Don't bother telling them. They're not listening. Just have fun hearing their "Yabuts" down the road when he outperforms the other guys...again.
The current yabuts include his air raid system (like Darnold's) and his supportimg talent (for four years at two schools)...and of course the cop tackling him incident (that one's legit, but it was a one-off).
That stuff will go away over time (except for in the elephantine memories of permabashers...they'll bring it up ten years from now what can ya do?)
Nick Dudukovich (Fansided) lists what he feels are four mistakes the Browns made this offseason.
The first was not replacing Joe Thomas.
Nick has a right to his opinion, but Wylie and Dorsey are better qualified to judge these guys than Nick or I are. If you feel a different guy was better than Corbett, or should have been drafted instead of Callaway, that's fine.
But Nick allowed for a Corbett "Red Shirt season". No, that's for Desmond Harrison, who has phenomenal upside. Corbett is a four year starting left tackle who is very advanced technically already.
And if Callaway keeps his nose clean...well there was no comparison talent-wise between Callaway and any left tackle in this draft. That wasn't even close.
Do you draft a much less talented player because you "need" him? I wouldn't. And Pat Kirwan/Gil Brandt etc say "you can't win" doing that.
It's premature to call this a mistake.
Next, Nick lists "giving up on Kizer". Well, in a vacuum, I would agree with him, but if you think it through
1: Damarius Randall fills a serious need at free safety (remember the trade?)
2: Dorsey had Tyrod Taylor and knew he would draft a quarterback.
3: Nick is right that Kizer was used and abused by Hue Jackson, and he shouldn't be judged for that. I mean do you throw a baby in a lake and yell "swim!"?
He might still turn into a really good quarterback in time. But this wasn't all there was to it. This was no mistake. I'm glad Randall is here.
Next, Nick thinks they should have signed another veteran receiver. He cites Gordon's high-risk status, and Callaway's as well.
Here, the writer just reached so far he fell overboard:
1: If you can mention Bowe, Britt, and Landry in the same sentence, you need your head examined.
2: Who do you cut for the jouneyman veteran: Damion Ratley? Coleman?
3: Is your veteran actually better than Louis or Higgins?
4: Callaway and Ratley are the only rookies. Everybody else has been around for over two seasons (with bad quarterbacks...well except for McCown anyway).
Last, Nick thinks they should name a starting running back!?! Why? Most of the teams in the NFL run committees! And most running backs don't complain about it, because it prolongs their carreers.
Running back is THE most instinctive position in football. A lot of college guys need to refine their receiving and pass-protection skills, but they're ready to rock as runners.
Nick thinks they should have named Carlos Hyde the starter based on his experience! He doesn't seem to know the difference between quarterbacks and running backs.
And Nick even says that naming a starter could be used as motivation! More motivation than "playing the hot hand" from week-to-week? That's just plain bizarre!
I regret including the link. Nick did not do well here.
Mitch Zoloty did better. He thinks Shon Coleman will step up at left tackle, and quotes some nice stuff Myles Garrett said about him.
But I read what Garrett said, and it was mostly about working hard and effort. It's something I'd say about my buddy that I humiliate all the time.
Mitch says that Coleman would be targetted by opposing defenses. Actually, maybe not. Chris Hubbard is vulnerable too, and that's partly why he's not a Steeler anymore.
Also, Mitch and everybody else (except me) seem oblivious to the fact that the majority of NFL teams in this era don't have great left tackles, and this includes a lot of playoff and Superbowl teams.
There are tons of ways to "mask" a weak passblocking left tackle, especially if you have an athletic quarterback and use some zone-blocks on runs.
When a quarterback moves to his right (and the left tackle knows he's doing it), it drastically reduces the edge rusher's angles and options. He has to either stunt or go through the tackle. If he tries to go around him outside, he takes himself out of the play.
When a quarterback runs a read-option, he and the running back are reading one of the two defensive ends, and this play is designed to burn aggressive passrushes.
Haley won't want to read-option with Mayfield that much, but with Tyrod he'll do it a LOT.
Quick-hitters (passes delivered in under 2.5 seconds) are another way to protect your left tackle, and this dates back to even before Joe Montana.
This is what he'll do with Mayfield more, once the kid takes over. Jarvis Landry and Duke Johnson are the biggest part of this.
If you have an immobile quarterback and throw deep a lot, you need an exceptional passblocking left tackle. If you have an athletic quarterback, dangerous short receivers and tight ends, and a strong running game, you can get by with...well a Corbett or a Coleman, see?
And please (Nick): Spencer Drango has NO SHOT at left tackle, and is a longshot to even make the final roster now. Anybody who counts Drango in on this competition is clueless.
Back to Mitch Zaloty: Good article, but I think Corbett will overtake Coleman. But it's like a coin-flip, mostly because Joe Thomas said he thought Shon could play left tackle.
...of course, Big Joe thinks Hue Jackson is the best Head Coach he ever played for, so...
Somebody or other knocked Dorsey's offseason because he drafted an undersized quarterback first overall, then an undersized cornerback fourth overall.
That's fine, but in both cases, I have to disagree:
Mayfield was clearly and obviously the best quarterback in this draft class, and what Mayfield told Colon Cowherd about today's NFL was on the money. This height stuff is obsolete.
And Denzel Ward was THE best man corner in this draft class, and he stifled elite wide receivers. He's one of the fastest players in the NFL, and he's 5'11". They're knocking this pick because he's not 6'1"--that's it?!?
You people: You bash analytics, and at the same time nitpick draft picks over an inch or two.
You accuse us analysts of ignoring "intangibles" in favor of numbers, but when we tell you a 6'5/8" quarterback and 5'11" cornerback are as good as they look, you say they're too short!
I conclude this article with a chart. DEAL WITH IT.
No comments:
Post a Comment