It's been a great day for correctable material!
First, there's Mel Kiper. Mel thinks the Browns trading for Jimmy Garopollo seems to make the most sense from among the potential contenders.
He's not wrong about that. But he goes on to say that if they drafted Mitch Trubisky, they'd need to park him on the bench for a season. That's not incorrect either.
What's incorrect is the premise that a new Browns quarterback has to start in 2017. Regardless of what Hue Jackson says, this team still plays in the AFC North, and will not be ready for primetime in 2017.
I think I know what Mel would say to that: The new quarterback will need game experience to develop, and the sooner the better. So stipulated. He would also say that when you draft a player that high, he has to make an immediate impact. Says who? They need to win seven instead of five games why?
Mel also seems to dismiss Deshaun Watson, and some mock drafts drop him to the 25th pick in the first round. I know Kiper has been doing this forever, and is right more often than he is wrong about players, but I'm having a hard time understanding this.
Just because of the shotgun spread? Because he's 205 lbs? That was Alabama, both times, and Nick Saban, you know. Around 900 total yards didn't change anything? Does the Buckeye massacre even count? What am I missing here?
Some other guy expects the Browns to pursue the 32 year old, thrice injured Adrian Peterson in year two of their rebuild. Need I say more? Yes, I do: Who the hell hires these people?
And Gramps Romo! And his salary! Stop please stop!
Others regard Tyrod Taylor as a top target, basicly as a bridge quarterback. Hue Jackson will not favor a less accurate, less decisive quarterback over Cody Kessler...or even RG3.
No knock on Taylor, but he's just not an upgrade here in the real world.
Gregg Williams said all kinds of great stuff at his news conference. What I liked best was what he said about tackling. Had the Ray Horton defenders not blown so very, very many tackles, they might have won 3-4 games...maybe even more.
Yes, he does have around 42 fronts, but with the personnel he inherits he will run a lot of 4-man fronts (see earlier post).
As that post points out, a lot of this is semantics. He might have Carl Nassib standing up in the exact same place sometimes, just for giggles. Big deal.
The Williams hiring hasn't caused anyone to miss a drumbeat on the Myles Garrett march, but it should. The Browns are going to have to release at least one pretty good edge-rusher as it is.
While Garrett would undeniably be a big upgrade, believe me or not, this is not a priority position of need. In a 4-3, Garrett would replace Nassib or Ogbah, both of whome will enter their second seasons much improved. Why is everybody so eager to kick Orchard, Holmes, and Johnson to the curb?
The Browns might get five or six more sacks with him than they would without him. Is six sacks worth a first overall pick?
Don't get me wrong the guy is just a beast, and yes, you take him IF you don't take a quarterback first overall.
Popular opinion now is that Deshaun Watson should be there for the Browns at number twelve, and that nobody would trade ahead of them to nab him.
Well there may be Garopollo if Bill trades him, then a couple other veterans could shake loose to eliminate a couple other quarterback-hungry teams from the competition, but you're assuming here that the Bills, Bears, 49ers, Jets, all agree with the amatuer consensus that Watson's career accomplishments were all flukes, and that with all the other guys gone, none of the teams behind the Browns will trade up to screw the Browns out of him.
This seems delusional. If the wild guess reports are accidentally accurate, and the Browns really are enamored with this "second round talent", it's because they believe he is a potential franchise quarterback.
Gil Brandt, Pat Kirwan, and every other former GM or head coach on NFL Radio say the same thing: If you can get your guy, you don't take ANY risks. You just take him.
Look at this last draft! Look what those teams gave up to get Goff and Wentz! Now one draft pick is too much? Throw the damn numbers out, along with all the negative opinions! If YOU think he's the guy, you GET HIM, period.
Here's how that might go:
Hue: I want Watson.
Sashi: Ok, we think there's a decent chance he'll be there--
Hue: Are you sure?
Sashi: Well, we can't guar--
Hue: Then draft him first.
Paul: But he's considered a--
Hue: They're wrong. I'm right. He's the guy we're looking for.
Sashi: Maybe we can move down a little, and still get him.
Hue: Only if you're sure. You can't risk losing him.
Sashi: Ok. Our collective fates depend on this, you know.
Hue: I know. That's why this is so important. You've just got to trust me on this.
Of course, I'm just guessing. The guy who wrote the article might have read my blog.
Those who say the franchise tag might be fine for Terrelle Pryor are also delusional. The Browns have seen what they needed to see. Even players who question whether or not he can be a number one are full of crap, because he already is.
He's bigger, taller, and faster than Randy Moss. He compares to Megatron. He's fanatical and obsessed. Why can't you see what's right in front of you in neon lights?
Sign him long term, right now, like you did Collins. Franchise him, and you probably lose him in 2017 when some twit offers him ten percent of his salary cap. That's analytics too: Don't expose your guys to the market. Pay a little extra now, front load it.
The second year it looks like a square deal. Year 3 he's cheap. Year 4 he's a bargain. That's exploiting inflation. It's analytical, and no doubt part of Paul DePodesta's job as Chief Strategy Officer.
Extend the other guys now, too. Use that cap space front-loading, and 3-4 years from now you have it back.
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
No comments:
Post a Comment