school, the seem to have a lot of busts.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
Well, if you go back to the Spurrier days they had an offensive system which worked well in college but didn’t translate well to the NFL, so guys like Grossman, Wuerffel, and all those WR’s were great in college but never became much in the NFL. And those teams never really had many NFL-caliber defensive players because they were an offensive team. The recent Urban Meyer teams, however, have had elite defenses with many guys who are top NFL prospects so that may be changing in the near future.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 11, 2010 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
that may be true about urban meyer, but so far, UF has really been a bust school IMO. even after spurrier in the ron zook era.
I have not looked at it enough but I also feel Miami might be similar with the same type of players as UF.
Miami has stocked the NFL with All-Pro’s. If anything, Miami is the anti-Florida when it comes to NFL players.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 13, 2010 3:42 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I was just about to say the same thing myself.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 13, 2010 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
like I said, I was mostly judging by my observation of butch davis taking miami players. like I said during the first comment, I had not done the research to say anything conclusively. on this comment previously I admitted that when thinking more about it, using butch davis’ picks as an example is not good.
How in the hell is Tennessee ranked ahead of OSU?!?
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 13, 2010 10:07 PM EST up reply actions
I think it was because OSU has a lot of underachieving defensive talent.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 14, 2010 12:07 PM EST up reply actions
That is a joke. OSU wins in terms of both raw numbers and impact players.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 14, 2010 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
I went back and looked up the draft and came across something interesting.
102) Cleveland Browns- Mitch Petrus, OG, Arkansas
103) Cinncinati Bengals (from Oak)- John Jerry, OG, Ole’ Miss
Which player did you actually take? Petrus? or Jerry?
Shhhh! I wasn’t there for the pick so they gave me Petrus but I would have taken Jerry. So while that isn’t my OFFICIAL results, its what I would have done.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
Solid choices, well-reasoned choices, except this still leaves us withQuinnSmith as our QB.
I am totally fine with this.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 9, 2010 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
+2
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 Feb 9, 2010 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t think thats something we need to address through the draft this year. we might draft someone, but i think its more likely we bring in a veteran to push quinn a little.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
If the player is there, the sooner we draft him the better.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I agree whole-heartedly with that, I just don’t think that player is there.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 9:53 AM EST up reply actions
If the Rams do take Suh, Bradford could fall.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
While I think bradford could potentially be the best QB in this draft, until I see him throw, his injury history would be too much for me to take him #7. just my opinion though, and like i said, if he throws well at the combine or at a pro day, my opinion could change.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
I think he is supposed to be clear to throw by the combine.
I would hope all he is doing right now is rehab and lifting, and other such prep for the draft. The medical people will be prodding the hell out of that shoulder and doing every test known to man on it. If he passes, I’m ok with picking him.
Mostly because I want to believe this is the last time we will be picking this high.
Well, this is of course predicated on the idea that he’s been vetted by our FO and they feel he’s worth it.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Right. I’m sure the Browns will put him through every workout and test imaginable to make sure he’s healthy before they pick him that high. If they think he’s healthy then I would have no problem with drafting him.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
love all the picks
except maybe the choice of blair white but he could turn out to be the wes welker type mold. but the undrafted free agent list-Perriloux out of jackson state that guy had so many problems in LSU its not funny. i believe he is the next JaMarcus Russell without all the hype surrounding him
I was waiting for someone to say he would be Wes Welker.
NO. He is not. They aren’t really that similar besides the fact that they are white. You are probably the same person that thinks all black QBs are McNabb
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 9:23 PM EST up reply actions
I mean they are white. His name even says it. Also I’d rather be Doug Williams.
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
Warren Moon?
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 9, 2010 11:10 PM EST up reply actions
Doug has a 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
So does Trent Dilfer. Warren Moon was a HOF quarterback. Doug Williams was a decent QB who had a few good seasons.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Feb 10, 2010 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
Precisely.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 10, 2010 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
but would you rather be a guy with a super bowl ring or a guy without one?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Randall Cunningham.
Also the whole thread was a joke. I know how much people here like to get their panties twisted when using wins and super bowls to value a QB. If you noticed my first comment, i figured it was fairly obvious i was jesting.
I mean they are white. His name even says it
I like all 3 always have always will. Although Moon I didn’t initially liked because he played for the Oilers. Williams winning the Super Bowl was an awesome moment.
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
And about Perriloux, we could easily cut him if we think he’ll get in trouble.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
I noticed that you did not address the ILB spot. Do you think the Browns are okay there, or were you working from a long-term building perspective? Or BPA?
Just curious, because it seems there were so many posts during the season (not sure if any were yours) that expressed a lack of enthusiasm for the talent pool on the roster at that position.
I like Bowens and Jackson. Both played well last year. Trusnick is a good backup and Maiava isn’t bad either.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 9, 2010 10:03 PM EST up reply actions
Bowens played inspired near the end of the season. Jackson works hard. Trunsnik is a solid 45th player on the roster. I hope Maiava develops into a contributer someday.
None of them are good inside linebackers. This was the most glaring omission. But, overall, I enjoyed the conjecture.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Bowens was okay at the end of the season, but I highly doubt he can keep that pace up for 16 games…especially now that he will be 33. I agree about all of those guys…the problem is that we don’t have a playmaker there.
I really think that if we could have gotten a look at Jackson in those last 5ish games, we would have more faith in his ability as a ‘playmaker’.
I wouldn’t mind a huge and extremely fast guy there, but we can get by with what we have.
I don’t totally see jackson as a playmaker but he can have a significant impact on the game. I believe he is just on the brink of being an impact player, but one impact player at ILB does not a defense make.
what we have besides him are trusnik, a special teams guy who I like but do not trust starting more than a few games, Maiava, who is still raw and never really played in college (and still has a lot of room to grow playing in the pros) and Bowens. with bowens we have a 33 year old who was decent and maybe passable as a starter in a career year. he really is a career backup.
jackson does not have more than above average range for an ILB. the problem is the only ILB with better than above average range is maiava. his speed is not anything that special and he still really needs to bulk up. the problem is that our guys don’t always get to the play, and when they do, it is usually a few yards after the LOS. none of our players (except maybe jackson and maiava) get into the backfield well to stop plays from happening. Bowens doesn’t have much left in the tank and I will be utterly shocked if he gets 5 sacks next year…even if he starts all 16 games.
I didn’t say you thought he was a playmaker. I said if Jackson was healthy when our team started to figure things out, I think we’d all have a different view.
Trusnik should not be playing on defense. Maiava should become a very capable backup, but I don’t know if he’ll ever be able to start. Bowens was great last year, and will probably give us solid production next year. Barton will be steady and unspectacular.
If you don’t think Jackson has above average range, you don’t know what you are looking at. He isn’t spectacularly fast, but he gets to the ball. If you need some jargon, his “playing speed” is much faster than people with better “timed speed”.
Regardless, ILB is not what is limiting our defense. It isn’t the kind of gaping hole we’d need to reach to fill. CB might be. Safety too. There is no need to reach to find an ILB, because we should be drafting BPA at all times if at all possible. TRSS didn’t think any ILBs were the BPA, so he didn’t take one. There will be more drafts.
I said he was somewhat of an impact player. I don’t think I said he was a playmaker. If I did I misspoke. i believe he is good but not a big playmaker.
bowens I don’t think will be nearly as good as he was this year. he will disappoint most likely IMO. he is 33 and had a career year. barton I have heard is likely to be cut.
I agree about the playing speed/timed speed. maybe I am giving him a bad rap. he doesn’t have great range but it definitely is pretty good.
I am not saying we don’t need a CB or safety. I think those are pretty big needs and I do agree with you that we should not reach.
Yes we do disagree on this.
I don’t think he is a bad player. Just that he is very average and extremely easy to replace.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 10, 2010 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with you. we have 4 guys on the interior.
-Maiava
-Trusnik
-Jackson
-Bowens
Here is How I address each one:
-Maiava has some talent, but I would not trust him starting yet. He never started consistently in college and although he could be good, he is not reliable yet as a starter. I like his speed, but he is also very undersized for the 3-4. he needs to put on several pounds to be a force on the inside. I see him as a backup and special teamer next season
-Trusnik: Now trusnik has the size to play in the middle in the 3-4 but I don’t know if he could ever truly bee more than an average starter. he is a nice player, a mangini player, but he doesn’t have a much higher ceiling. he has average range for an ILB. he doesn’t make enough playsi n the backfield to truly be a force. he is slightly better than maiava but I would not start him either
-Bowens: Now bowens has good size and performed fairly well but I would not rely on him honestly this year. he is good at pressuring the QB but average everywhere else. He can stop the run but only has average range and can really only defend between the tackles effectively. for the amount of tackles he got, too many were assisted tackles. if you take solo tackles, he was no better than trusnik. he is also 33, slower than he once was (with less range) and just had a career year. that being said, this year wasn’t even great. banking on him to produce at the average pace he did last year would be optimistic to the point of foolishness. He is not a starter anymore, he is a backup.
-DQwell Jackson: This is the only guy I truly like as a viable option as a starter. He has improved every year he has been with the browns. He has very good size for the position. he racks up more tackles every year and looks more comfortable in coverage. he was on a good pace this year until he got hurt. He is also coming off of an injury so it is not 100% certain his status. Granted, for how much I like him, he is only a solid starter really. he doesn’t make enough solo tackles and doesn’t have great range. granted after maiava, I think he is our quickest ILB, but he still has average range for the position at best. he isn’t a huge hitter either. Verdict: If jackson comes back 100% he is a solid starter. he is nothing special but he goes out and does the job and is solid…
It looks like there is a gaping hole here. every decent 3-4 has at least one impact ILB and the great teams have a star or superstar at the position.
the packers (hawk and barnett are impact players), the cardinals (carlos dansby), the Dolphins (crowder), Steelers (farrior and timmons are stars), Ravens (ray lewis…enough said), Jets (bart is impact player and David harris is becoming a star), 49ers (Willis is superstar, spikes is impact player), chargers (cooper=impact), and the Pats (jerrod mayo) all have impact players.
I would be hard pressed to consider Jackson better than many of these guys…maybe a few like cooper, but most of these guys are all better than DQwell as a player. the great teams have 2 impact players, or an impact player and a star. if the browns can get a guy later like Micah Johnson, he can come in and be an impact player. Johnson is a guy who can be an impact player in a 3-4. we need that player. the teams that have one impact player, also have a solid starter. what we have is a borderline impact player and 3 guys who are all average starters or best, but should be role players.
The only team that has a worse inside D for a 3-4 compared to us is KC. KC is horrible but we are not far behind. we have the 2nd least talented, and 2nd least productive group of 3-4 ILBs in the NFL.
by bross09 on Feb 9, 2010 10:28 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
bross, I’ve been annoyed and frustrated by you dozens of times over the last month or so.
But I must say, you absolutely took the words out of my mouth here.
The first reaction after reading over TRSS’s post was: Damn, where are the ILB’s?
Un-ironic rec.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Must agree. As much as I love Maiva, a linebacker should be picked up at some point in this draft.
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 12:20 AM EST up reply actions
(sry…didn’t finish) Johnson and spikes are really the only ILBs for a 3-4 in the draft (besides McClain). Daryl washington is extremely undersized. Sean Lee is DQwell Jackson Jr (similar build, similar lack of range). if we want to get a playmaker at the position, we need to go after McClain, Spikes, or Johnson in the Draft.
I was looking at FA ILBs too (and btw, jackson is a FA) and I would maybe like the browns to pursue a ILB in Free Agency…maybe a Barrett Ruud or Karlos Dansby
Technically, he’s a RFA because of a lack of CBA.
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 9:57 AM EST up reply actions
I’m not a big fan of the 3-4. It’s probably because our defense gives it a bad name.
We need to either get guys who can run the damn thing or stop "trying" to run it.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 12:31 AM EST up reply actions
We were actually pretty good this past year. Ryan has only scratched the surface of what he can do from a base 3-4 with 3-4 personnel.
Mel Tucker was embarrassingly bad.
I would not say we were pretty good. our run defense sucked! Even after shaun rogers got hurt it pretty much sucked.
Yeah but look at the personnel that was running it. Being below average with a practice squad speaks well of the defense itself.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
so because we had crap players, you think highly of our D?
Our D was pretty much garbage for most of the year. I do not blame this on rob ryan, I blame it on the personnel. with what he had to work with, I do give a lot of credit to ryan. We outperformed what our personnel talent was in many areas but we still could use a definite personnel upgrade.
That’s precisely what I’m saying. I think highly of our scheme. The results were subpar, but not horrific towards the end, despite getting worse personnel.
We had a good scheme with (largely) bad players.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
yes. we could be a good D with good players. I like the scheme, I just think we need some talent. the ryan bros. know how to make a good D. they learned it from the best.
It is just going to take time. If anything, I trust our staff with defense. They found good value players who are high-character guys, smart, and hard working in one season. Now time to add young talent. It’ll get there, Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Actually, our run defense got better after Rodgers got hurt. I thought it improved quite a bit towards the end of the year, despite the Chiefs shoot out….
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
it got maybe slightly better…we also faced worse rushing teams at the end of the year. the only real accomplishment we had after rogers went down was shutting down MJD (which was more b/c they were behind and not running).
really, even after rogers went out, we were still a bottom 5 rushing D. the only reason it seemed like we were better is b/c teams were playing from behind more and running less. the game where we “shut down” MJD, he still averaged over 5 ypc. If the teams were actually running the ball more, it might be an argument but they weren’t.
I do believe Ryan can get this 3-4 going, but I’m with you on this one.
Our defense F-ing sucked last year, and every year before that (while running the 3-4). We don’t have and have never had the players to run that scheme. I don’t care what anyone says.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, you’re right. We did suck running the 4-3 also. We haven’t had a complete D in the last 15 years that can run either.
It is the scheme. You can’t argue that each scheme itself requires different players based on their abilities.
I think, based on the roster from last season, we would have been better off running the straight 4-3.
BUT our young talent is on the rise, and Ryan knows what he’s doing. I don’t have a huge problem with our guys perfecting it.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 9:05 PM EST up reply actions
You can’t argue that each scheme itself requires different players based on their abilities.
I never said that. Straw man.
I think, based on the roster from last season, we would have been better off running the straight 4-3.
Playing a one gap system or playing from a 4-3 front? We didn’t have anyone to play DE in the 4-3, except maybe Roth and Wimbley. Would they really have benefited from putting their hands on the ground? I don’t know, but I doubt it.
We do seem to have better one-gappers than two-gappers, outside of Coleman and Rubin, but we play one-gap all the time in passing situations.
It is the scheme.
When you initially said this, I took it to mean that the scheme was what was limiting us defensively. I really don’t think it was. We were playing WRs at safety, and we have 2-3 players I wouldn’t mind upgrading over on defense, the talent was clearly the limiting factor, IMO.
AHHH, We have a misunderstanding here.
Yeah, the 3-4 system itself is awesome. I was just trying to say that system isn’t good with who we’ve been trying to run it with.
And I was being sarcastic about running the 4-3. I assumed you would pick up on the humor in that. The 3-4 is far more superior than the 4-3.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 11, 2010 3:30 PM EST up reply actions
I still think that our run defense looked so bad because they were up against a disproportionate number of run plays. It seemed the Browns were down early and often in so many games that the opposition was able to settle into pounding the ball early on without much fear that the Browns would mount a comeback.
So our defense looked that bad because everyone just ran the ball down our throats???
meh
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 9:30 PM EST up reply actions
at the same time, when teams were not up on us and were running the ball, they found success. we limited MJDs carries when we played jacksonville but he still averaged 5.1 ypc.
haha yup!!
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 11, 2010 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
No doubt Ryan can get it moving soon.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 3:46 AM EST up reply actions
didn’t Barton play inside? or am i confusing Barton and Bowens?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
I’ve confused their names several times, I got it straight now.
Barton has always played inside and started at ILB this year til he got hurt.
Bowens usually played outside in his career, started at OLB this year, but moved to ILB this year when Jackson and Barton got hurt.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 10, 2010 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
ok thats what i thought. I confuse the two all the time as well, so you’re not alone on that.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
I disagree. Crowder was hurt this year, but when healthy is an impact player.
Hawk isn’t bad. He might be the only one where I might take jackson over them, but Hawk also has a higher ceiling. either way, I would not say hawk is definitely worse than jackson either…that is very debatable.
This season he had 1 sack and 1 INT and 0 FF and 0 FR.
That isn’t making plays.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
He played in 13 games.
For his career he has 2.5 sacks, 3 FF and 1 INT in his 5 year career.
He has never made plays. He is 100% replaceable, and probably easily upgraded.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
Hawk didn’t even start every game last year
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 10, 2010 8:43 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, even though the Packers did a pretty good job running the 3-4 this year (for the first time running it), Hawk and Crowder aren’t that great. I wouldn’t have listed them.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Feb 10, 2010 9:17 PM EST up reply actions
they are impact players. they are not playmakers but I would not put them that much ahead of DQwell. i think all of those guys are on a similar level.
How can a guy be a “impact player” without being a “playmaker”?
If a guy is making impact plays (sacks, INT’s, FF, FR) then he is a playmaker. If he doesn’t make the impact plays, then he is Andra Davis.
Andra Davis is the perfect example for non-playmaker.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
I equate playmaker higher than impact player. to me, an impact player does make an impact on the defense at times, but isn’t a playmaker. channing crowder when healthy is an impact player. so is DQwell. Barrett Ruud however is a playmaker.
Why is Barrett Rudd a playmaker?
From what I have seen he is just a good player, but nothing special. Channing Crowder is JAG. Ruud is good but far from impact or a playmaker.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
Barton Isnt bad and benard and veikune still might have potential.
Anyway, I never really liked available as much as Thomas, Black, and Wright
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 10, 2010 10:23 AM EST reply actions
I’m reserving my final decision til after I read and see more information. But am I the only one thinking Rolando McClain is a better pick than Hayden? Even at 7.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Positional value as well. I’d trade away a great ILB for an equally great CB.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
It’s an excellent question.
I would love to hear what a room full of GMs would say on the subject. Take a stand, though. I’m sticking with CB.
Gun to your head: which do you take, the best ILB in the game or the best CB?
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I think a shut-down CB in the mold of Deion or Revis is more valuable. They can take the best receiver completely out of the game, and no ILB can have that affect on the offense in my opinion.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
I would agree with that. With the new passing rules, it’s harder to shut down receivers these days like Revis can then to be a top LB like Lewis was.
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 10, 2010 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with you completely. ray lewis can defend the pass and rush the passer but he cannot shut down one aspect of a game completely. he might be able to singlehandedly shut down mediocre RBs but a good running back cannot be completely shut down by one player from what I have seen watching football…even if the player is urlacher or lewis.
champ bailey and revis truly shut down the opponents #1 wideout. yes they do usually get a catch or 2, but they are ineffective.
Revis comes along once every decade. Elite ILBs are much more practical.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Wait, are you saying elite CBs are more or less rare than ILBs?
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
More rare. So rare that it is almost impossible to project a rookie to become a truly elite CB. Plus, they don’t stay elite for big chunks of their career. Champ Bailey was elite for a few years, but not anymore. Revis is elite now, but there is a good chance he won’t be 5 years from now. Kinda like RBs on offense. So few are actual game-chaniginly-better than a big pack of solid players and they don’t last long enough to make it worth it, in my mind, to invest a top pick in them.
My broader point is that if you think Haden is a once-a-decade talent, take him. But if you merely think he will be a good CB, don’t. Find contributors further down in the draft at the position, or find vets that have some gas in the tank.
Put it this way, the #1 CB in any given draft, in my mind, has about a 5% chance of being Revis-good. The #1 ILB in any given draft, in my mind, has about a 15% chance of being Ray Lewis-good.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I know I am in the minority, but I just don’t see it in Haden.
I think he is the best CB in this class, but I think that says more about this class of CB’s than Haden.
Put a gun to my head, I would say that Eric Berry is the best CB in this class. That isn’t a typo. Then again, I think that Ed Reed would be an All-Pro CB. This doesn’t mean that Berry and Reed should be CB’s though.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 2:02 PM EST up reply actions
It does seem from all the reports I’m seeing that Haden will likely turn out to be solid but not elite. That’s not entirely thrilling. I still want Bradford or Berry. Haden makes a decent backup plan, but so does McClain or (better yet) a trade down.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
What about trading down and getting Earl Thomas, who would also be a great CB or S?
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
What is the talent level of the other position? If my ILB is Ray, who’s my CB? Who is my ILB if I take Revis or Nnamdi?
We’ve seen Denver and Washington stink on defense despite Champ, and we’ve seen Ray Lewis play on nothing but slightly above average-to-legendary defenses. And I think Revis would not be doing what he is doing without that front-7 and that scheme.
In my eyes, the ILBs in this league are Lewis (though he is not what he once was), Willis, and then everybody else. I’d put Bailey (again, not what he once was but still elite), Revis, Nnamdi all on that top tier with the Cromarties, Samuel, and a few others not all that far behind. Rarity goes to ILB, IMO.
As for positional impact on the field, traditional thinking says you take the guy who plays closer to the ball, but everybody’s so pass-happy now that this is where it really gets fuzzy for me. You can just throw away from the CB, while it is harder to adjust things around the middle of the field (assuming each can take away 1/3 of the horizontal field, you are left with a contiguous 2/3 with the CB, but two 1/3-width slices with the ILB).
So if I can get Lewis in his prime along with Winfield, I think I take that over Bailey in his prime with Barrett Ruud.
I can see that, but I’m sticking with Bailey in his prime.
Besides, you have to make the decision in a vacuum.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
In a vacuum, I’ll conform and take Bailey like everyone else.
I just think Lewis is a pretty rare guy and makes a ridiculous impact on that whole defense, and I am also buying in to what I think a lot of other people are selling here; average ILBs are easy to find.
Lewis is absolutely a rarity, agreed.
Also a murderer, though…
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Where’d this come from, anyway? Were there charges or something?
by BrownDawg1409 on Feb 11, 2010 9:56 AM EST up reply actions
From when he was indicted for murder.
The conjecture is that he paid off his cohorts, and the victim’s family in the civil suit. There may or may not be any truth in that, but regardless it was some knifey, shady business.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I disagree though. I would rather have ruud and bailey than lewis and winfield. winfield is good but the difference between winfield and bailey I believe is greater than that of Lewis and Ruud. ruud may not rush the passer like ray, or have quite as much range, but he is definitely a great player.
That’s your choice, but as I said I disagree. Winfield is very good, and he’s probably about the 15th best CB in the league. He played on a team that was a good bet to make the Super Bowl both on paper and in real life, and he was probably considered a strength on that team.
Who do you think the 16th best CB in the league is?
Lewis and Winfield are 10x better than Rudd and Bailey.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 2:08 PM EST up reply actions
in their primes, Bailey was soo much better than Winfield. Ruud isn’t even in his prime yet. ray lewis is still probably much better but it is hard to say IMO.
I hate Ray Lewis. I think he is a POS.
But to say that “it is hard to say” that Ray Lewis is better than Barrett Ruud is just foolish.
Ruud is a nice player, but he isn’t in the same zip code as Lewis.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
We already had Ruud, and he was nothing special.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
I think he was talking about his brother who plays for the Bucs.
If he meant the other one, then I am even more in the camp of Lewis and Winfield.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 6:53 PM EST up reply actions
Jokes don’t translate well online.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
Ahh. Got ya. I feel a little foolish.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
I think they aren’t as far apart as we make it seem. The real difference maker for me is that i’m ok with jackson and barton going into next season, but i’m definitely not ok with mcdonald.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
With the things that Heckert has said, I will go out on a limb and say we will have at least 2 new secondary players by training camp.
Players or (at least potential) starters? Big difference.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I really don’t want McClain. Especially that high. Just ask B19K, he’ll beat you to death with McClain’s ineptitude.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 10, 2010 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2010/1/7/1238028/who-to-watch-for-in-the-national
Seems like a fair scouting report of McClain by B19K.
Like I said, I want to wait for more info, including the combine. McClain is big, fast enough, very good head on his shoulders, and has room for growth. Haden seems to be the Taylor Mays of safteys. He should be awesome, but I don’t feel like he has proven that he will be awesome.
In the end, I’d probably rather trade down and hope McClain is available around 15. However, unlikely that may be.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I think he has proven to be much more of a playmaker in the passing game than Mays. he has had double digit pass breakups the last 2 seasons. he also has a good amount of Tackles against the run. he has good hands and got a good amount of INTs…plus he was a first team All American.
I am not even the biggest haden fan, but I would be happy with either haden or McClain. the thing about McClain that makes me want us to get him more is that this is such a deep CB class. we can get a guy like trevard lindley in the 3rd and kyle wilson in the 2nd. there are only really 3 ILBs for the 3-4 in this draft: McClain, spikes, and Micah Johnson.
I am not saying Haden is the next Revis, or even the next Cromartie, but he’s done more on the field than Mays. If I didn’t know Mays was supposedly some athletic freak, I never would have noticed him at USC. I noticed Haden before I knew experts had him in the first round.
I would have put Haden in the 15-25 range, not 5-10, though.
That’s fair. Mays was perhaps a bit harsh of a comparison. My point was just that he seems to be more hype than actually showing me something, at this point.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Mel Kiper has Haden at #5 on his Big Board. Not that he’s always right, of course, but he certainly think Haden is a high-level talent if he ranks him that high. So I’d have no problem with the Browns taking him at 7 if they think he’s that type of talent as well. I don’t think that would be a reach at all.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 11, 2010 6:37 PM EST up reply actions
That is mostly my own personal bias against drafting linebackers that don’t rush the passer.
If a ILB isn’t elite, then they are are damn near the same player. Since we have no idea whether or not a draftee is going to great or not, why even bother trying to get an “elite” ILB? Considering that there are really only two-three truely elite ILB’s in the NFL (Urlacher, Willis, Lewis) the odds seems stacked against you.
Jerod Mayo is good, but is he really that much better than Curtis Lofton who was taken 27 picks later? Linebackers that don’t rush the passer are like running backs in my mind. You can find them anywhere (free agency, late in the draft) and you can find them cheap. Why waste a high draft pick on something like that?
McClain very may well be a great NFL player, but IMO his position isn’t worth the risk of the high draft pick. Ask the Packers if they would trade A.J Hawk for Hatoli Ngata. They wouldn’t even let you finish the sentence.
In fact, off the top of my head I can’t remember the last time a Super Bowl winning team had a starting ILB that they used a first rounder on (The Steelers drafted Timmons but he wasn’t a starter when they won the SB). It very may well have been the Ravens with Lewis.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
This is all fair. I don’t want McClain either. I am still feeling good about Lewis over Bailey, though. Mostly because the risk is gone; we know exactly how good both players were/are. The draft is a crapshoot.
Funny, your concerns about drafting an ILB mirror my concerns of drafting a CB at the top of the draft.
I guess there is only one way to solve this problem. Don’t draft in the top of the draft.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 11, 2010 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly. Compromise: trade down and take one (or more) of each.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
by danvail on Feb 11, 2010 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think we need CB help much more than LB, and a shut-down corner is more valuable to a defense, so if they’re equal players then I’ll take Haden. I don’t know enough about either player to evaluate them, but unless there is doubt about Haden’s abilities then I would take him.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Question is, are you convinced that Haden is a shutdown corner? They are extremely rare, and I’m very skeptical that he ever makes it to that rarified top tier of NFL CB. He probably could be a starter, and a darn good one. But I just don’t see him becomming some top-5 CB in the legue.
I feel McClain is more likely to be truly special than Haden.
Also, I think ILB is more of a need, but I realize that I’m lower on DQwell and higher on McDonald than most.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
It’s interesting that as a Football Outsiders fan you are even slightly high on McDonald. Don’t have the link on hand, but I recently read that McDonald allowed more big plays than any other corner in the NFL this season.
Yeah, I know Football Outsiders doesn’t like McDonald. He regressed this year, I think. And his tackling was nearly unforgivable. But, FO’s numbers on specific corners are really suspect- they mainly just go by numbers by opposing WRs and to the extent they try to evaluate corners at all, they simply match up #1 WR with opposing #1 CBs. That isn’t how most teams cover though.
Anyway, I do think McDonald already is a good nickleback and he is unfairly scapegoated by Browns fans. And while I was much higher on McDonald at this time last year, I still think he can be a contributor.
But my still-developing opinion of Haden vs. McClain and the #7 pick generally is mostly influenced by my thoughts on Eric Wright, the current Browns LB corps, and Haden and McClain themselves. McDonald is a small part of my thinking. Wright is the #1 CB. We are talking about upgrading the #2 CB. Which is fine, but probably not worthy of a top-10 pick. Unless you are going for best player available. Even then, I’m not sold on Haden.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Yeah, a recent post they had on CBs even pointed out that one player (don’t remember who) had alternated at least twice between worst in the league and best in the league in one key category. The numbers are just too volatile to be taken very seriously.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
But if Haden turns out to be better than Wright — and if we pick him at #7 then he should be — then he’s our #1 CB and we’ve upgraded at #1 and #2 CB. To me, I don’t really care who you call the #1 and the #2 CB, we just need help at that position. I don’t think the value of Wright changes that at all. It’s kind of like with pitchers in baseball; adding a great pitcher will help your staff no matter if you call him the #1 or #2 or #3 guy.
As I said, I haven’t seen enough of Haden to evaluate him myself, so I’m just going off what I hear from analysts and scouting reports. And having two very good CB’s will really help our defense because it will free up our LB’s to make more plays.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 10, 2010 3:17 PM EST up reply actions
Fine point.
Wright is way ahead of Haden though. Haden becomes better than Wright, if everything pans out with him no sooner than 2012
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Even if it takes that long for him to be better than Wright, if he can be almost as good as Wright in 2010 and 2011, then we are in really good shape in the secondary.
Coye was a 6th round pick, so despite the high hopes many had for him, it is unlikely that he will amount to much.
Didn’t he get injured, though? I thought that derailed him. I was just mentally plumbing through secondary depth and couldn’t remember what happened to him.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I don’t think so. Don Carey was hurt and then placed on waivers at which point he was claimed. I think Coye was consistently inactive for coach’s decision.
I thought he had an injury early in the season, but that doesn’t explain him being inactive late in the season.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
when was revis drafted? did it take him 3 seasons to get to where he is now?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:20 PM EST up reply actions
Revis was mid-first round and while he was above average his first season, he didn’t reach dominance until this year.
i meant what year, was this his second season or third?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
This was his 3rd season. Revis was pick #14, 4 picks later Leon Hall was taken, not a bad pick as well and 2 picks after that Aaron Ross was taken. Eric Wright was pick #53 in this draft. There were a lot of good players taken in the first round of this draft.
Also we took Brady Quinn #22 in this draft and Kevin Kolb was taken #36. Just a little ironic considering we are one of the teams rumored to be talking to Philly about their QB’s.
by BornInThePound on Feb 11, 2010 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
all of this is very interesting, thanks.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 11, 2010 3:20 PM EST up reply actions
I’d like to see us try to move back before selecting either.
I’m in for Berry, Bradford, or obviously but improbably Suh.
This is where I stand but I think at least right now none of them will be available.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
That would suck. I think I would look to trade back if that were the case, unless Holmgren himself wanted to pick Clausen. We could even pull a Savage/Baltimore trade down one or two spots with a few “who cares?” picks thrown in.
McShay’s latest mock has Berry falling to us, FYI.
I fist pumped when I saw it, now I think I might break my TV on draft day (via good or bad news).
I am almost certain that Berry is going to drop to us.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
Nope.
His best attribute is his out of this world instincts and ability to be in the right place at the right time. That kind of thing can’t be measured at the combine.
Teams will start to fall in love with guys who are awesome in their underwear in the next month. Someone is going to run a 4.3 and bench press a small village, and teams will swoon.
Yet teams forget that the player who looked awesome in his underwear was being beaten by Eric Berry every Saturday on the field. Yet they take the workout warrior. I hope the Browns aren’t that foolish if we are unable to trade down.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 11, 2010 6:59 PM EST up reply actions
It also had Jason Pierre Paul 3rd overrall.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
I would say its a tie between Berry and Bradford, provided of course that bradford is 100% healthy
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 3:58 PM EST up reply actions
Honestly, I have barely seen Haden and Berry play. I’m going based on scouting reports and what I’ve read online. I put Bradford as my third choice only because I think we need to build on defense first.
yeah in all honesty i would be happy with any of the three
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 10, 2010 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree with this, but i think we’ve been over that enough
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 12, 2010 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
TRSS, I know we have both been down on Patrick Robinson from FSU in the past. His stock seems to be plummeting, so I want to ask you when it gets to the point that he is so talked about as being “overrated” that people shove him down draft boards and he becomes underrated.
I would think about taking him with our pick in the second depending on what happened in the first (mostly because of need), but would really give him a look in the second half of the second round. Thoughts? Anyone else?
Hmmm… Interesting thoughts. If I don’t have Haden in the first, I think Kyle Wilson is the 2nd best corner and would be worth a 2nd rounder. I don’t really think I would like P Robinson unless it is in the third. Here is my list of CBs ( and this was very hard because a lot of them are very close)
1. Haden
2. Wilson
3. Kareem Jackson
4. Perrish Cox
5. Dominique Franks
6. Patrick Robinson
7. Devin McCourty
8. Javier Arenas
9. Donovan Warren
10. Amari Spievey
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 10, 2010 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
I’m amazed how far lindley has fallen. I saw a mock sometime last year that had him as a top pick. If we can assess that his injury won’t be a problem I would love to grab him later in the draft.
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
Linley sucked in the season and the senior bowl, plus he is 5’10 170. Not good.
Warren is low because this is a very deep corner class and I think he is very overated anyway.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 5:22 PM EST up reply actions
Most listings i have seen have him at 6’0, saw some with 5’11 some 6’1. Weight has been 178 – 179. Also he had an ankle injury this year which probably had an effect on his sucking.
I still wouldn’t mind taking him late or if possible undrafted.
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
If you read some official senior bowl measurements…
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
Like I said. Can’t get more official than this.
Lindley, Trevard
Kentucky
DB
Height: 5-11
Weight: 178
Not sure where you got your measurements.
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
Thread is massive because of the videos and pictures that BQIB put in the main body. If you wait long enough the z will work.
sorry. I just wanted to include info about the prospects because a lot of people here don’t know about the later ones.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 11, 2010 5:22 PM EST up reply actions
In the next mock I might take McClain to see how that scenario would work.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 13, 2010 2:26 PM EST reply actions
Actually never mind. Ill take Haden again
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 13, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Hey Bross will you take over for me over on mockingthedraft?
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 13, 2010 8:41 PM EST reply actions
If he isn’t interested I would be willing to help out.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 14, 2010 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
I’m not sure, but I got us Haden and Damian Williams, but I’m busy working on my own mock because this one seems to unrealistic.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 14, 2010 8:06 PM EST up reply actions
yeah…hearing that, I am surprised. Damian williams dropping that low would be super lucky. I am not that much for taking a WR in the 2nd (because I favor getting other positions more, and feel we have enough youth…not at all b/c of our draft history there) but if williams falls, I would take him in a heartbeat.
for a WR though, realistically I think the browns should go out and sign a veteran guy like torry holt. he has still got a bit left in the tank and if he can play the jurevicious role and be a veteran presence at the position, he would be a good pickup.
The only WR we should draft in the 2nd round is Dez Bryant. Since there is about 0.02% of that happening, we should be looking elsewhere in the second.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 15, 2010 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
What do you think of him in the first/?
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
This guy likes him a lot and says the Browns should consider drafting him at 7.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 15, 2010 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
If a WR is uber-elite, I have no problem taking him early. I was for drafting Crabtree last season, even after all the diva talk.
I don’t think Bryant is uber-elite. I think he could be good even great, but with our jumbled QB situation, I think we could make a bigger impact with the 7th pick.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 15, 2010 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
I think Bryant has way more potential versus Crabtree. Then again, I wasn’t high on Crabtree, so that is probably saying more about him.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
I think there have been 3 uber-elite WR’s coming out of the draft. Fitz, BE, and Crabtree.
I think Crabtree is going to very, very good very soon.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 16, 2010 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
what about calvin johnson?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 16, 2010 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
Remember, the thing about CJ was that he was talented and possessed all the tools, but he didn’t really put it all together until his junior season.
Now looking back, it is easy to say that his numbers were down because of Reggie Ball. At the time, I wasn’t so sure. There were games in which CJ was shut down.
Larry Fitz didn’t have that.
Say what you want about Edwards but I have never seen a WR performance like he had against MSU.
Crabtree was the best college WR I have ever seen. He had 5 games in his career in which he didn’t score. How nuts is that? I know he played in a pass happy offense, but who else from TTU has dominated like that?
Clavin Johnson had the tools, but I didn’t place him in the class of Fitz, BE and Crabtree in college.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 17, 2010 1:09 AM EST up reply actions
good point.
I could say crabtree only had a couple great seasons…but he came out very early (RS Soph if I remember correctly).
However much I hate BE, he was spectacular in college too.
Crabtree only had a couple great seasons because he only played two seasons.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 17, 2010 9:01 AM EST up reply actions
that is exactly what I said.
I only remember hearing about crabtree during his last year at school…but he only played for 2 years…I SAID he came out very early.
Then why even mention it? Why say he “only” had a couple great seasons if that’s all he played? That makes no sense.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 18, 2010 8:45 AM EST up reply actions
Its tough to have a few good seasons when you don’t play a few seasons.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
this goes for brad’s post too:
I think thats exactly what bross said.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
I saw Braylon light up OSU in person. I was impressed and quite angry we weren’t stopping him. We won, though.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I’ve been to 5 — 2001 (at Michigan, Tressel’s first season), ‘02, ’04, ’06, ’08. Nothing will ever top the 2002 game; best sporting event I’ve ever attended.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 17, 2010 2:37 PM EST up reply actions
I got to see ND-scUM in 08. It was awesome even though it was pouring down rain.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
BE looked very pedestrian in college compared to Calvin Johnson, in my opinion. I’ve only seen two players in the last few years dominate games from the WR position: CJ and Fitz.
I think Crabtree sticks out like a sore thumb in this conversation though. Doesn’t belong.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
Really?
I used to go to GT games and it was maddening watching Reggie Ball and Chan Gailey try and figure out how to get CJ the ball. I guess no one told them that you just have to throw the ball in his area code and watch him go get it.
I am surprised to hear you so down in Crabtree. I would trade a 1st and 3rd for him right now. I think he is going to be an All-Pro within 2 seasons, and that isn’t a typo.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 17, 2010 6:55 PM EST up reply actions
Crabtree didn’t dominate games? Really?? I don’t agree at all. He was the best receiver in college football from the moment he stepped on the field.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 18, 2010 8:47 AM EST up reply actions
I thought Crabtree was ridiculous(ly good) in college. What I think determines his NFL success will be his upside.
I personally think it is pretty low compared to the guys we are talking about. He isn’t especially fast, he isn’t especially physical, he isn’t especially big, he’s just really good at his position.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2010/2/15/1309276/shadys-mock-3-0
Here is my mock if anyone is interested
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 15, 2010 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
Do you really see Bradford falling all the way to 30?
And I would love to get Gresham in the second round.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 15, 2010 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
i’d say about half of the mocks i’ve seen have him rated higher than clausen, so i’d say no. That assumes he has a good workout and his shoulder is healthy of course.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 15, 2010 7:00 PM EST up reply actions
Have you all ever read the forums on Yahoo!Sports? They are hilarious. It’s like they gathered all of the stupidest football fans and forced them to interact. There was a discussion on 2010s top QBs and everyone says Dan LeFeuver is best. Then everyone says Tebow sucks or he will be a star and gives no reason besides “he won at Florida” or “he is close with God”. 90% of the people said Jimmy Clausen was one of the worst prospects in the draft because “Noter Dame SUkKz!!!!!!!!!!”. Some have even agreed they would rather have Juice Williams over Clausen.
I’m glad I found DBN.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 15, 2010 8:38 PM EST reply actions
Yahoo! comments just turn into an orgy of hate comments to each commenter that all end in “well, your mother sucks too!” and what not.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 15, 2010 9:57 PM EST up reply actions
But in all honesty, ND does indeed suck.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 15, 2010 9:57 PM EST up reply actions
In all honesty, Kent State swallows.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 15, 2010 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
the difference being nobody has any delusions about kent state being a football powerhouse
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 15, 2010 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
But we do churn out some damn good football players every once in a while.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 15, 2010 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
I am so excited though (side subject) that I get to come back to cleveland the same week the MAC tourney is there. A great week for some college B-Ball (and I will try to see any Cleve St. games if they play at the wolstein that week…i want to check out that funky lineup)
and some decent basketball players who end up being great football players.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 16, 2010 9:01 AM EST up reply actions
well, just one of those to my knowledge
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 16, 2010 9:05 AM EST up reply actions
lol…yeah. I know who u r talking about.
the only players buffalo (my school) sent to the NFL were a QB, an interior lineman and a DT. 2 though were on the colts and almost got a super bowl ring…
Kent still wins b/c they have jack lambert…and james harrison.
Kent still wins b/c they havejack lambert…and james harrisonJOSH CRIBBS
Fixed. Josh Cribbs is better than everyone.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 17, 2010 1:10 AM EST up reply actions
lol. I figured josh cribbs was a no brainer. at the same time, however much I love cribbs i CANNOT say he is better than Lambert.
Lambert was a steeler and cribbs is on the browns, but I respect the game too much to say that cribbs was better. Lambert is HOF Middle linebacker and one of the best in history at the position.
We also had Elam and Antonio Gates…
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 9:28 AM EST up reply actions
as i said above, the basketball team had gates, he is not a product of kent state football.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
Duh. I meant Kent in general smart stuff.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
Duh. I meant Kent in general smart stuff.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not because it’s the internet, but I will say this:
Coming from a high school teacher, there is absolutely nothing to be gained (except your own satisfaction) by implying that somebody is stupid or that they even made a stupid mistake. All it does is make you look like a douche.
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
I’m going to be a teacher and, as of now, it makes me feel a little better.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 8:23 PM EST up reply actions
I’ll let you know that you’re in the wrong profession if that’s how you’re going to be treating your students. If you talk to your students like they are stupid (and you will get plenty of stupid questions), you will surely do two things:
1) You’ll be sure that that student and probably many other students won’t ask any more questions. (Not a good thing mind you)
2) You’ll virtually destroy any chance that the bubble kids have of passing your class. Yeah the over achievers will get by based on their smarts alone, but the kids who need the interaction and reinforcement won’t get it because you made them feel stupid and thus they fail.
Any teacher that is on this board can attest to this.
Get into teaching and let me know how your way of handling stupid questions works out for you.
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
by Browns town on Feb 18, 2010 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
…I know how to be a teacher, thank you. And I wasn’t planning on bringing that attitude into my profession. Excuse me if I use the word Duh once in a blue moon. Heaven forbid I get a lecture from someone about it.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 18, 2010 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
Just because we’re all adults here doesn’t necessarily mean that treating people like they are stupid has a different effect. I read your comment above and I saw someone acting like a tool.
Plus, if you’re a different person outside of the classroom than you are inside of it, you’re probably in over your head anyways. It’s a grind, and faking it 5 days a week for 35 weeks a year will soon wear on you. Best of luck!
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
by Browns town on Feb 18, 2010 10:30 AM EST up reply actions
So I got a lecture about saying duh and you call me a tool? Hypocrite much?
And I don’t fake it, as said before, I said duh and exclaimed that I had already known that information. I tried to treat him as one of my peers and assumed people understand sarcasm. Apparently not.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 18, 2010 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
You have to realize that this is a website, inflection isn’t there. It’s often times impossible to tell if someone is being sarcastic or not.
Hence:
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not
The “smart stuff” remark is what made me think “Tool.” If you were being completely sarcastic, which I didn’t believe you were, a /sarc doesn’t hurt. I’m not the only one who didn’t take your comment as sarcasm:
thats not exactly a "duh" statement
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
by Browns town on Feb 18, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
Well I honestly forgot you put a sarc disclaimer in your comment but you jumped to conclusions as well. So I say we agree to disagree.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 18, 2010 12:28 PM EST up reply actions
Sounds good by me
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
by Browns town on Feb 18, 2010 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
One of the best in the state.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 18, 2010 12:28 PM EST up reply actions
thats not exactly a “duh” statement, the point of this thread was that kent state football has produced good nfl players, and gates has nothing to do with kent state football.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
ND still went to BCS bowls a few years ago.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 16, 2010 12:24 PM EST up reply actions
That really doesn’t mean anything. ND got selected to those bowls because they bring a huge TV audience and lots of money, not because their team was worthy of getting selected — which is why they got blown out by OSU and LSU in those games.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 16, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure if this is sarcasm, but I disagree wholeheartedly. This attitude is attempting to kill amateur sports.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
NCAA football is not an amateur sport.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 9:07 PM EST up reply actions
umm…they don’t get paid unless they go to USC.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 10:11 PM EST up reply actions
oh, ok sure ;)
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 18, 2010 10:39 PM EST up reply actions
Those years we still had good teams. Every year there are teams that lose bowl games by a wide margin.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 16, 2010 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
I never said they weren’t good teams. But going to a couple BCS games does not make your team a “football powerhouse”, which is what you were responding to.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 16, 2010 10:51 PM EST up reply actions
exactly
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 16, 2010 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
Hey, that’s my other favorite team! No joke.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 16, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
That’s called the Steve Kragthorpe effect.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 16, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
You are not allowed to mention that name.
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
Why?
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
It brings bad things.
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
Yes is does.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 8:00 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 16, 2010 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
Her boobies.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
Steeler troll.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 8:24 PM EST up reply actions
Please change your avatar or your comment will be deleted. That picture is not appropriate for this blog.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 16, 2010 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
Who needs girlfriends when you have football and raunchy avatars at DBN?
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 16, 2010 11:03 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I know that avatar sure isn’t a girl from Pittsburgh!
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 16, 2010 11:31 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Only 1 rec? tough crowd
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 5:22 PM EST up reply actions
I recced, I thought it was a good one. Pittsburgh women vs. Baltimore women, who ya got?
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
Depends on preference. Ugly girls vs. Diverse group of ugly girls.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 17, 2010 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
Just read on yahoo that toby gerhart had had 28 touchdowns and only 42 negative yards. boy would i love to throw a mid-round pick at him.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
Yeah but what’s his 40.
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’ll be the clincher, but he did outrun people this year.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 12:34 PM EST up reply actions
my bad, i was making a poor joke on the earlier “discussion” on the site
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
honestly that was my first thought, but you never can be sure.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
i think gerhart is probably faster than both of those guys, but thats a hard comparison to make using tape.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Feb 17, 2010 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
from the projected 40 times I have heard, maybe not as much as you think.
The point is more guys do put up great stats in college. both duckett and Dayne had massive power but weren’t fast, weren’t agile, could not make a guy miss at all, didn’t have great alance, and had stone hands. I have heard a combination of all these criticisms for Gerhart. While I do like him as a change of pace back, don’t be fooled into thinking he is a guaranteed every down back (or the main back in a rotation even)
No but I bet Toby would be a GREAT 3rd down back. We need a guy to punch holes through the D lines of our division. He’d be great for that. I wish he’d drop to the 3rd round, but dont think that’ll happen.
it is possible…if you are talking about a 3rd and short.
he does not have good hands at all, nor is he a good blocker for a RB (even for his size) so he would not be at all reliable on passing downs on third. I would rather have harrison who has improved his pass blocking and has soft hands.
he is a nice guy to get short yardage (leron McClain style) but he does not seem to have the skills to be a guy that gets more than 10-15 carries a game (that is IMO his ceiling on carries).
I think there are better options we can get in the third. in the third, we can still get guys like Ciron Black who could start on the Offensive line, we could get a nice safety (I think major wright is available in the third in many mocks) we could get anthony dixon who is a RB that was passed over by many scouts b/c he didn’t have one outstanding season but was a very good college player for 4 years…and has more physical skills than gerhart and some project to be more able to carry the load.
I say no way he goes in the 2nd
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 18, 2010 6:43 PM EST up reply actions
doubt it. He Dwyer, Best, Spiller, Dixon, and Matthews are all better. Montario Hardesty and Joe McKnight are about equal.
Scientific research has proven that you lose exactly 5.37 billion brain cells every time you listen to Todd McShay.
by TheRealSlimShady on Feb 20, 2010 6:45 PM EST up reply actions
It is not always about who scouting reports say is better but what teams are thinking. a team may see his stats and interview him and he does well and want to take him late in the 2nd.
Although I do not believe he will be able to carry the load as the main back in the NFL his college stats do tell a different story and teams may be swayed by this.
Quit it with the projected 40 times. They mean nothing. Literally nothing.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I am not saying they mean anything. I am not saying they are true at all, but I am saying them more to point out that he isn’t that fast (which is evident when watching him play)
that gerhart does not look all that fast when i watch him play? yeah. he just doesn’t he has decent speed but nothing that wows me at all…he does look kinda slow to me…
but maybe he might look faster to you…
I was referring to your statements of, “I am not saying anything” followed by “I am not saying they are true” followed by “but I am saying”.
It is like you are talking in riddles.
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 20, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
The Pac-10’s defenses this year were not very good, and I would assume not very fast. Obviously, USC has a bunch of NFL athletes back there, but I was surprised at Oregon’s lack of speed vs. OSU. They looked a lot faster against other Pac-10 teams.
My 2¢
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I agree. I looked at the rushing Defenses that he faced, most were pretty bad. some were not even in the top 100 in the NCAA D1-A. (actually at least 2-3 weren’t and he dominated them). when I look at anthony dixon, he faced much better defenses and still put up great numbers. he only got truly shut down twice, against Bama and against Florida (if I remember correctly).
he didn’t get stats from dominating weak teams.
So he got shut down by the two best teams he faced?
by Bernie19Kosar on Feb 19, 2010 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
he did get shut down against Florida (a top 10 rushing D in the NCAA) and he had a solid game against alabama. he was not as good as he normally is but he was definitely not shut down against ’Bama. I did not remember the exact stats but I looked them up. he did better against ’bama than i remembered seeing.
gerhart also DID face some mediocre, slow, defenses in the Pac 10. he put up more yards and TDs than dixon but my opinion watching both is that dixon will make more of an impact in the pros.
If Florida or Bama’s whole gameplan was to dare them to pass, it would have been pretty hard not to get shut down. I do not think I watched those games, and if I did I didn’t study the tape.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
with Mississippi state, most teams did seem to try to dare them to pass. They didn’t seem to pass the ball well. I did look up passing stats too and they are horrendous.
Stats for their Main QB. 1444 Passing yards. 6.5 ypa, 58 completion Percentage. 4 TDs, 14 INTs, 107 college QB rating.
Those are some horrendous numbers. the backup QB in was slightly better (54 comp %, 6.9 ypa, 5 TDs, 3 INTs) but he actually ran it more than he passed. their whole offense was really just anthony dixon. a smart team would load 8 in the box against them and many did. still Dixon put up solid stats.
about 1400 rushing yards, 5.4 YPC, 12 TDs
Their starting receivers were pretty bad too. the 2 starting receivers combined for less than 60 receptions and less than 700 yards. their leading receiver had 32 receptions for 375 yards. the offense was basically running the game and the occasional short pass.
It would make complete sense for a team like florida to load up 8 men in the box. I want to find some game tape if I can to verify this but with that offense, they likely loaded up on dixon. he was able to dominate some of the lesser SEC schools (which were still good) and still did well against good schools like LSU (over 100 yards and 2 TDs).
The one downside I can see to him is he was not able to break away big runs against good Defenses. granted if they were loading up on him, breaking off a big run, even for a speed back would be impressive. against GTech, Ole Miss, Florida, ’Bama, and LSU, his longest run was 22 yards (at ole miss)
This is just one video I have found of anthony dixon
This is a play on a 3rd and 19.
they don’t put 8 men in the box they put NINE!!!
I did watch the play though and it does like Miss St does have a solid Offensive line. either that or UCF just couldn’t stop anybody…or maybe a combination of both.
either way, even if you ARE a horrendous D and are facing a good RB, there is NO way you put 9 in the box and he gets 19 yards
also, when you watch him, he does look very agile for a 240 (ish) pounder…at least to me. he also looks fairly fast.
Ha! This was amusing.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 17, 2010 8:25 PM EST up reply actions
…I honestly thought the link was to see the actual artwork you were “trying” to portray earlier.
It’s a trap…
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Feb 18, 2010 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
NO TRAP
The avatar I used before was cut off, so I posted the link to the full size picture. Nothing unusual about that. I was trying to show you the pose. I’m sure you can google many examples of the actual art work though …
by steelers4me on Feb 18, 2010 10:30 AM EST up reply actions
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 the image I was trying to portray. It’s Bouguereau’s take on Botticelli’s Birth Of Venus
by steelers4me on Feb 18, 2010 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
What would you trade to Green Bay for Collins? I wouldn’t mind that kind of pick up. Adding Sharper and Collins would add cred to our secondary.
I’d rather have production than cred.
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
Cred comes from production. Sharper had production and cred. Some believed he was beyond the point to where he could offer production. Obviously that was off base. However, my point still remains, cred does not equate to guaranteed production for various reasons.
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
at the same time, adding either of those guys you get production AND cred. they earned their cred because of production…especially collins.
I was speaking more in general terms as opposed to those two specifically.
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
Besides making possible trades for established NFL players, what do you think of our teams player development? I truely believe we aren’t making enough of an effort to develope some of the raw talent out there. I would advocate bringing some specialists, (ie – Jerry Rice, or someone like him for the WR’s and a LB/DB specialist), they could use the extra help. I would love to see our WR’s live up to there draft spots.
As for talent to be found in the late rounds, I would give a hard look at some DB’s & LB’s from the Big 12 and Pac-10 schools. There are a few sleepers to be found. With extra education, training / instruction, we could end up witha quality draft for a much lower $ amount than in the past.
This year was the first time that I remember that some of our no-names stepped up and did something, mainly on the defensive side of the ball.
That’s because they wanted to play & have a job, and they got some really good instruction from there coach. I don’t know what the offensive side of the ball is doing, but I wouldn’t call it developement. The WR’s nedd extra training, weren’t both the rookie WR’s 2nd rounders? They played like 7th rounders.
Actually, MoMass played very well for a rookie wide receiver. WR’s rarely make a big impact in their rookie year even if they’re drafted high. Robiskie was a disappointment, though, but you need to realize he was just a rookie. Hopefully he’ll show improvement next year with more experience.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 25, 2010 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
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.
