1: If Delhomme struggles, Seneca Wallace will replace him. Rumors of his non-existance are greatly overstated. Look at his stats.
2: While Cleveland WR's underperformed last season, Massequoi emerged late in his R O O K I E season. Had he started his R O O K I E FIRST season playing as well as he did during the last 4-6 games, he might have caught 60 or more passes.
3: Stop it with this "vedderrrunnn wide reciever" crap! Linemen, defensive backs, and (sorta) linebackers need veterans to learn stuff from. Running backs and wide recievers do NOT! Their jobs are pretty cut and dried. Some of it is complex, but coaches handle that.
Not that a vet who is GOOD would be bad...it's just that there's little he could teach anybody else.
4: People's personal preconceptions and biases re Mangini are interfering with their superficial declarations about his short leash in the Holmgren front office.
The Jets didn't fall apart late in his third year. Brett Favre's arm did, and Favre kept playing when he sucked because of it. I do NOT believe that he ever made Mangini aware of it, because what I've sewen of Mangini says that he would NOT allow a guy with a bumb arm sabotage his playoff hopes.
In point of fact, the preponderance of the evidence suggests that Mangini wasn't in favor of getting Favre in the first place, but accepted it after the GM dropped him on his team. Pennington was doing a great job.
Mangini built over 85% of the team with which Rob Ryan's brother went to the playoffs.
Holmgren is a West Coast guy. Mangini's excitement about his opportunity to broaden his horizons and cooperate are genuine, and Holmgren's respect for what the team did in the last half of his first season is genuine. The fact is, a LOT of players, coaches, and GM's pretty much agree that Mangini is as intelligent as anybody in the NFL.
Dumb people need labels and convenient boxes to stick people in, and Mangini's label says disciplinarian, no people skills, inflexible, egotist.
But for one thing, people chance and evolve. The smartest people are smart enough to understand that they must learn and adapt throughout their lives. Like any real player, Mangini wants to be the best, and views working with an other-than-Belichick coach with an impressive history of his own as a great opportunity.
Delhomme was a Heckert/Holmgren move, and if he falls on his face, there's no way Holmgren will use this as a pretext to fire Mangini. If the TEAM underperforms...ok. Daboll is indeed probably on the spot, but in reality there wasn't much wrong with his offense, or even his play-calling. I can sit in a bar and hit over 50% predicting run or pass with any team!
AND Daboll WANTS to use more West Coast--and Mangini agrees! Why not, since you don't have the personnel for a spread vertical game anyway DUH?
No insideously diabolical conspiracy here: Holmgren knows Mangini is a brain and hopes he wins. I also think that since Mangini is NOT an egomanic control-freak and welcomes Holmgren's guidance, Mikey will like him just fine.
5: Hardesty is not here to be featured. He will share time. This offense will feature a lot of two-back, and otherwise use a commitee.
6: A two-back team often has five backs active, with two fullbacks. Please learn to count.
7: I get the distinct impression that Rob isn't going to run a cover two. TJ Ward is prominantly a strong safety. People shouldn't compare him to Eric Turner, who was a free safety with great speed and coverage skills.
In point-of-fact, Elam is an average two-deep safety or strong safety, but is no free safety. If it's a 2-deep, this is Ward/Elam, vulnerable deep, and ZERO depth. If it's one-deep, then it's Ward strong and ADAMS OR BROWN free, with excellent depth.
Adams gets no respect, but in the season prior to his arrival here, he had something like seven picks and a ton of tackles as a free safety. He's a Felix Wright-type.
But then, what Mangini said is true. You can label guys "safety" or "cornerback", but if you're smart you simply use them however they best match up vs. a given opponent. The only thing that's highly probable is that Wright and Haden will start at corner (at least eventually this season).
So much to correct, so little time...
Friday, April 30, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Browns Fans Pre-Draft Dumbage Control
If the Browns are unable to trade up for Bradford, option B seems to be trading down--perhaps repeatedly--and targeting Colt McCoy.
McCoy has surged of late, and could well go low in the first round. It's also possible that the damn liars would trade down and still take Clausen if available. ...and if you just said "that would be stupid!", congratulations on knowing more about quarterbacks than Phil Simms, Jim Miller, Rich Gannon, Gil Brandt, and several other guys.
Anyway, I do feel a McCoy crush.
NOW, don't be sitting there with your value chart expecting the last nickel. The Browns don't have much leverage in this deep draft. They'll have a hard time lining up a dance partner in the first place, and most likely have to deal with a buyer's market.
Last season, Mack was the guy Mangini wanted all along. After the first trade-down, he then took two sixth round picks to move down four more slots. Everybody was calling him an idiot. But he got the guy he wanted all along, four slots cheaper, and picked up two sixth-rounders. If you think that he should have stuck to his guns and rejected the two extra picks, plus paid Mack more money, you are an i d i o t.
Perhaps Buffalo wants Clausen and needs to move up two slots. They probably won't want to give up their second-rounder. But they might be the only potential partner. If the Browns took Buffalo's third this season and a third next year they should take it. Ditto moving down from there. Maybe they take even less. Or take Trent Edwards and a pick.
If their target is McCoy and they end up with him and a bunch more stuff, that's a good deal--whatever the hell your draft chart says.
And quit talking about "too many other needs". They need a QB, CB, WR, and safety. Guys like the young RT they got from the Stoolers, Coye Francies, etc. (emerging talent) may mitigate these legitimate needs, and others which exist in hallucinations.
Remember what I said about CJ Spiller: Draft him, and then you can trade either him or Jerome Harrison.
Upon further review, Spiller is pretty awesome. I still love Harrison, but there's really not room for Spiller, Cribbs, and him. You can't have a star sitting on the bench getting paid star money for it. Spiller is younger, faster, and more effective in the slot.
Probably, none of this will happen...I mean except that they do get a quarterback. That's the fun of it. I can't wait.
But just don't make a fool of yourself, bashing somebody for getting who they want cheaper, and collecting extra picks while they're doing it, ok?
McCoy has surged of late, and could well go low in the first round. It's also possible that the damn liars would trade down and still take Clausen if available. ...and if you just said "that would be stupid!", congratulations on knowing more about quarterbacks than Phil Simms, Jim Miller, Rich Gannon, Gil Brandt, and several other guys.
Anyway, I do feel a McCoy crush.
NOW, don't be sitting there with your value chart expecting the last nickel. The Browns don't have much leverage in this deep draft. They'll have a hard time lining up a dance partner in the first place, and most likely have to deal with a buyer's market.
Last season, Mack was the guy Mangini wanted all along. After the first trade-down, he then took two sixth round picks to move down four more slots. Everybody was calling him an idiot. But he got the guy he wanted all along, four slots cheaper, and picked up two sixth-rounders. If you think that he should have stuck to his guns and rejected the two extra picks, plus paid Mack more money, you are an i d i o t.
Perhaps Buffalo wants Clausen and needs to move up two slots. They probably won't want to give up their second-rounder. But they might be the only potential partner. If the Browns took Buffalo's third this season and a third next year they should take it. Ditto moving down from there. Maybe they take even less. Or take Trent Edwards and a pick.
If their target is McCoy and they end up with him and a bunch more stuff, that's a good deal--whatever the hell your draft chart says.
And quit talking about "too many other needs". They need a QB, CB, WR, and safety. Guys like the young RT they got from the Stoolers, Coye Francies, etc. (emerging talent) may mitigate these legitimate needs, and others which exist in hallucinations.
Remember what I said about CJ Spiller: Draft him, and then you can trade either him or Jerome Harrison.
Upon further review, Spiller is pretty awesome. I still love Harrison, but there's really not room for Spiller, Cribbs, and him. You can't have a star sitting on the bench getting paid star money for it. Spiller is younger, faster, and more effective in the slot.
Probably, none of this will happen...I mean except that they do get a quarterback. That's the fun of it. I can't wait.
But just don't make a fool of yourself, bashing somebody for getting who they want cheaper, and collecting extra picks while they're doing it, ok?
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Trade Stuff
First, Lane Adkins and John Taylor had an interesting discussion on the draft that I need to comment on:
The Rams naturally want to get young players that they can develop in their system. That's true. But it does not mean that they don't want Pro Bowl calibre veterans with 2-5 years tread left on their tires! The NEW OWNERS and their fans need a reason for optimism. A few wins, and a couple vets to teach the new guys all the dirty tricks, would really help these guys to SAVE THEIR JOBS.
They could still get Clausen at #7 or maybe McCoy in the second. Clausen is best prepared, and McCoy can at least run for his life. The total payroll for all the players/picks the Rams would get might not even exceed what the Browns would probably have to pay Bradford.
In this uncapped year, by front-loading the guaranteed money "off the books", Lerner could dip into petty cash, take the write-off, and nail him down without entering cap-hell when a new agreement is reached. This is THE YEAR to make such a move--they'd have an advantage over everybody else for years.
Rogers is probably going to be suspended, and is 31. However, as of last season, he was maybe the best DT or NT in the NFL. As he ages, he'll lose some quickness, and become merely a very formidable inside player for at least two and maybe four years.
He's actually very intelligent, and would be very helpful to the coaches in bringing along young pups. He has real value at a position of need for this struggling franchise.
Jackson is still young--so much for that.
If Rogers were 24, knowing what we know, he'd be at the top of this draft. Knowing what we know, Jackson would be mid-to-high second. Ok--take some value off Rogers for his age and the time he'll lose to suspension--make him a low second.
SO FAR, that's #7 and two second rounders for the one pick. Now, you include a third and a fifth--and in this draft you get a starter with the third. For Sam Bradford, the Rams get two defensive studs, two starters, and a project.
If the Rams don't want Rogers, then substitute another third and another fifth. Then it's a defensive star, #7, two thirds, and two fifths...is THAT enough young talent? Can't you guys get out of your box? It's SIX slots--not sixteen!!!
Of course, I have no idea what Holmgren will really do. I know that if he and I played poker, it would be pretty entertaining, since I say stuff like "I'm bluffing. Honest!" myself.
I've had some outlandish thoughts about insideously diabolical stuff they could do, like:
1: Draft CJ Spiller at #7 and immediately trade Harrison (pre-arranged) to (maybe) Detroit for their high second rounder, then make sure they nab McCoy.
2: Uh...don't have one yet--call this one simply drafting Clausen there, and admitting they wanted him all along.
Now, the PD's comment of the day sounded like me about 10 years ago. Since then, I have evolved somewhat. Yeah, trading down is almost always my favorite thing.
But the writer was wrong about there being no franchise players. Bradford is a franchise QB, especially for the Browns and the West Coast. They might not get this chance again, and if they believe that he's that much better than Clausen/McCoy, they have to try to get him. Your QB is...well just about your whole team.
Ross Tucker, who I really respect, talked about Bradford's shoulder again. He injured it twice. Another goober talked about injuring it two years in a row--which is simply not true.
Anyway. getting back to Tucker: Bradford got it dinged and missed some time. I suppose something was torn, but not completely, so that it would heal given enough time. But Sam went back and played too soon, and the shoulder was structurally weakened by the unhealed damage. The same minor injury turned into a major one.
That doesn't mean he's fragile. It means he needs to be kept on a leash and make sure he's ready before he plays again. MLB pitchers and QB's list a ton of guys who've had this surgery, and done fine since. Bradford has also packed on 20 lbs. of muscle (so far) since then to protect it. Sometimes Ross is a worry-wart.
What scared me was that Ross went on to say that he thinks Bradford holds the ball too long. He pointed out that he had an awesome offensive line, and had a lot more time than he's likely to get in the pros.
THAT, coming from Ross Tucker, IS scary!
However, in a West Coast (timing) offense, presumably heavy on short and intermediate quick-hitters, I'm not as scared. Also, Bradford's stats indicate that his hesitation was more about greed than indecision. He just wanted to go deep first.
I still hope they can get him, but as long as it's Mikey doing the deciding I'll love whoever it is.
I repeat my prediction: the Browns will draft Bradford, Clausen, McCoy or another QB in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, or seventh round. Write that down.
The Rams naturally want to get young players that they can develop in their system. That's true. But it does not mean that they don't want Pro Bowl calibre veterans with 2-5 years tread left on their tires! The NEW OWNERS and their fans need a reason for optimism. A few wins, and a couple vets to teach the new guys all the dirty tricks, would really help these guys to SAVE THEIR JOBS.
They could still get Clausen at #7 or maybe McCoy in the second. Clausen is best prepared, and McCoy can at least run for his life. The total payroll for all the players/picks the Rams would get might not even exceed what the Browns would probably have to pay Bradford.
In this uncapped year, by front-loading the guaranteed money "off the books", Lerner could dip into petty cash, take the write-off, and nail him down without entering cap-hell when a new agreement is reached. This is THE YEAR to make such a move--they'd have an advantage over everybody else for years.
Rogers is probably going to be suspended, and is 31. However, as of last season, he was maybe the best DT or NT in the NFL. As he ages, he'll lose some quickness, and become merely a very formidable inside player for at least two and maybe four years.
He's actually very intelligent, and would be very helpful to the coaches in bringing along young pups. He has real value at a position of need for this struggling franchise.
Jackson is still young--so much for that.
If Rogers were 24, knowing what we know, he'd be at the top of this draft. Knowing what we know, Jackson would be mid-to-high second. Ok--take some value off Rogers for his age and the time he'll lose to suspension--make him a low second.
SO FAR, that's #7 and two second rounders for the one pick. Now, you include a third and a fifth--and in this draft you get a starter with the third. For Sam Bradford, the Rams get two defensive studs, two starters, and a project.
If the Rams don't want Rogers, then substitute another third and another fifth. Then it's a defensive star, #7, two thirds, and two fifths...is THAT enough young talent? Can't you guys get out of your box? It's SIX slots--not sixteen!!!
Of course, I have no idea what Holmgren will really do. I know that if he and I played poker, it would be pretty entertaining, since I say stuff like "I'm bluffing. Honest!" myself.
I've had some outlandish thoughts about insideously diabolical stuff they could do, like:
1: Draft CJ Spiller at #7 and immediately trade Harrison (pre-arranged) to (maybe) Detroit for their high second rounder, then make sure they nab McCoy.
2: Uh...don't have one yet--call this one simply drafting Clausen there, and admitting they wanted him all along.
Now, the PD's comment of the day sounded like me about 10 years ago. Since then, I have evolved somewhat. Yeah, trading down is almost always my favorite thing.
But the writer was wrong about there being no franchise players. Bradford is a franchise QB, especially for the Browns and the West Coast. They might not get this chance again, and if they believe that he's that much better than Clausen/McCoy, they have to try to get him. Your QB is...well just about your whole team.
Ross Tucker, who I really respect, talked about Bradford's shoulder again. He injured it twice. Another goober talked about injuring it two years in a row--which is simply not true.
Anyway. getting back to Tucker: Bradford got it dinged and missed some time. I suppose something was torn, but not completely, so that it would heal given enough time. But Sam went back and played too soon, and the shoulder was structurally weakened by the unhealed damage. The same minor injury turned into a major one.
That doesn't mean he's fragile. It means he needs to be kept on a leash and make sure he's ready before he plays again. MLB pitchers and QB's list a ton of guys who've had this surgery, and done fine since. Bradford has also packed on 20 lbs. of muscle (so far) since then to protect it. Sometimes Ross is a worry-wart.
What scared me was that Ross went on to say that he thinks Bradford holds the ball too long. He pointed out that he had an awesome offensive line, and had a lot more time than he's likely to get in the pros.
THAT, coming from Ross Tucker, IS scary!
However, in a West Coast (timing) offense, presumably heavy on short and intermediate quick-hitters, I'm not as scared. Also, Bradford's stats indicate that his hesitation was more about greed than indecision. He just wanted to go deep first.
I still hope they can get him, but as long as it's Mikey doing the deciding I'll love whoever it is.
I repeat my prediction: the Browns will draft Bradford, Clausen, McCoy or another QB in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, or seventh round. Write that down.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Quarterbacks
I listen to John Gruden, Ron Jaworski, Phil Simms, Mike Mayock, Solomon Willcotts, Jim Miller, Gil Brandt, Rich Gannon, and others about quarterbacks. Read that again.
I know that I am not an expert on quarterbacks. I am an expert on who IS an expert, how much weight I should attach to their opinions, and how to piece things together.
If you think you know better than these guys, you need to check your massive ego at the door.
These guys got my head spinning. Latest is Gruden, Jaws, and Simms on Clausen. (Interestingly, none of them seemed to give a damn that he came from the same college as Quinn. Amazing, isn't it?)
Anyway, Gruden and Jaws fairly gushed over him. He moves okay, has a good arm, is accurate, reads well, and has all those come-back wins. Simms had far less to say; I had to pick out a couple little comments: Arm, accuracy.
Gannon and Miller, by the way, think the leadership stuff is assenine: Gannon said "You NEED to be combative!" By the way, do you know what Tom Brady does when a reciever runs a bad route? Huh? Think he's all peaches and sugar?
A bad PD article pointed out that Quinn's and Clausen's accuracy was comparable; Quinn 59% and Clausen 62%. First of all, three percent is significant. Second, compare their final seasons at Notre Dame, and you see Clausen over 68%. He got BETTER!
What's this mean? Maybe nothing. Maybe that Clausen IS an option with the first pick.
I do still think that Bradford is all-planet and if they can get him (Rogers/Jackson/#7/a 3rd/a 5th maybe?) that would be ideal. Clausen would have to be taken where the Browns are now, as Buffalo might want him.
McCoy might well not be there at #38. To get him, the Browns would need to trade, down and/or up. McCoy has nice brains, accuracy, athleticism. But he has the weakest arm, and isn't so hot on corner routes, nor can he rifle it to get it through tight spaces before defenders can react. Clausen can do most of what he does, plus fire it deep. He's bigger/stronger too.
The other quarterbacks are far riskier. In the past, Holmgren has always drafted quarterbacks late, and sometimes scored on them. But he's just come to this team, and reall has no quarterbacks. He has to minimize the developmental time and risk. He drafted his low picks with an eye to the future when he had quarterbacks installed, and he was much younger. Some failed utterly, and others were permanent backups. Even for him, the odds on low picks are long.
Those who advocate waiting a year and then taking Jake Locker are retarded. Locker is likely to be the first overall pick. Are the Browns supposed to also throw all their gamdes and make sure they finish winless to make sure they get him? Look--shut up. You shouldn't be allowed on a jury or near a voting booth.
Nor is Locker better than Bradford, even if he can throw the ball farther or run around better.
What about what Holmgren said? "I wish I liked him better."? Do you think he meant it? Do you ass ume he meant that he wouldn't draft him? Do you also ass ume that Holmgren couldn't change his mind even if he wasn't lying? Maybe he wishes he liked him as much as he likes Bradford.
Another thing: when Holmgren says "it would be hard", he means "it would be hard", not "I would never do that".
Write this down: When you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself.
I have no opinion; I'm just trying to prognosticate, and read Heckert/Holmgren/Mangini. Whoever they draft, I believe he'll have a good chance to succeed. And I won't make an ass of myself saying anything like "What the hell is he doing? What an idiot!"
And my revised assessment is that Clausen is a viable candidate at #7, and might even be "Plan B" failing a trade-up for Bradford--which I feel is their only shot at him. And I mean a trade-up to #1.
Finally: Quinn's draft stock fell as the draft approached because they studied his films, and said this: Inaccurate.
Clausen's stock is RISING because they study his films and say this: ACCURATE, and comes back late; better under pressure. Aside from Golden Tate, he had a weak team. He DID play vs. elite competition. Last season, he came from behind four times-he brought his team back. You can't teach that.
The two aren't even comparable. Sorry Clausen aint pretty, guyth, but...there ya go.
Alarm bells on McCoy: Solomon Willcotts, former Bangle/Stooler safety, said he didn't like how he played vs. elite competition. This guy made his living studying opposing quarterbacks, and I listen to him. He said much the same about Quinn as his draft approached. You CAN'T say that about Clausen.
I believe he likes Clausen too. And Jim Miller and Rich Gannon. Brandt is kinda neutral (update: He really likes him, including his leadership.) NONE of my experts bach him, although until recently they said that #7 would be "too high" for him.
If you ever read this blog, you would know that I wanted to know why.
I mean, you stipulate that he has the arm, accuracy, and all the other stuff...you say all this good stuff about him, and your only doubts are about his big toe and emotional maturity...you have described a pretty damn good NFL QB...and seven is too high?
UPDATE: #7 is not too high.
UPDATE: Heckert and Holmgren just said a lot of something for everybody, including they're talking to the Rams about trading up for Bradford...but it would be really hard...but...
The Rams just got new owners who did not hire the current coach or GM. The Rams are like many of you hallucinate the Browns are: Needs everywhere.
They need improvement--four wins could saved their jobs, or at least put something positive on their resumes. If they take Bradford, they'll be forced to play him, and he'll get slaughtered. They have to build an offensive line and a defense first.
Established veteran players have real value for them. Rogers, warts and all, is currently a one-man wrecking crew, and as he ages can be a solid space-eater for a couple more seasons. Jackson, contract demands and all, led the NFL in tackles two seasons ago, and is young. The Browns even have a couple pretty good running backs they could toss in. I would personally include Delhomme, but doubt that Holmgren agrees and will defer to him.
If you were the Rams GM and could turn one draft pick into tw Pro-bowl calibre defensive insta-starters, a decent running back like Jennings, the elite left tackle you could get at number seven, and another starter with a third round pick you'd get...
No, of course not. You'd take the doomed quarterback. Ok I give up.
I know that I am not an expert on quarterbacks. I am an expert on who IS an expert, how much weight I should attach to their opinions, and how to piece things together.
If you think you know better than these guys, you need to check your massive ego at the door.
These guys got my head spinning. Latest is Gruden, Jaws, and Simms on Clausen. (Interestingly, none of them seemed to give a damn that he came from the same college as Quinn. Amazing, isn't it?)
Anyway, Gruden and Jaws fairly gushed over him. He moves okay, has a good arm, is accurate, reads well, and has all those come-back wins. Simms had far less to say; I had to pick out a couple little comments: Arm, accuracy.
Gannon and Miller, by the way, think the leadership stuff is assenine: Gannon said "You NEED to be combative!" By the way, do you know what Tom Brady does when a reciever runs a bad route? Huh? Think he's all peaches and sugar?
A bad PD article pointed out that Quinn's and Clausen's accuracy was comparable; Quinn 59% and Clausen 62%. First of all, three percent is significant. Second, compare their final seasons at Notre Dame, and you see Clausen over 68%. He got BETTER!
What's this mean? Maybe nothing. Maybe that Clausen IS an option with the first pick.
I do still think that Bradford is all-planet and if they can get him (Rogers/Jackson/#7/a 3rd/a 5th maybe?) that would be ideal. Clausen would have to be taken where the Browns are now, as Buffalo might want him.
McCoy might well not be there at #38. To get him, the Browns would need to trade, down and/or up. McCoy has nice brains, accuracy, athleticism. But he has the weakest arm, and isn't so hot on corner routes, nor can he rifle it to get it through tight spaces before defenders can react. Clausen can do most of what he does, plus fire it deep. He's bigger/stronger too.
The other quarterbacks are far riskier. In the past, Holmgren has always drafted quarterbacks late, and sometimes scored on them. But he's just come to this team, and reall has no quarterbacks. He has to minimize the developmental time and risk. He drafted his low picks with an eye to the future when he had quarterbacks installed, and he was much younger. Some failed utterly, and others were permanent backups. Even for him, the odds on low picks are long.
Those who advocate waiting a year and then taking Jake Locker are retarded. Locker is likely to be the first overall pick. Are the Browns supposed to also throw all their gamdes and make sure they finish winless to make sure they get him? Look--shut up. You shouldn't be allowed on a jury or near a voting booth.
Nor is Locker better than Bradford, even if he can throw the ball farther or run around better.
What about what Holmgren said? "I wish I liked him better."? Do you think he meant it? Do you ass ume he meant that he wouldn't draft him? Do you also ass ume that Holmgren couldn't change his mind even if he wasn't lying? Maybe he wishes he liked him as much as he likes Bradford.
Another thing: when Holmgren says "it would be hard", he means "it would be hard", not "I would never do that".
Write this down: When you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself.
I have no opinion; I'm just trying to prognosticate, and read Heckert/Holmgren/Mangini. Whoever they draft, I believe he'll have a good chance to succeed. And I won't make an ass of myself saying anything like "What the hell is he doing? What an idiot!"
And my revised assessment is that Clausen is a viable candidate at #7, and might even be "Plan B" failing a trade-up for Bradford--which I feel is their only shot at him. And I mean a trade-up to #1.
Finally: Quinn's draft stock fell as the draft approached because they studied his films, and said this: Inaccurate.
Clausen's stock is RISING because they study his films and say this: ACCURATE, and comes back late; better under pressure. Aside from Golden Tate, he had a weak team. He DID play vs. elite competition. Last season, he came from behind four times-he brought his team back. You can't teach that.
The two aren't even comparable. Sorry Clausen aint pretty, guyth, but...there ya go.
Alarm bells on McCoy: Solomon Willcotts, former Bangle/Stooler safety, said he didn't like how he played vs. elite competition. This guy made his living studying opposing quarterbacks, and I listen to him. He said much the same about Quinn as his draft approached. You CAN'T say that about Clausen.
I believe he likes Clausen too. And Jim Miller and Rich Gannon. Brandt is kinda neutral (update: He really likes him, including his leadership.) NONE of my experts bach him, although until recently they said that #7 would be "too high" for him.
If you ever read this blog, you would know that I wanted to know why.
I mean, you stipulate that he has the arm, accuracy, and all the other stuff...you say all this good stuff about him, and your only doubts are about his big toe and emotional maturity...you have described a pretty damn good NFL QB...and seven is too high?
UPDATE: #7 is not too high.
UPDATE: Heckert and Holmgren just said a lot of something for everybody, including they're talking to the Rams about trading up for Bradford...but it would be really hard...but...
The Rams just got new owners who did not hire the current coach or GM. The Rams are like many of you hallucinate the Browns are: Needs everywhere.
They need improvement--four wins could saved their jobs, or at least put something positive on their resumes. If they take Bradford, they'll be forced to play him, and he'll get slaughtered. They have to build an offensive line and a defense first.
Established veteran players have real value for them. Rogers, warts and all, is currently a one-man wrecking crew, and as he ages can be a solid space-eater for a couple more seasons. Jackson, contract demands and all, led the NFL in tackles two seasons ago, and is young. The Browns even have a couple pretty good running backs they could toss in. I would personally include Delhomme, but doubt that Holmgren agrees and will defer to him.
If you were the Rams GM and could turn one draft pick into tw Pro-bowl calibre defensive insta-starters, a decent running back like Jennings, the elite left tackle you could get at number seven, and another starter with a third round pick you'd get...
No, of course not. You'd take the doomed quarterback. Ok I give up.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Hey, Tony and Wile E.
Q: Hey, Tony: What is the value of the three third-round picks that the Browns have? Would two third-round picks be good enough to get a second-round pick? Would a second- and two third-round picks allow the Browns to get another first-round pick? Do you think Holmgren has something already agreed to when he said that we would understand later why they got the third-round pick from Oakland?
-- Rich Smith, Columbus, Ohio
A: Hey, Rich: According to the draft value chart, the Browns' three picks in the third round equal 532 points. That's the equivalent of the fifth pick in the second round (No. 37 overall). My hunch is the Browns would be interested in moving into the middle of the second round and may offer two or more of these picks to accomplish that.
Hey, Tony: In a draft this deep, especially in the secondary and on the offensive line, there probably isn't a reason to trade up, unless it's into the first to nab McCoy ahead of the Rams--depending on what they do with #1.
If Colt is targetted, moving down could do the same thing. Is there any specific reason that came out of your cerebral cortex that made you think they want to get rid of draft picks?
Q: Hey, Tony: With the Browns' acquisition of Sheldon Brown, does that take Joe Haden off the board for the Browns? And if so, and if Eric Berry is already drafted, what is the Browns' fallback option picking No. 7?
-- Paul Thiel, Crescent Springs, Ky.
A: Hey, Paul: I do believe Haden is out of consideration for the Browns' No. 7 overall pick. I suspect the fallback option after Berry is Penn State defensive lineman Jared Odrick, Texas safety Earl Thomas or an offensive lineman, perhaps Iowa's Bryan Bulaga.
Hey, Paul: No it does not. In today's NFL you need AT LEAST three "starting" cornerbacks, and in Ryan's defense man-coverage skills are very important. Brown can move to safety--Haden is still a good target, although getting him after a move down would be a lot better.
Hey, Tony: Bulaga? And pay him about as much as Joe Thomas? To play right tackle? A 3-4 inside linebacker 7th overall? Stick to writing--you couldn't manage a payroll.
Q: Hey, Tony: This morning I saw Shaun Rogers on ESPN. He really seemed to me to be telling the truth that he didn't intend to bring a loaded gun through the airport. I would like to hear your thoughts on this incident. Also, the average person cannot know what threats these highly paid athletes live under. I think Shaun forgot it was in his bag . . . hope they do cut him a break.
-- Alan Wilson, Fredonia, Wis.
A: Hey, Alan: Rogers is one of the brightest men in the Browns' locker room. I have no idea what was going through his mind. I learned a long time ago that we never really know a player outside the locker room.
Reminds me of that time they found those hand grenades and the C-4 in my foot locker. Boy was that embarrassing!
Q: Hey, Tony: Do you think that Brandon McDonald will accept the nickel back role now that the Browns just acquired a starter in Sheldon Brown, or is he likely to be traded around draft day?
-- Casey Valentine, Dublin, Ohio
A: Hey, Casey: The question is not whether McDonald will accept whatever role the Browns assign him. The question is what will be his role. I believe the draft will dictate that. I suspect the Browns will try to draft a cornerback in the first three rounds, which could push McDonald to the No. 4 spot. I don't see him as the first option at nickel back. Mike Adams is much better there.
Hey, dumbass: McDonald is NOT good in man coverage, and a nickel guy needs that skill. And Adams IS a pretty damn good nickel guy.
Q: Hey, Tony: How about a moratorium on questions concerning the possession rule change in playoff overtimes until it might have some impact on the Browns? Maybe until we finish at .500?
-- Tim Halpern, Orlando, Fla.
A: Hey, Tim: I expect an owners vote in May will make the new overtime format applicable in all games in 2010.
What about the moritorium? I'll second that! Along with the other questions having nothing to do with THIS team!
Q: Hey, Tony: I was thinking about possible late-round sleepers in the quarterback department, and Max Hall from BYU came to mind. I realize that he is a couple of years older, because of his Mormon mission, but his numbers for the Cougars were pretty good. Also, I think that I remember you mentioning Jameson Konz from Kent State putting up crazy numbers at his pro workout, but have not heard anything else other than that. Do you think that he is a possible sleeper that the Browns might go after?
-- Don Jones, Pawcatuck, Conn.
A: Hey, Don: My late-round sleeper quarterback is Tim Hiller of Western Michigan. Konz has received a lot of interest from teams such as New Orleans, Miami, and the Giants. His workout numbers were through the roof. They may get him drafted.
Q: Hey, Tony: I like what Heckert and Holmgren are doing to bring in guys from winning teams through trade and free agency. I was just wondering if bringing in Flozell Adams would make any sense if he could play the other tackle position? And what are your thoughts on Jordan Shipley?
-- Matt Barnes, Bedford
A: Hey, Matt: Even though Adams was released, he will command a big salary. I don't know how he'd feel about moving to right tackle. Washington is supposedly interested in him as its left tackle. Shipley was very productive at Texas. If the Browns take Colt McCoy, why not take a flier on his favorite receiver, too?
Hey, Dimbulb: Gramps Adams was never a very good run-blocker. He was athletic. WAS. He's not even remotely suited to right tackle in a man blocking system. Wish Tony knew this stuff. But good point on Shipley, Tony.
Q: Hey, Tony: Can you think of a player(s) traded or released by the post-move Browns that went on to perform significantly better for his new team? If not, is this an endorsement of the front office/coaching staff's ability to assess its own talent or an indictment of the generally poor talent level of the team?
-- Steve Cornelius, Avon Lake
A: Hey, Steve: Going back to the early 2000s, tackles Lomas Brown and Roman Oben come to mind. Of course, Shaun O'Hara might be the best one. Anthony Henry had a few good years in Dallas. Well, Jeff Garcia had a bit of a rebirth in Philadelphia after he left here (and Detroit). Then there was Antonio Bryant. What about Jeff Faine? Have I mentioned Leigh Bodden?
Sorry to disappoint you.
TWO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DAMN BROWNS DELETED DAMMIT.
Q: Hey, Tony: During Jake Delhomme's media session, he stated that coaches should fit the offensive scheme to their players' strengths. He stated (paraphrase), "the best play is worthless if you can't execute it." I believe it's fairly obvious that Mangini's coaching style does not support this position. Can you foresee this being a problem between the coach and his new QB?
-- Dave M., Lawrenceville, Ga.
A: Hey, Dave: Not right now, but a veteran with the equity of Delhomme can, and should, voice concerns about the direction of the offense.
Hey Tony and dumbass: A general statement about strategy is niether a complaint nor a criticism, however much you want it to be or have decided in advance it will be.
All Browns coaches have discussed their willingness--maybe even eagerness--to institute more of Holmgren's West Coast scheme, and this offense will obviously run the ball a lot...which is doing precisely what Delhomme talked about.
Tony--your bias is showing. Better tuck it in.
Q: Hey, Tony: I have not heard anyone ask this question. Is the extra point considered a part of a touchdown? If so, would a team have to kick an extra point in overtime if they get in the end zone? I would guess not but wouldn't that add a great twist?
-- Rich Mowery, Cincinnati
A: Hey, Rich: In overtime, a touchdown wins the game. The PAT is unnecessary.
WHO CARES?
Q: Hey, Tony: Is DT a bigger priority in the upcoming draft, now that Big Baby is facing legal issues? If either Gerald McCoy or Ndamakung Suh are still on the board at No. 7, do the Browns draft one of them?
-- Jimmy Brock, Berkeley, Calif.
A: Hey, Jimmy: I don't think Shaun Rogers' legal issues have made defensive tackle a top priority. However, if McCoy or Suh dropped to them at No. 7, the Browns would have no problem selecting either one.
That's a big ten-four, but quit dreaming.
Q: Hey, Tony: Why did the Browns settle on Jake Delhomme and give up on getting Donovan McNabb? A second-rounder for a much-needed franchise QB is a steal and I can't put into words how much this upsets me.
-- Chris Kingzett, Parma Heights
A: Hey, Chris: Mike Holmgren told me in a story that ran in Friday's Plain Dealer that he did not want to give up a draft pick in the top three rounds for a veteran quarterback. He said that at the time of his discussions about McNabb, the Eagles' price tag was "pretty high." It was reported to be a first-round pick. Ultimately, they accepted a second and a future fourth.
Q: Hey, Tony: I'm predicting Sam Bradford will be there at No. 7. Do the Browns take him?
-- Brian Wheatley, Alliance
A: Hey, Brian: In a heartbeat.
Hey, Brian: I agree with Tony, but would like to know where you get your stuff. Bradford sliding to seven?
Q: Hey, Tony: Anyone outside of Cleveland notices the huge gaps on offense. My question to you is this: If the Browns don't draft defense, who would they possibly pick on offense in the first round besides a quarterback, who most know they won't draft till later?
-- Ashley Sopotnick, Leesburg, Fla.
A: Hey, Ashley: Offensive lineman is a possibility (Bryan Bulaga or Trent Williams). Receiver Dez Bryant and running back C.J. Spiller would appear to be considerations, also.
Hey, Nimrod: "huge gaps?" You mean QB and wide reciever? I wish you clowns would quit overstating everything.
Hey Tony: See my payroll comment. Also, please read this 3 times: SCHEME MATTERS! A west coast wide reciever needs to be intelligent. So much for Dez Bryant.
Since Spiller can play wide reciever, that's possible. He's otherwise redundant with Cribbs and Harrison. He's NOT the guy this team needs, but sets up future trades, I guess.
Q: Hey, Tony: Why is it that I seem to be the only Browns fan that is not excited about the Browns surrendering the eighth overall pick of the 4th round, a fifth pick and Alex Hall for Sheldon Brown and Chris Gocong? I would have been OK with a fifth-rounder and Hall for Gocong. But I just can't believe we would surrender such an early pick on a player that has had contract issues, high-mileage 31-year-old legs and probably does not want to spend the last of his years wallowing in a rebuilding effort. To me, this trade looks in every way, shape or form like they wasted a pretty good draft pick. One they could very well have used on a decent young corner out of the draft. Please give me a reason to believe that I am wrong about this trade.
-- Fernando Fernandez, Parma
A: Hey, Fernando: I would trade a fourth-rounder for Sheldon Brown. I doubt the Browns could find an immediate starting cornerback in the fourth round.
Hey, Bozo: Gocong was playing a different position on the wrong scheme. He's young, cheap, and in a 3-4 can be awesome. T H I N K.
Q: Hey, Tony: On April 5, you wrote a story suggesting that the Browns could target Penn State's DL Jared Odrick with the team's first draft choice. Let's just presume this is true. Unless Holmgren/Heckert trade down to pick No. 25 or lower in the first round, how can selecting Odrick possibly be justifiable? Odrick is widely regarded as having a second-round grade, is a borderline top-5 prospect at his position, and most likely will not be an opening-day starter and offers little immediate impact on the Browns' D-line. If the Browns remained at the No. 7 pick (and both CB Joe Haden and S Eric Berry were already gone), wouldn't selecting ILB Rolondo McClain, OLB Brandon Graham or S Earl Thomas not only provide more value for that draft slot, but also offer more in terms of immediate and long-term impact at their respective positions? I can't help but think that selecting Odrick at No. 7 would be yet another wasted first-round pick -- especially considering that if the Browns really are in love with him, the team could target Odrick for the second round (when he most likely will still be available). What have you or your source in your April 5 story seen in Odrick lately to suggest a meteoric rise in his draft stock is warranted?
-- Tim, Winter Haven, Fla.
A: Hey, Tim: I'll defer to my source, who insists Odrick is the fastest-rising player in the first round among teams who play the 3-4 defense. He will not last beyond New England at No. 22. Some teams are angling to move up for him, but they don't have an idea as to how far they have to go. Denver would take him at No. 11. He is a serious contender for the Browns' pick at No. 7.
Why do you goobers want to kick Jackson to the curb? Why do you want to massively overpay an inside linebacker? Why do you want a third, fourth, or even fifth pass-rushing outside linebacker when we have so many? Oh yeah...Oblivia. If it hasn't already happened for two seasons, it can't. YOUNG PLAYERS GET BETTER.
Tony, I doubt that. Odrick's really good, but there will be better options.
Q: Hey, Tony: Assuming Eric Berry is gone at No. 7, do we now take a chance with Jimmy Clausen? It just seems to me there is a fairly large drop-off in talent at both DB and QB after Berry and Clausen.
-- Jonathan Kirk, St. Louis, Mo.
A: Hey, Jonathan: I'm not a fan of Clausen. Holmgren wasn't either, when I asked about him three weeks ago. Maybe Clausen's pro day workout and visit would change Holmgren's mind. The criticisms about Clausen's leadership ability are valid, from what I've been told.
Q: Hey, Tony: What are your thoughts about bringing in Marc Bulger? Did the Browns jump the gun in signing Seneca Wallace and Jake Delhomme?
-- Jim Workman, Winfield, W.Va.
A: Hey, Jim: Bulger never did much for me, to be honest. I'm comfortable with Delhomme and Wallace for one year. I'm interested in seeing Wallace play.
I hope he gets a fair chance, and that if Delhomme doesn't EARN the job, Wallace starts. But I heard that Bulger is a wild and crazy guy.
--' Q: Hey, Tony: I agree that David Veikune was probably a reach in the second round. But the front office had to see something. In your opinion, was that as a rush OLB or as the bigger ILB that most everyone seems to agree D'Qwell Jackson would benefit from? Veikune seems like the type of player Mangini was referring to at the Combine that can/should make a big jump between his first and second years in the league. Or is he (George) Kokinis' Beau Bell?
-- Andy Applegate, Chicago.
A: Hey, Andy: Actually, it was Phil Savage who drafted Bell. Very good point made by you, nonetheless. My own opinion on Veikune is I don't see the physical traits that attracted him to Mangini. Mangini has compared him loosely to Tedy Bruschi.
VEIKUNE WAS A DEFENSIVE END AT A SMALL COLLEGE WITH A MUCH LOWER LEVEL OF COMPETITION. IF DEFENSIVE ENDS FROM BIG SCHOOLS TAKE AWHILE TO LEARN A WHOLE NEW POSITION IN THE NFL, WHY DID YOU EXPECT THIS GUY TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING? JEEZ!!!!
Q: Hey, Tony: I just saw that Mel Kiper had the Browns picking Dez Bryant in the first round. Do you actually think that is possible? If so, wouldn't we just be adding another Braylon Edwards type to the locker room?
-- Steve Bohnenkamp, Geneva, Ill.
A: Hey, Steve: Possible? Yeah. Probable no.
He isn't smart enough for the west coast!
-- Rich Smith, Columbus, Ohio
A: Hey, Rich: According to the draft value chart, the Browns' three picks in the third round equal 532 points. That's the equivalent of the fifth pick in the second round (No. 37 overall). My hunch is the Browns would be interested in moving into the middle of the second round and may offer two or more of these picks to accomplish that.
Hey, Tony: In a draft this deep, especially in the secondary and on the offensive line, there probably isn't a reason to trade up, unless it's into the first to nab McCoy ahead of the Rams--depending on what they do with #1.
If Colt is targetted, moving down could do the same thing. Is there any specific reason that came out of your cerebral cortex that made you think they want to get rid of draft picks?
Q: Hey, Tony: With the Browns' acquisition of Sheldon Brown, does that take Joe Haden off the board for the Browns? And if so, and if Eric Berry is already drafted, what is the Browns' fallback option picking No. 7?
-- Paul Thiel, Crescent Springs, Ky.
A: Hey, Paul: I do believe Haden is out of consideration for the Browns' No. 7 overall pick. I suspect the fallback option after Berry is Penn State defensive lineman Jared Odrick, Texas safety Earl Thomas or an offensive lineman, perhaps Iowa's Bryan Bulaga.
Hey, Paul: No it does not. In today's NFL you need AT LEAST three "starting" cornerbacks, and in Ryan's defense man-coverage skills are very important. Brown can move to safety--Haden is still a good target, although getting him after a move down would be a lot better.
Hey, Tony: Bulaga? And pay him about as much as Joe Thomas? To play right tackle? A 3-4 inside linebacker 7th overall? Stick to writing--you couldn't manage a payroll.
Q: Hey, Tony: This morning I saw Shaun Rogers on ESPN. He really seemed to me to be telling the truth that he didn't intend to bring a loaded gun through the airport. I would like to hear your thoughts on this incident. Also, the average person cannot know what threats these highly paid athletes live under. I think Shaun forgot it was in his bag . . . hope they do cut him a break.
-- Alan Wilson, Fredonia, Wis.
A: Hey, Alan: Rogers is one of the brightest men in the Browns' locker room. I have no idea what was going through his mind. I learned a long time ago that we never really know a player outside the locker room.
Reminds me of that time they found those hand grenades and the C-4 in my foot locker. Boy was that embarrassing!
Q: Hey, Tony: Do you think that Brandon McDonald will accept the nickel back role now that the Browns just acquired a starter in Sheldon Brown, or is he likely to be traded around draft day?
-- Casey Valentine, Dublin, Ohio
A: Hey, Casey: The question is not whether McDonald will accept whatever role the Browns assign him. The question is what will be his role. I believe the draft will dictate that. I suspect the Browns will try to draft a cornerback in the first three rounds, which could push McDonald to the No. 4 spot. I don't see him as the first option at nickel back. Mike Adams is much better there.
Hey, dumbass: McDonald is NOT good in man coverage, and a nickel guy needs that skill. And Adams IS a pretty damn good nickel guy.
Q: Hey, Tony: How about a moratorium on questions concerning the possession rule change in playoff overtimes until it might have some impact on the Browns? Maybe until we finish at .500?
-- Tim Halpern, Orlando, Fla.
A: Hey, Tim: I expect an owners vote in May will make the new overtime format applicable in all games in 2010.
What about the moritorium? I'll second that! Along with the other questions having nothing to do with THIS team!
Q: Hey, Tony: I was thinking about possible late-round sleepers in the quarterback department, and Max Hall from BYU came to mind. I realize that he is a couple of years older, because of his Mormon mission, but his numbers for the Cougars were pretty good. Also, I think that I remember you mentioning Jameson Konz from Kent State putting up crazy numbers at his pro workout, but have not heard anything else other than that. Do you think that he is a possible sleeper that the Browns might go after?
-- Don Jones, Pawcatuck, Conn.
A: Hey, Don: My late-round sleeper quarterback is Tim Hiller of Western Michigan. Konz has received a lot of interest from teams such as New Orleans, Miami, and the Giants. His workout numbers were through the roof. They may get him drafted.
Q: Hey, Tony: I like what Heckert and Holmgren are doing to bring in guys from winning teams through trade and free agency. I was just wondering if bringing in Flozell Adams would make any sense if he could play the other tackle position? And what are your thoughts on Jordan Shipley?
-- Matt Barnes, Bedford
A: Hey, Matt: Even though Adams was released, he will command a big salary. I don't know how he'd feel about moving to right tackle. Washington is supposedly interested in him as its left tackle. Shipley was very productive at Texas. If the Browns take Colt McCoy, why not take a flier on his favorite receiver, too?
Hey, Dimbulb: Gramps Adams was never a very good run-blocker. He was athletic. WAS. He's not even remotely suited to right tackle in a man blocking system. Wish Tony knew this stuff. But good point on Shipley, Tony.
Q: Hey, Tony: Can you think of a player(s) traded or released by the post-move Browns that went on to perform significantly better for his new team? If not, is this an endorsement of the front office/coaching staff's ability to assess its own talent or an indictment of the generally poor talent level of the team?
-- Steve Cornelius, Avon Lake
A: Hey, Steve: Going back to the early 2000s, tackles Lomas Brown and Roman Oben come to mind. Of course, Shaun O'Hara might be the best one. Anthony Henry had a few good years in Dallas. Well, Jeff Garcia had a bit of a rebirth in Philadelphia after he left here (and Detroit). Then there was Antonio Bryant. What about Jeff Faine? Have I mentioned Leigh Bodden?
Sorry to disappoint you.
TWO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DAMN BROWNS DELETED DAMMIT.
Q: Hey, Tony: During Jake Delhomme's media session, he stated that coaches should fit the offensive scheme to their players' strengths. He stated (paraphrase), "the best play is worthless if you can't execute it." I believe it's fairly obvious that Mangini's coaching style does not support this position. Can you foresee this being a problem between the coach and his new QB?
-- Dave M., Lawrenceville, Ga.
A: Hey, Dave: Not right now, but a veteran with the equity of Delhomme can, and should, voice concerns about the direction of the offense.
Hey Tony and dumbass: A general statement about strategy is niether a complaint nor a criticism, however much you want it to be or have decided in advance it will be.
All Browns coaches have discussed their willingness--maybe even eagerness--to institute more of Holmgren's West Coast scheme, and this offense will obviously run the ball a lot...which is doing precisely what Delhomme talked about.
Tony--your bias is showing. Better tuck it in.
Q: Hey, Tony: I have not heard anyone ask this question. Is the extra point considered a part of a touchdown? If so, would a team have to kick an extra point in overtime if they get in the end zone? I would guess not but wouldn't that add a great twist?
-- Rich Mowery, Cincinnati
A: Hey, Rich: In overtime, a touchdown wins the game. The PAT is unnecessary.
WHO CARES?
Q: Hey, Tony: Is DT a bigger priority in the upcoming draft, now that Big Baby is facing legal issues? If either Gerald McCoy or Ndamakung Suh are still on the board at No. 7, do the Browns draft one of them?
-- Jimmy Brock, Berkeley, Calif.
A: Hey, Jimmy: I don't think Shaun Rogers' legal issues have made defensive tackle a top priority. However, if McCoy or Suh dropped to them at No. 7, the Browns would have no problem selecting either one.
That's a big ten-four, but quit dreaming.
Q: Hey, Tony: Why did the Browns settle on Jake Delhomme and give up on getting Donovan McNabb? A second-rounder for a much-needed franchise QB is a steal and I can't put into words how much this upsets me.
-- Chris Kingzett, Parma Heights
A: Hey, Chris: Mike Holmgren told me in a story that ran in Friday's Plain Dealer that he did not want to give up a draft pick in the top three rounds for a veteran quarterback. He said that at the time of his discussions about McNabb, the Eagles' price tag was "pretty high." It was reported to be a first-round pick. Ultimately, they accepted a second and a future fourth.
Q: Hey, Tony: I'm predicting Sam Bradford will be there at No. 7. Do the Browns take him?
-- Brian Wheatley, Alliance
A: Hey, Brian: In a heartbeat.
Hey, Brian: I agree with Tony, but would like to know where you get your stuff. Bradford sliding to seven?
Q: Hey, Tony: Anyone outside of Cleveland notices the huge gaps on offense. My question to you is this: If the Browns don't draft defense, who would they possibly pick on offense in the first round besides a quarterback, who most know they won't draft till later?
-- Ashley Sopotnick, Leesburg, Fla.
A: Hey, Ashley: Offensive lineman is a possibility (Bryan Bulaga or Trent Williams). Receiver Dez Bryant and running back C.J. Spiller would appear to be considerations, also.
Hey, Nimrod: "huge gaps?" You mean QB and wide reciever? I wish you clowns would quit overstating everything.
Hey Tony: See my payroll comment. Also, please read this 3 times: SCHEME MATTERS! A west coast wide reciever needs to be intelligent. So much for Dez Bryant.
Since Spiller can play wide reciever, that's possible. He's otherwise redundant with Cribbs and Harrison. He's NOT the guy this team needs, but sets up future trades, I guess.
Q: Hey, Tony: Why is it that I seem to be the only Browns fan that is not excited about the Browns surrendering the eighth overall pick of the 4th round, a fifth pick and Alex Hall for Sheldon Brown and Chris Gocong? I would have been OK with a fifth-rounder and Hall for Gocong. But I just can't believe we would surrender such an early pick on a player that has had contract issues, high-mileage 31-year-old legs and probably does not want to spend the last of his years wallowing in a rebuilding effort. To me, this trade looks in every way, shape or form like they wasted a pretty good draft pick. One they could very well have used on a decent young corner out of the draft. Please give me a reason to believe that I am wrong about this trade.
-- Fernando Fernandez, Parma
A: Hey, Fernando: I would trade a fourth-rounder for Sheldon Brown. I doubt the Browns could find an immediate starting cornerback in the fourth round.
Hey, Bozo: Gocong was playing a different position on the wrong scheme. He's young, cheap, and in a 3-4 can be awesome. T H I N K.
Q: Hey, Tony: On April 5, you wrote a story suggesting that the Browns could target Penn State's DL Jared Odrick with the team's first draft choice. Let's just presume this is true. Unless Holmgren/Heckert trade down to pick No. 25 or lower in the first round, how can selecting Odrick possibly be justifiable? Odrick is widely regarded as having a second-round grade, is a borderline top-5 prospect at his position, and most likely will not be an opening-day starter and offers little immediate impact on the Browns' D-line. If the Browns remained at the No. 7 pick (and both CB Joe Haden and S Eric Berry were already gone), wouldn't selecting ILB Rolondo McClain, OLB Brandon Graham or S Earl Thomas not only provide more value for that draft slot, but also offer more in terms of immediate and long-term impact at their respective positions? I can't help but think that selecting Odrick at No. 7 would be yet another wasted first-round pick -- especially considering that if the Browns really are in love with him, the team could target Odrick for the second round (when he most likely will still be available). What have you or your source in your April 5 story seen in Odrick lately to suggest a meteoric rise in his draft stock is warranted?
-- Tim, Winter Haven, Fla.
A: Hey, Tim: I'll defer to my source, who insists Odrick is the fastest-rising player in the first round among teams who play the 3-4 defense. He will not last beyond New England at No. 22. Some teams are angling to move up for him, but they don't have an idea as to how far they have to go. Denver would take him at No. 11. He is a serious contender for the Browns' pick at No. 7.
Why do you goobers want to kick Jackson to the curb? Why do you want to massively overpay an inside linebacker? Why do you want a third, fourth, or even fifth pass-rushing outside linebacker when we have so many? Oh yeah...Oblivia. If it hasn't already happened for two seasons, it can't. YOUNG PLAYERS GET BETTER.
Tony, I doubt that. Odrick's really good, but there will be better options.
Q: Hey, Tony: Assuming Eric Berry is gone at No. 7, do we now take a chance with Jimmy Clausen? It just seems to me there is a fairly large drop-off in talent at both DB and QB after Berry and Clausen.
-- Jonathan Kirk, St. Louis, Mo.
A: Hey, Jonathan: I'm not a fan of Clausen. Holmgren wasn't either, when I asked about him three weeks ago. Maybe Clausen's pro day workout and visit would change Holmgren's mind. The criticisms about Clausen's leadership ability are valid, from what I've been told.
Q: Hey, Tony: What are your thoughts about bringing in Marc Bulger? Did the Browns jump the gun in signing Seneca Wallace and Jake Delhomme?
-- Jim Workman, Winfield, W.Va.
A: Hey, Jim: Bulger never did much for me, to be honest. I'm comfortable with Delhomme and Wallace for one year. I'm interested in seeing Wallace play.
I hope he gets a fair chance, and that if Delhomme doesn't EARN the job, Wallace starts. But I heard that Bulger is a wild and crazy guy.
--' Q: Hey, Tony: I agree that David Veikune was probably a reach in the second round. But the front office had to see something. In your opinion, was that as a rush OLB or as the bigger ILB that most everyone seems to agree D'Qwell Jackson would benefit from? Veikune seems like the type of player Mangini was referring to at the Combine that can/should make a big jump between his first and second years in the league. Or is he (George) Kokinis' Beau Bell?
-- Andy Applegate, Chicago.
A: Hey, Andy: Actually, it was Phil Savage who drafted Bell. Very good point made by you, nonetheless. My own opinion on Veikune is I don't see the physical traits that attracted him to Mangini. Mangini has compared him loosely to Tedy Bruschi.
VEIKUNE WAS A DEFENSIVE END AT A SMALL COLLEGE WITH A MUCH LOWER LEVEL OF COMPETITION. IF DEFENSIVE ENDS FROM BIG SCHOOLS TAKE AWHILE TO LEARN A WHOLE NEW POSITION IN THE NFL, WHY DID YOU EXPECT THIS GUY TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING? JEEZ!!!!
Q: Hey, Tony: I just saw that Mel Kiper had the Browns picking Dez Bryant in the first round. Do you actually think that is possible? If so, wouldn't we just be adding another Braylon Edwards type to the locker room?
-- Steve Bohnenkamp, Geneva, Ill.
A: Hey, Steve: Possible? Yeah. Probable no.
He isn't smart enough for the west coast!
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Sheldon Brown: Could have up to two seasons left as a solid (but not elite) cornerback, but might actually be a pretty special safety.
Defense in general is an area where mentoring and leadership are actually useful, and Brown actually can have a positive influence on the younger players. Secondary guys have a ton of nuances and dirty tricks to learn for the pros--like reading subtle cues in a reciever's body language to anticipate his break, where you can get away with tugging a guy's waistband to upset his balance and slow him, how to decieve them and make them do something dumb, etc.
Please--this does NOT rule out Haden as the top pick. For one thing, Haden would set up Brown for safety, killing two birds with one stone. For another thing, it's really optimistic to project that the 31-year old Brown could go longer than 3 or 4 years, even at safety--he's holding the fort.
The Browns could get away with one cornerback and one safety, but ideally still need another cornerback. Everybody is going spread, and nickels and dimes are really base defenses in today's NFL.
Adams is an excellent utility guy, inc. nickel corner, except that in that role he's vulnerable to waterbug type slot guys. McDonald is actually a good zone guy, but is weak in man coverage, and that's why (correction coming) he is NOTNOTNOT a good nickel back.
But Brown does significantly upgrade the secondary. Ryan wants to sic the dogs on enemy backfields (a man after my own heart), and to reduce the risk of getting toasted for it, you need two (actually three) tough cover guys (man coverage).
No guarantees that Brown will be all that at this age, simply because he was pretty good last season. The Eagles did note a decline, despite his five picks. Age catches up to everybody. But he should at least be better than what we've had, and certainly is solid against the run, too.
Gocong "failed to become the passrusher the Eagles envisioned"--yeah right. Look-Gocong was a best-available pick. the Eagles drafted him despite the fact that he wasn't a good match for their system, simply because he was the best player on their board. Most scouts rated him a second rounder.
They felt he'd be a special teams upgrade and had the athleticism to compete at SAM, and maybe be a situational passrusher. Realisticly, they were looking at a backup there at the time. He surprised many by becoming the starter.
The Eagles run a 4-3, and Gocong was lining up five yards off the line in space. He was responsible for containment, and the tight end in coverage. He didn't blitze a lot. His height is also a disadvantage as a situational DE with his hand in the dirt.
Well, he did the containment and run-stuffing stuff pretty well as a 4-3 SAM, but got burned in coverage.
A 3-4 OLB lines up at or near the defensive line, and ideally blitzes about half the time. On the tight end side, he'll often engage the tight end right there to disrupt his pattern--and sometimes then release him to a safety or the weak inside backer.
Nor does an offense attack a 3-4 the same way. In that case, many tight ends will not try to catch anything. They need to protect the backfield from this far more aggressive OLB. And then, tight ends are used up the middle--in most cases, they must angle towards the ILB's, one of which is to pick him up, if the safety doesn't. Offenses also use more 3/4-wides vs. 3-4's to get their base people off the field.
Had Gocong been drafted by a 3-4 team, he might well have had a slew of sacks. That is what he does best. He has the size and build to play outside or inside here--much like Rodney Veikunefield. (Note to Oblivia: this second year player still exists, and is very much in the linebacker mix).
With Fujita now also on board, the Browns are overloaded at linebacker (yes, Oblivians--it's true!). Ryan is creative as hell, just like his daddy was, and he likes using five linebackers and stuff like that.
In a conventional 3-4, the weak inside backer is a run-and-hit/sideline-to-sideline/coverage guy, which is why Ma...uh, the undersized Hawaiian rookie...showed up in relief late in the season, and did surprisingly well. (Dude's really a real big strong safety--one of the reasons Ryan used five linebackers; that's a big nickel, really...but I digress).
This is Jackson and Barton--and possibly Fujita; not sure there.
You knuckleheads that want the Browns to waste a high pick on any linebacker need to go back to school and review what the no-name kids and Roth did late last season.
Recall this: Earlier, the inside guys were Barton and Jackson. Veikune, the small-college defensive end--wasn't ready YET, and Bowens was playing OLB. That wasn't good, because the strong inside backer is ideally a bigger goon who can take on guards moving in space--and Barton aint that.
Then they put David Bowens, a big monster there (next to M...the Hawaiian shrimp) e voila! Yeah, you just keep reciting season stats while ignoring the fact that that combination (with some Trusnik mixed in, and with the freelancing Rogers injured and the disciplined Rubin plugging the middle) they stopped the run.
Now I hope you understand that what happened happened and why it happened and the near-certainty that it will happen even moreso in the future, AND WE DON'T NEED NO STEENKING LINEBACKERS!!!
You're just killing me, Oblivia!
We need a fast (not neccessarily vedderrunn) wide reciever, safety, cornerback (still), and of course a quarterback of the future. Ok and a backup center and future (or superior) guard and (maybe--remember Rodney Capizzifield) RT...
Also, Coye Francies is still on the roster. I've heard rumors about some psychological issues there--don't know--but I need to point out his existance to you Oblivians. There's a decent chance he shows up and fills one of the cornerback holes. He's absolutely got the talent.
Outside the box:
Steinbach fits a zone scheme a lot better and has great trade value. This is kind of a longshot and no doubt horrifies the emotional thinkers who get attached and worshipful, but a trade is possible.
...though doubtful, since it would disrupt continuity and there is nobody better on the current roster. Plus Steinbach can play LT in a pinch, and...come to think of it, he can play center. HAS played center. Why did I forget that? Oh yeah I read the same stuff you guys read.
It now looks as if a trade-down from 7 is possible. Buffalo et al might want Clausen that bad and several teams will want Berry or a left tackle.
I personally think Mike Mayock is smarter than allayouall and that Earl Thomas is about as good as him, plus Haden will last awhile too. Either of those guys would help massively, and I see no reason not to trade down even if Mayock is wrong for once and Berry is slightly better than Thomas.
Per the chart, Buffalo would need to cough up a third round pick to move up two slots, or maybe Trent Edwards. (Jim Miller and others say that Edwards doesn't really suck--I have no opinion but we got Holmgren/Heckert to sort that out).
If the targets are Thomas, Haden, or maybe one of the offensive linemen (I never said they shouldn't upgrade at a reasonable price), they could move down further and still get one of them and Colt Mccoy.
I have decided that Colt McCoy is the realistic quarterback for the Browns in this draft. He's the absolute prototype West Coast quarteback. Bradford is awesome and fits any system, but McCoy is right there with him in this scheme.
He looks like Montana, but has a better arm.
Oh yeah. Trade down. Get 2011 picks too. Trade down and load up and get McCoy...mmmmm....
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Defense in general is an area where mentoring and leadership are actually useful, and Brown actually can have a positive influence on the younger players. Secondary guys have a ton of nuances and dirty tricks to learn for the pros--like reading subtle cues in a reciever's body language to anticipate his break, where you can get away with tugging a guy's waistband to upset his balance and slow him, how to decieve them and make them do something dumb, etc.
Please--this does NOT rule out Haden as the top pick. For one thing, Haden would set up Brown for safety, killing two birds with one stone. For another thing, it's really optimistic to project that the 31-year old Brown could go longer than 3 or 4 years, even at safety--he's holding the fort.
The Browns could get away with one cornerback and one safety, but ideally still need another cornerback. Everybody is going spread, and nickels and dimes are really base defenses in today's NFL.
Adams is an excellent utility guy, inc. nickel corner, except that in that role he's vulnerable to waterbug type slot guys. McDonald is actually a good zone guy, but is weak in man coverage, and that's why (correction coming) he is NOTNOTNOT a good nickel back.
But Brown does significantly upgrade the secondary. Ryan wants to sic the dogs on enemy backfields (a man after my own heart), and to reduce the risk of getting toasted for it, you need two (actually three) tough cover guys (man coverage).
No guarantees that Brown will be all that at this age, simply because he was pretty good last season. The Eagles did note a decline, despite his five picks. Age catches up to everybody. But he should at least be better than what we've had, and certainly is solid against the run, too.
Gocong "failed to become the passrusher the Eagles envisioned"--yeah right. Look-Gocong was a best-available pick. the Eagles drafted him despite the fact that he wasn't a good match for their system, simply because he was the best player on their board. Most scouts rated him a second rounder.
They felt he'd be a special teams upgrade and had the athleticism to compete at SAM, and maybe be a situational passrusher. Realisticly, they were looking at a backup there at the time. He surprised many by becoming the starter.
The Eagles run a 4-3, and Gocong was lining up five yards off the line in space. He was responsible for containment, and the tight end in coverage. He didn't blitze a lot. His height is also a disadvantage as a situational DE with his hand in the dirt.
Well, he did the containment and run-stuffing stuff pretty well as a 4-3 SAM, but got burned in coverage.
A 3-4 OLB lines up at or near the defensive line, and ideally blitzes about half the time. On the tight end side, he'll often engage the tight end right there to disrupt his pattern--and sometimes then release him to a safety or the weak inside backer.
Nor does an offense attack a 3-4 the same way. In that case, many tight ends will not try to catch anything. They need to protect the backfield from this far more aggressive OLB. And then, tight ends are used up the middle--in most cases, they must angle towards the ILB's, one of which is to pick him up, if the safety doesn't. Offenses also use more 3/4-wides vs. 3-4's to get their base people off the field.
Had Gocong been drafted by a 3-4 team, he might well have had a slew of sacks. That is what he does best. He has the size and build to play outside or inside here--much like Rodney Veikunefield. (Note to Oblivia: this second year player still exists, and is very much in the linebacker mix).
With Fujita now also on board, the Browns are overloaded at linebacker (yes, Oblivians--it's true!). Ryan is creative as hell, just like his daddy was, and he likes using five linebackers and stuff like that.
In a conventional 3-4, the weak inside backer is a run-and-hit/sideline-to-sideline/coverage guy, which is why Ma...uh, the undersized Hawaiian rookie...showed up in relief late in the season, and did surprisingly well. (Dude's really a real big strong safety--one of the reasons Ryan used five linebackers; that's a big nickel, really...but I digress).
This is Jackson and Barton--and possibly Fujita; not sure there.
You knuckleheads that want the Browns to waste a high pick on any linebacker need to go back to school and review what the no-name kids and Roth did late last season.
Recall this: Earlier, the inside guys were Barton and Jackson. Veikune, the small-college defensive end--wasn't ready YET, and Bowens was playing OLB. That wasn't good, because the strong inside backer is ideally a bigger goon who can take on guards moving in space--and Barton aint that.
Then they put David Bowens, a big monster there (next to M...the Hawaiian shrimp) e voila! Yeah, you just keep reciting season stats while ignoring the fact that that combination (with some Trusnik mixed in, and with the freelancing Rogers injured and the disciplined Rubin plugging the middle) they stopped the run.
Now I hope you understand that what happened happened and why it happened and the near-certainty that it will happen even moreso in the future, AND WE DON'T NEED NO STEENKING LINEBACKERS!!!
You're just killing me, Oblivia!
We need a fast (not neccessarily vedderrunn) wide reciever, safety, cornerback (still), and of course a quarterback of the future. Ok and a backup center and future (or superior) guard and (maybe--remember Rodney Capizzifield) RT...
Also, Coye Francies is still on the roster. I've heard rumors about some psychological issues there--don't know--but I need to point out his existance to you Oblivians. There's a decent chance he shows up and fills one of the cornerback holes. He's absolutely got the talent.
Outside the box:
Steinbach fits a zone scheme a lot better and has great trade value. This is kind of a longshot and no doubt horrifies the emotional thinkers who get attached and worshipful, but a trade is possible.
...though doubtful, since it would disrupt continuity and there is nobody better on the current roster. Plus Steinbach can play LT in a pinch, and...come to think of it, he can play center. HAS played center. Why did I forget that? Oh yeah I read the same stuff you guys read.
It now looks as if a trade-down from 7 is possible. Buffalo et al might want Clausen that bad and several teams will want Berry or a left tackle.
I personally think Mike Mayock is smarter than allayouall and that Earl Thomas is about as good as him, plus Haden will last awhile too. Either of those guys would help massively, and I see no reason not to trade down even if Mayock is wrong for once and Berry is slightly better than Thomas.
Per the chart, Buffalo would need to cough up a third round pick to move up two slots, or maybe Trent Edwards. (Jim Miller and others say that Edwards doesn't really suck--I have no opinion but we got Holmgren/Heckert to sort that out).
If the targets are Thomas, Haden, or maybe one of the offensive linemen (I never said they shouldn't upgrade at a reasonable price), they could move down further and still get one of them and Colt Mccoy.
I have decided that Colt McCoy is the realistic quarterback for the Browns in this draft. He's the absolute prototype West Coast quarteback. Bradford is awesome and fits any system, but McCoy is right there with him in this scheme.
He looks like Montana, but has a better arm.
Oh yeah. Trade down. Get 2011 picks too. Trade down and load up and get McCoy...mmmmm....
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Friday, April 2, 2010
Gocong
First, I have to confiscate these words: Mentor, experienced, and needs. You have been abusing these words, and have almost worn them out. You will be allowed to use these words only when you have learned to respect them and not overuse them.
OK now: I remember hoping that the Browns would draft Gocong in the middle rounds. I'd thought that the Eagles would make him a situational DE, but they actually tried to make him a 4-3 OLB.
That's amazing. Also amazing is the fact that he did OK in that role, and actually started.
Gocong is much much better suited to being a 3-4 linebacker (outside or inside). His only weakness in Philly's system was in coverage.
In college, Gocong had not only a bunch of sacks, but also a plethora of TFL's--he was extremely disruptive as a DE. Has a great nose for the ball and the wheels to get there.
IF he comes to Cleveland, OLB will be loaded and neck-deep. Gocong is a starter in this scheme, and his experience in Philly's system will be a huge benefit. They turned him into a REAL linebacker--a complete player.
The Browns don't need two Jerome Harrisons, unless the other home-run hitting little guy is taken LATE in the draft. Please stop trying to waste the Browns high picks on redundant players.
Best available is one thing, but Rodney Hillisfield IS the big back, ok? He's a backup fullback here, but will be heavily in the running back rotation. Denver was loaded at running back and hadn't exposed this Jerome Bettis type enough. He was a steal, and the Browns are now loaded at running back/fullback.
As I mentioned earlier, the rest of the NFL is gearing to stop the pass. The Browns are going to overpower these defenses. Let them keep thinking they can outscore the infantry. Ask Rex Ryan's brother what he thinks of that.
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
OK now: I remember hoping that the Browns would draft Gocong in the middle rounds. I'd thought that the Eagles would make him a situational DE, but they actually tried to make him a 4-3 OLB.
That's amazing. Also amazing is the fact that he did OK in that role, and actually started.
Gocong is much much better suited to being a 3-4 linebacker (outside or inside). His only weakness in Philly's system was in coverage.
In college, Gocong had not only a bunch of sacks, but also a plethora of TFL's--he was extremely disruptive as a DE. Has a great nose for the ball and the wheels to get there.
IF he comes to Cleveland, OLB will be loaded and neck-deep. Gocong is a starter in this scheme, and his experience in Philly's system will be a huge benefit. They turned him into a REAL linebacker--a complete player.
The Browns don't need two Jerome Harrisons, unless the other home-run hitting little guy is taken LATE in the draft. Please stop trying to waste the Browns high picks on redundant players.
Best available is one thing, but Rodney Hillisfield IS the big back, ok? He's a backup fullback here, but will be heavily in the running back rotation. Denver was loaded at running back and hadn't exposed this Jerome Bettis type enough. He was a steal, and the Browns are now loaded at running back/fullback.
As I mentioned earlier, the rest of the NFL is gearing to stop the pass. The Browns are going to overpower these defenses. Let them keep thinking they can outscore the infantry. Ask Rex Ryan's brother what he thinks of that.
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)