The Gipper Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Id pick him at 12 in a second..... You never know with any player, what they will become and this one has been a dependable hard working - hard playing teammate for years....never an issue...no arrests...no suspensions....no history of drugs.... Unlike some of our other problem children, who had extensive histories of trouble before they were drafted.... At this point, nobody has shown that he's done anything wrong....except hydrate.... I would take him at 12....IF he were an OLB....a prime position of need. But we already got an ILB playing OLB: Collins. Can Foster play full time at OLB....or roam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 I would take him at 12....IF he were an OLB....a prime position of need. But we already got an ILB playing OLB: Collins. Can Foster play full time at OLB....or roam? Yes, he's that good. He reads plays and gets to the ball like the best in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Yes, he's that good. He reads plays and gets to the ball like the best in the league. Then he tackles head first and gets concussed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Yes, he's that good. He reads plays and gets to the ball like the best in the league. Honestly, our need for an OLB, who can rush, cover the TE, and hold the edge on running plays is greater than our need for a strictly DE. Of course, you can say: but you can't pass up the great player just because he doesn't exactly fit our position of need. I hear that. But, if Foster is the beast some say....he may actually turn out to be better than that guy you want at #1. So....maybe the Browns take MT at #1 and Foster at #12. What would you think about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Then he tackles head first and gets concussed... A risk they all take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Honestly, our need for an OLB, who can rush, cover the TE, and hold the edge on running plays is greater than our need for a strictly DE. Of course, you can say: but you can't pass up the great player just because he doesn't exactly fit our position of need. I hear that. But, if Foster is the beast some say....he may actually turn out to be better than that guy you want at #1. So....maybe the Browns take MT at #1 and Foster at #12. What would you think about that? Bird in hand worth 2 in the bush. Foster will be gone by 12 and if he is there, he would be great operating with Garrett-best of both worlds and use a lot of that ammunition to acquire more for the QB's next year. I just like them better next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 Bird in hand worth 2 in the bush. Foster will be gone by 12 and if he is there, he would be great operating with Garrett-best of both worlds and use a lot of that ammunition to acquire more for the QB's next year. I just like them better next year. But, he would not be operating with Garrett. Browns take MT...and so they need their defender at 12. Foster could be the choice. If he's not there....someone else. Maybe the Browns go Ghoolie....and address their two biggest needs on offense in round 1: MT plus OJ. And leave defense for the rest of the draft. How about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.