Opinion on which quarterback the Browns will draft to replace the unmentionable one are divided between Goff and Wentz.
Before I continue, I need to correct a faulty scouting report on Goff: Due to the nature of his offense, Goff didn't throw a lot of deep passes. When he did, he showed off a strong arm. Stop saying he doesn't have a strong arm simply because he wasn't a mad bomber. You only needed to see a couple of those passes. That's his arm, fool.
I have no idea which quarterback they'll choose. I only know that somebody is probably going to trade up to number one and grab one of the two (or Bosa).
The Browns will prioritize upside. "Pro-ready" won't matter. Regardless of the PR spin, they can't expect to overtake the Steelers and Bengals in 2016.
As I've said, Goff is more pro ready. He might or might not have the most upside, as well, if he has a Bernie Kosar brain.
But it's also not smart to ignore Wentz's athleticism, or make any assumptions about his brain.
In short, there is a 75% chance that the Browns will draft Goff.
Or Wentz.
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
Mindless Mantras, Labels, Boxes, and the Browns
Craig Lyndall is a smart guy, which is why I include links to most of his articles, despite the fact that he's wrong about a lot of things.
In this one, about the wisdom of re-signing Travis Benjamin, his logic is irrefutable. Unlike some alleged analysts, Craig comprehends that the Rabbit isn't a number one receiver.
But he considers Benjamin a number two outside receiver, as well as a slot guy. He regards the quality of the cornerback as the lone challenge, and ignores the routes and types of coverage.
Travis Benjamin (and Andrew Hawkins) have been forced into playing outside by injuries (and Dwayne Bowe). Outside receivers are often pressed, and physically leveraged outside.
That puts the cornerback roughly between the quarterback and receiver. A good cornerback can bump and jostle a small receiver toward the sideline with his body. It prevents the little guy from getting to full speed as he struggles for balance. He's not where he's supposed to be, and when the passer does find him, any throw is contested, with the cornerback having the advantage.
This is as true for the Z as for the X. Outside is outside.
Slot receivers can be munchkins because they have a two-way go, and are very hard to press. They can't be leveraged outside, because they'll simply go with the leverage, and turn it into a footrace. They also have more room outside.
Travis Benjamin is a slot receiver.
Craig thoughtfully mentioned Josh Gordon as a potential number one, but again ignored Pryor, and seems to think Benjamin is a better number two (Z) than Rodney Hartlinefield.
Craig seems to think any receiver who lacks world class speed shouldn't bother showing up, and that speed trumps height and catch radius...and everything else.
He talks about a "complete overhaul", and describes a team all but devoid of playmakers.
This is common. There are only eleven players on an offense, and six of them are linemen and a quarterback. Of the five remaining, is Barnidge a playmaker? Gordon? Duke? Travis?
Okay, that's four. Why do you keep chanting this mantra? And what is to rebuild? I even left out Andrew Hawkins, and Crowell, who's had a number of explosive plays himself.
Craig is smart, but stubborn. Analysis isn't a series of annual cliches, repeated.
"Playmaker" is a cliche. A label. A box. A good player is a good player. A tall guy with average speed who is money on third down belongs. A guy who gets three carries of over ten yards in a game makes a difference.
Ok I'm sorry. I'm confiscating the phrase "playmaker". You're overusing it. It doesn't mean anything any more. It will be returned to you when you can use it responsibly.
But Craig is right about re-signing Travis Benjamin.
This article on Jared Goff by Nick Master isn't bad, but he screws up badly on the stats. He cites Goff's 14-23 w/l record as a reason for concern.
He mentions (as an aside) his first 1-11 season, then a "but still". No, stop right there. He was a first year starter, and eleven of his twenty three total losses came in that year. He got better in his second season, and became elite in his third. That is what matters.
Nor did he play in a vacuum. No quarterback can single-handedly win a game (well except maybe Cam Newton).
Real scouts will study how he handled blitzes, checked down, used his eyes, placed the ball; his completion percentage, yards per attempt, third down pass efficiency, etc.
Not wins and losses. He played for a small school, and it's a team sport.
Besides, he won most of his games and the Armed Forces Bowl last year.
Goff entered one of the worst teams in college football, and three years later left with a championship. What rational person is concerned?
In this one, about the wisdom of re-signing Travis Benjamin, his logic is irrefutable. Unlike some alleged analysts, Craig comprehends that the Rabbit isn't a number one receiver.
But he considers Benjamin a number two outside receiver, as well as a slot guy. He regards the quality of the cornerback as the lone challenge, and ignores the routes and types of coverage.
Travis Benjamin (and Andrew Hawkins) have been forced into playing outside by injuries (and Dwayne Bowe). Outside receivers are often pressed, and physically leveraged outside.
That puts the cornerback roughly between the quarterback and receiver. A good cornerback can bump and jostle a small receiver toward the sideline with his body. It prevents the little guy from getting to full speed as he struggles for balance. He's not where he's supposed to be, and when the passer does find him, any throw is contested, with the cornerback having the advantage.
This is as true for the Z as for the X. Outside is outside.
Slot receivers can be munchkins because they have a two-way go, and are very hard to press. They can't be leveraged outside, because they'll simply go with the leverage, and turn it into a footrace. They also have more room outside.
Travis Benjamin is a slot receiver.
Craig thoughtfully mentioned Josh Gordon as a potential number one, but again ignored Pryor, and seems to think Benjamin is a better number two (Z) than Rodney Hartlinefield.
Craig seems to think any receiver who lacks world class speed shouldn't bother showing up, and that speed trumps height and catch radius...and everything else.
He talks about a "complete overhaul", and describes a team all but devoid of playmakers.
This is common. There are only eleven players on an offense, and six of them are linemen and a quarterback. Of the five remaining, is Barnidge a playmaker? Gordon? Duke? Travis?
Okay, that's four. Why do you keep chanting this mantra? And what is to rebuild? I even left out Andrew Hawkins, and Crowell, who's had a number of explosive plays himself.
Craig is smart, but stubborn. Analysis isn't a series of annual cliches, repeated.
"Playmaker" is a cliche. A label. A box. A good player is a good player. A tall guy with average speed who is money on third down belongs. A guy who gets three carries of over ten yards in a game makes a difference.
Ok I'm sorry. I'm confiscating the phrase "playmaker". You're overusing it. It doesn't mean anything any more. It will be returned to you when you can use it responsibly.
But Craig is right about re-signing Travis Benjamin.
This article on Jared Goff by Nick Master isn't bad, but he screws up badly on the stats. He cites Goff's 14-23 w/l record as a reason for concern.
He mentions (as an aside) his first 1-11 season, then a "but still". No, stop right there. He was a first year starter, and eleven of his twenty three total losses came in that year. He got better in his second season, and became elite in his third. That is what matters.
Nor did he play in a vacuum. No quarterback can single-handedly win a game (well except maybe Cam Newton).
Real scouts will study how he handled blitzes, checked down, used his eyes, placed the ball; his completion percentage, yards per attempt, third down pass efficiency, etc.
Not wins and losses. He played for a small school, and it's a team sport.
Besides, he won most of his games and the Armed Forces Bowl last year.
Goff entered one of the worst teams in college football, and three years later left with a championship. What rational person is concerned?
Monday, February 8, 2016
Free Agent Market: Running Backs Galore
I have defended Isaiah Crowell, even vs some very smart people. Duke Johnson really needs no defending. I don't consider running back as a team need.
But holy cow, there are free agent running backs coming out of the woodwork! The sheer number of them will suppress their contracts. The Browns have to look at this as an opportunity.
Lamar Miller, Doug Martin, and Chris Ivory are really the top three. They're all YOUNG ENOUGH to matter to a young and building team a year away from contention DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
I like LeGarrett Blount a lot, but he's 29 and his style got him all beat up. I know I'll hear his name a lot, because he's a familiar name. That's a non-starter unless Hue thinks he can be a blocking fullback for the league minimum. (Fullbacks are the hittERS and not hitees so they can play longer).
Committees work fine. Talent is talent. More talent is better. Let's see what happens.
But holy cow, there are free agent running backs coming out of the woodwork! The sheer number of them will suppress their contracts. The Browns have to look at this as an opportunity.
Lamar Miller, Doug Martin, and Chris Ivory are really the top three. They're all YOUNG ENOUGH to matter to a young and building team a year away from contention DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
I like LeGarrett Blount a lot, but he's 29 and his style got him all beat up. I know I'll hear his name a lot, because he's a familiar name. That's a non-starter unless Hue thinks he can be a blocking fullback for the league minimum. (Fullbacks are the hittERS and not hitees so they can play longer).
Committees work fine. Talent is talent. More talent is better. Let's see what happens.
Sunday, February 7, 2016
Browns Tight Ends and Fullbacks
Joe Wilson wrote another great piece as he assesses different Browns position groups. This one was on tight ends and fullback.
Other than Barnidge and E J Bibbs, Joe isn't high in anybody. Unlike with the running backs, and as usual, I don't dare argue with Joe.
He really does like Bibbs, though. Joe says he has all the tools of a real tight end. But he's between 6'2" and 6'3". Well Joe knows that and said it anyway so amen.
Bibbs can block in-line, and this is what Joe cited as a big issue last season. Per Joe, Barnidge was marginal, and Dray maybe even worse. This is why Cam Erving played tight end in some two tight end sets last season.
The fullbacks couldn't block either.
This is why, if he is there and Miller isn't at pick 32, the Browns will have to look hard at Hunter, by far the best tight end in this draft.
Joe cites the power running scheme that Hue Jackson likes to run. This includes a second tight end or a fullback.
But I just have to remind Joe and the rest of you, we don't yet know if Hue will run the same scheme without the same personnel. And if he is who I think he is, he won't, because that would be stupid.
He's probably already put his order in with Sashi Brown: Tight end who can block, with a side of blocking fullback.
Nothing is etched in stone, either. Joe is right that fullback Malcomb Johnson was bad last season, but he was a rookie, and deserves another shot.
What Joe said about Bibbs was really encouraging too. Bibbs can also play H-Back or even fullback, though he's a long shot at the latter, where shorter is better.
Well, Hunter could be there. Miller first though.
Other than Barnidge and E J Bibbs, Joe isn't high in anybody. Unlike with the running backs, and as usual, I don't dare argue with Joe.
He really does like Bibbs, though. Joe says he has all the tools of a real tight end. But he's between 6'2" and 6'3". Well Joe knows that and said it anyway so amen.
Bibbs can block in-line, and this is what Joe cited as a big issue last season. Per Joe, Barnidge was marginal, and Dray maybe even worse. This is why Cam Erving played tight end in some two tight end sets last season.
The fullbacks couldn't block either.
This is why, if he is there and Miller isn't at pick 32, the Browns will have to look hard at Hunter, by far the best tight end in this draft.
Joe cites the power running scheme that Hue Jackson likes to run. This includes a second tight end or a fullback.
But I just have to remind Joe and the rest of you, we don't yet know if Hue will run the same scheme without the same personnel. And if he is who I think he is, he won't, because that would be stupid.
He's probably already put his order in with Sashi Brown: Tight end who can block, with a side of blocking fullback.
Nothing is etched in stone, either. Joe is right that fullback Malcomb Johnson was bad last season, but he was a rookie, and deserves another shot.
What Joe said about Bibbs was really encouraging too. Bibbs can also play H-Back or even fullback, though he's a long shot at the latter, where shorter is better.
Well, Hunter could be there. Miller first though.
Friday, February 5, 2016
This is a Manziel-free Zone
Just a quickie here: I didn't read Grossi's article yet, but here are reasons for the Browns to move summer camps to Columbus:
1: Expansion of fan base. Columbus is the DMZ between the Browns and Bengals (actually closer to Cinci). Front-running Steelers fans have also imprinted on the first team they saw winning (like baby ducks).
2: Money.
It's not the big deal people make of it. The media guys don't want to drive down there. Not much meaningful happens in shorts and drills; rookies vs rookies.
....sorry I fell asleep there. That's all.
1: Expansion of fan base. Columbus is the DMZ between the Browns and Bengals (actually closer to Cinci). Front-running Steelers fans have also imprinted on the first team they saw winning (like baby ducks).
2: Money.
It's not the big deal people make of it. The media guys don't want to drive down there. Not much meaningful happens in shorts and drills; rookies vs rookies.
....sorry I fell asleep there. That's all.
Thursday, February 4, 2016
Superbowl Free Agents for Cleveland Browns
For the Broncos, the "beeping" sound you hear is Von Miller backing up the Brinks truck.
The Broncos have problems, with current cap space of seven million. Ryan Clady and a couple other guys could renegotiate to increase that, and some players could be cut loose to free up some more, but Denver has a tall order.
For an excellent and comprehensive in depth analysis of Denver's current challenges and what they might do, this article was my main source. In this writer's opinion, the Broncos could try to simulate the Nick Fole's deal (to retain Osweiler), which (despite the big numbers) would actually count as around five million against their cap.
I think he's underestimating a bit, but close enough. The Browns could certainly outbid the Broncos, however.
Much is dependant on what Gramps Manning does. The writer said it would be difficult to keep both quarterbacks.
I've got to say this, however: If I'm Brock Osweiler, I'm angry. Brock Osweiler is the better quarterback. Yet his Head Coach yanked him on the eve of the playoffs. And listen to the talk: If Manning stays, Brock can expect to collect more splinters in his fifth season.
If Peyton retires, he probably wants to stay, but again, if it's me, I explore the market first. If that happens, the Broncos can't match Cleveland's offer. That doesn't mean he won't accept less to stay in Denver.
On the surface, he would want to. The Broncos will lose some talent, but should remain a force to be reckoned with.
But looking deeper, a young team coached by Hue Jackson has some appeal as well. The cap is the cap, and Denver will inevitably erode in the coming years. The Browns (you heard me mention Hue Jackson right are you paying attention?) are getting better.
As you can tell, I like Osweiller a lot, and bet Hue does too. While the top two quarterbacks in this draft could end up being great, they're far from a sure thing. Osweiler is tested and proven, with remaining upside. And the number two overall pick could then be.....
More practical Denver targets for the Browns would be DE Malik Jackson, ILB Danny Trevathan, and Ronny Hillman. Jackson is the big one here.
The Panthers have around 24 million. They can keep all their top young guys, and unlike the Broncos, they're just getting started. Nothing to see here.
In an earlier article, I bashed somebody for talking about Osweiler. In my defense, I had faulty data on the Broncos salary cap number. I thought they had a lot more ammunition than they do.
Not everybody is that high on Osweiler. He wasn't spectacular or anything. The Chargers were giving him a hard time when he got yanked, but Manning was similar.
I leave this to Hue Jackson. The last Manning understudy I saw, however, was Kelly Holcomb. Holcomb didn't have Osweiler's pedigree or tools.
Whatever. Hue will know best, and he sure beats the hell out of drafting a quarterback later in the draft. (And don't say Osweiler was a second rounder. We don't have four years here.)
Now we can watch possible future Browns in the Superbowl.
The Broncos have problems, with current cap space of seven million. Ryan Clady and a couple other guys could renegotiate to increase that, and some players could be cut loose to free up some more, but Denver has a tall order.
For an excellent and comprehensive in depth analysis of Denver's current challenges and what they might do, this article was my main source. In this writer's opinion, the Broncos could try to simulate the Nick Fole's deal (to retain Osweiler), which (despite the big numbers) would actually count as around five million against their cap.
I think he's underestimating a bit, but close enough. The Browns could certainly outbid the Broncos, however.
Much is dependant on what Gramps Manning does. The writer said it would be difficult to keep both quarterbacks.
I've got to say this, however: If I'm Brock Osweiler, I'm angry. Brock Osweiler is the better quarterback. Yet his Head Coach yanked him on the eve of the playoffs. And listen to the talk: If Manning stays, Brock can expect to collect more splinters in his fifth season.
If Peyton retires, he probably wants to stay, but again, if it's me, I explore the market first. If that happens, the Broncos can't match Cleveland's offer. That doesn't mean he won't accept less to stay in Denver.
On the surface, he would want to. The Broncos will lose some talent, but should remain a force to be reckoned with.
But looking deeper, a young team coached by Hue Jackson has some appeal as well. The cap is the cap, and Denver will inevitably erode in the coming years. The Browns (you heard me mention Hue Jackson right are you paying attention?) are getting better.
As you can tell, I like Osweiller a lot, and bet Hue does too. While the top two quarterbacks in this draft could end up being great, they're far from a sure thing. Osweiler is tested and proven, with remaining upside. And the number two overall pick could then be.....
More practical Denver targets for the Browns would be DE Malik Jackson, ILB Danny Trevathan, and Ronny Hillman. Jackson is the big one here.
The Panthers have around 24 million. They can keep all their top young guys, and unlike the Broncos, they're just getting started. Nothing to see here.
In an earlier article, I bashed somebody for talking about Osweiler. In my defense, I had faulty data on the Broncos salary cap number. I thought they had a lot more ammunition than they do.
Not everybody is that high on Osweiler. He wasn't spectacular or anything. The Chargers were giving him a hard time when he got yanked, but Manning was similar.
I leave this to Hue Jackson. The last Manning understudy I saw, however, was Kelly Holcomb. Holcomb didn't have Osweiler's pedigree or tools.
Whatever. Hue will know best, and he sure beats the hell out of drafting a quarterback later in the draft. (And don't say Osweiler was a second rounder. We don't have four years here.)
Now we can watch possible future Browns in the Superbowl.
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Browns Shallow Analysis Corrections: Shallow Waters Run Deep.
Joe Gilbert is one of my favorite sources, and knows more about football than I do. But after reading this analyisis of the Browns' running back situation, for the first time I have to disagree.
What he said about Duke Johnson was pretty accurate, except it didn't seem to me that he danced around any more than necessary.
This dovetails into his comments about Isaiah Crowell. Joe thought he failed to see running lanes. I, too, failed to see running lanes. That's because there weren't any.
I'm sure that over the course of all their carries, Joe indeed saw some incidents to prompt his criticisms of both players. I simply contend that there weren't that many of them.
As I've repeated a thousand times, the Browns didn't have big receivers to help in blocking. Doug Dieken questioned changes to the blocking scheme, which produced far better results under Kyle Shanahan. I myself complained loud and long at the predictability of running only to the weak side for most of the season.
Joe himself acknowledged the improvements in the running game (especially Crowell) during the last quarter of the season. I want to point out that they were now running to both sides of the field (coincidence? I think not).
Joe suggested getting the ball to Duke more. Ok.
He suggested sticking to the run more. Wrong. Well okay, as Hue knows better than most, you really need to establish the run and have a balanced attack. So I guess Joe isn't wrong.
What's wrong is that the Vikings can't keep handing off to Adrian Peterson when they're two touchdowns behind with eight minutes left, and it's bad math to hand off on second or third and eight at any time.
I defer to Joe in matters x and o, but not on statistics. Joe cited season-long statistics to illustrate the Browns inefficiency running the ball in the same article in which he cited the late season improvement.
The most effective predictor of the future are those four most recent games. Neither running back improved during that span. The playcalling and the blocking did.
And now that I've checked it out some more, Terrelle Pryor's blocking helped more than a little.
Joe doesn't hate Crowell, but feels he's too inconsistent. I contend that Crowell is very consistent at running through holes, and also at getting stopped by human walls. Joe thinks the Browns could use a bell cow running back. I contend they have one.
But Joe is really smart, and I've learned a lot from him. Anybody who wants to learn about football should check him out on WFNY.
I don't include links to really bad articles (you're welcome), but I just read a top 100 dumbest (trust me that's really high).
The article, which shall remain shameless, discussed what the Browns might do about quarterback. It wasn't really stupid. Just thoughtless.
Even mentioning Sam Bradford's name in this context is dumb, but listing him as a viable option is worse. Bradford is a good quarterback who is getting old and is injured more often than not. He collected tens of millions of dollars for hanging around for most of his career, refusing to renegotiate his massively overinflated contract for the sake of his team mates and team. He refused to even consider coming to Cleveland. His agent recently said he expects to get paid TWENTY FOUR MILLION A YEAR by his next team.
The article then lists Brock Osweiler. Now I'd love that myself. That is a really good quarterback.
The writer thinks it all depends on Peyton Manning. If Manning decides not to retire, then John Elway will get rid of Brock.
A Superbowl team with an ancient, banged up quarterback will get rid of his heir apparent? This is so dumb on so many levels: Even if Elway is the poster boy for the concussion protocol what would he then need most?
A quarterback. Jeez...
The article lists Kirk Cousins. I like Cousins too, but so do the REDSKINS.
Colin Kaepernick. After all, Hue Jackson wanted to draft him once.
Who just took over the Niners? Chip Kelly. What kind of quarterback makes his read-option system viable in the NFL (theme from "Jeapordy" playing...).
Robert Griffin III. That one isn't really dumb. The book on this guy shouldn't be closed yet. All the same, it's a long shot. He's had his chances, and can't overcome all of his limitations.
Smith, Glennon, Sanchez and Mettenberger? Of all these guys, Glennon is actually the most interesting. He has quietly become a pretty good quarterback (83.-something rating). But he's under 58% completions and best as a vertical passer; not a good fit.
The writer shows a glimmer of intelligence by suggesting that Goff would be the best draft option, then extinguishes it by saying he read somewhere that the Browns like Wentz better.
Well, Goff wasn't at the Senior Bowl.
The article concludes that since drafting a quarterback not named Luck that high is risky, the Browns might take the safer route with one of the aforementioned veteran options.
Jeez. Aside from Osweiler, none of these guys (except conceivably RG3) can be a franchise quarterback. The Browns will NOT draft in this rarified air again for the foreseeable future.
How can they not draft a guy with that potential? Know what poker players call guys like this writer? ATMs.
Rang lists Goff tenth overall and Wentz fifteenth. I guess that means the Browns need to trade down to tenth or fifteenth and then draft one of them, right?
Wow.
A couple more draft targets: ILB Kentrell Brothers led college football in tackles and did well during Senior Bowl week. He's not a great athlete but has great instincts. He's 6'1", 245. A couple interceptions and 14 tackles for losses. He's a complete linebacker, not unlike DQwell Jackson, except he's a little bigger. He can stack and shed.
The knock on him is that he has short arms, which I find amusing. They say that because of his short arms, he sometimes needs help tackling.......
He's projected to go in the second round, but with such a severe handicap (snicker) he could slide to the third.
Leland Miller is a 6', 180 lb. press/man cornerback who Ray Horton would want because he's very willing and able to tackle running backs. He also did well at the Senior Bowl, and could well last well into the fourth round.
He needs to get bigger, of course, but doesn't need a lot of refinement; could be a fifth cornerback right away, and a special teamer. They say he gets too aggressive at times, but other than that and his weight, I can't find anything wrong with him. I guess there's just a lot of cornerbacks in this draft, and nobody wants to wait for a guy to gain ten lousy pounds.
What he said about Duke Johnson was pretty accurate, except it didn't seem to me that he danced around any more than necessary.
This dovetails into his comments about Isaiah Crowell. Joe thought he failed to see running lanes. I, too, failed to see running lanes. That's because there weren't any.
I'm sure that over the course of all their carries, Joe indeed saw some incidents to prompt his criticisms of both players. I simply contend that there weren't that many of them.
As I've repeated a thousand times, the Browns didn't have big receivers to help in blocking. Doug Dieken questioned changes to the blocking scheme, which produced far better results under Kyle Shanahan. I myself complained loud and long at the predictability of running only to the weak side for most of the season.
Joe himself acknowledged the improvements in the running game (especially Crowell) during the last quarter of the season. I want to point out that they were now running to both sides of the field (coincidence? I think not).
Joe suggested getting the ball to Duke more. Ok.
He suggested sticking to the run more. Wrong. Well okay, as Hue knows better than most, you really need to establish the run and have a balanced attack. So I guess Joe isn't wrong.
What's wrong is that the Vikings can't keep handing off to Adrian Peterson when they're two touchdowns behind with eight minutes left, and it's bad math to hand off on second or third and eight at any time.
I defer to Joe in matters x and o, but not on statistics. Joe cited season-long statistics to illustrate the Browns inefficiency running the ball in the same article in which he cited the late season improvement.
The most effective predictor of the future are those four most recent games. Neither running back improved during that span. The playcalling and the blocking did.
And now that I've checked it out some more, Terrelle Pryor's blocking helped more than a little.
Joe doesn't hate Crowell, but feels he's too inconsistent. I contend that Crowell is very consistent at running through holes, and also at getting stopped by human walls. Joe thinks the Browns could use a bell cow running back. I contend they have one.
But Joe is really smart, and I've learned a lot from him. Anybody who wants to learn about football should check him out on WFNY.
I don't include links to really bad articles (you're welcome), but I just read a top 100 dumbest (trust me that's really high).
The article, which shall remain shameless, discussed what the Browns might do about quarterback. It wasn't really stupid. Just thoughtless.
Even mentioning Sam Bradford's name in this context is dumb, but listing him as a viable option is worse. Bradford is a good quarterback who is getting old and is injured more often than not. He collected tens of millions of dollars for hanging around for most of his career, refusing to renegotiate his massively overinflated contract for the sake of his team mates and team. He refused to even consider coming to Cleveland. His agent recently said he expects to get paid TWENTY FOUR MILLION A YEAR by his next team.
The article then lists Brock Osweiler. Now I'd love that myself. That is a really good quarterback.
The writer thinks it all depends on Peyton Manning. If Manning decides not to retire, then John Elway will get rid of Brock.
A Superbowl team with an ancient, banged up quarterback will get rid of his heir apparent? This is so dumb on so many levels: Even if Elway is the poster boy for the concussion protocol what would he then need most?
A quarterback. Jeez...
The article lists Kirk Cousins. I like Cousins too, but so do the REDSKINS.
Colin Kaepernick. After all, Hue Jackson wanted to draft him once.
Who just took over the Niners? Chip Kelly. What kind of quarterback makes his read-option system viable in the NFL (theme from "Jeapordy" playing...).
Robert Griffin III. That one isn't really dumb. The book on this guy shouldn't be closed yet. All the same, it's a long shot. He's had his chances, and can't overcome all of his limitations.
Smith, Glennon, Sanchez and Mettenberger? Of all these guys, Glennon is actually the most interesting. He has quietly become a pretty good quarterback (83.-something rating). But he's under 58% completions and best as a vertical passer; not a good fit.
The writer shows a glimmer of intelligence by suggesting that Goff would be the best draft option, then extinguishes it by saying he read somewhere that the Browns like Wentz better.
Well, Goff wasn't at the Senior Bowl.
The article concludes that since drafting a quarterback not named Luck that high is risky, the Browns might take the safer route with one of the aforementioned veteran options.
Jeez. Aside from Osweiler, none of these guys (except conceivably RG3) can be a franchise quarterback. The Browns will NOT draft in this rarified air again for the foreseeable future.
How can they not draft a guy with that potential? Know what poker players call guys like this writer? ATMs.
Rang lists Goff tenth overall and Wentz fifteenth. I guess that means the Browns need to trade down to tenth or fifteenth and then draft one of them, right?
Wow.
A couple more draft targets: ILB Kentrell Brothers led college football in tackles and did well during Senior Bowl week. He's not a great athlete but has great instincts. He's 6'1", 245. A couple interceptions and 14 tackles for losses. He's a complete linebacker, not unlike DQwell Jackson, except he's a little bigger. He can stack and shed.
The knock on him is that he has short arms, which I find amusing. They say that because of his short arms, he sometimes needs help tackling.......
He's projected to go in the second round, but with such a severe handicap (snicker) he could slide to the third.
Leland Miller is a 6', 180 lb. press/man cornerback who Ray Horton would want because he's very willing and able to tackle running backs. He also did well at the Senior Bowl, and could well last well into the fourth round.
He needs to get bigger, of course, but doesn't need a lot of refinement; could be a fifth cornerback right away, and a special teamer. They say he gets too aggressive at times, but other than that and his weight, I can't find anything wrong with him. I guess there's just a lot of cornerbacks in this draft, and nobody wants to wait for a guy to gain ten lousy pounds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)