Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

OK, just announce we're taking Garrett....


Clevfan4life

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 352
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Don't know why but I have a vague feeling of unease about Garrett.

Maybe it's that Universal opinion that he's the greatest thing since sliced corned beef.

Players really live up to that kind of hype... Just saying

 

WSS

 

So if the Browns don't chose him he turns into Khalil Mack and if they do he turns into Soupy Sales?

 

Clowney had a lot of hype, but once he recovered from injuries he lived up to it despite not having JJ Watt to take the heat off him. And this was after he played his last year at S.C. not to get hurt.

 

Overthinking has killed the Browns forever. Just once don't do it that way again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So if the Browns don't chose him he turns into Khalil Mack and if they do he turns into Soupy Sales?

 

Clowney had a lot of hype, but once he recovered from injuries he lived up to it despite not having JJ Watt to take the heat off him. And this was after he played his last year at S.C. not to get hurt.

 

Overthinking has killed the Browns forever. Just once don't do it that way again.

I certainly understand your way of thinking here. I guess it's just one of the reasons I hate the first pick in the draft. A-Team rightfully expect that guy to start and contribute at a high level right out of the gate. Anything less is a disappointment anything mediocre is a bust the haunt you for years. And yes it's the best bet.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should trust a guy who wanted Deshawn Watson @ #1 overall over Garrett? The Plain Dealer's football staff has sunk to new depths. Not just that AG, they let Mary Kay spew her irrational school girl crush on Jimmy Garropolo on a regular basis.

 

Even though I'm one of the top Mitch supporters around here, the Browns taking him over Garrett would be either the boldest move ever, or the dumbest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though I'm one of the top Mitch supporters around here, the Browns taking him over Garrett would be either the boldest move ever, or the dumbest.

And Im not a big Mitch guy.....at all......BUT, if the Browns think he's their guy and plan to take him at #12....they are fools to pass and wait....

 

You dont pass on your future QB to tap a DE first.....(esp in a draft FULL of DL talent)......

 

Overall, Id prefer they draft D early and often and Im not enamored with any of the QB's this year.....but if mitch is their guy, then they shouldnt wait til 12.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Im not a big Mitch guy.....at all......BUT, if the Browns think KNOW he's their guy and plan to take him at #12....they are fools to pass and wait....

 

You dont pass on your future QB to tap a DE first.....(esp in a draft FULL of DL talent)......

 

Overall, Id prefer they draft D early and often and Im not enamored with any of the QB's this year.....but if mitch is their guy, then they shouldnt wait til 12.....

 

FIFY...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point to the case being made to take Trubs at #1, so you stand no chance of missing him, is you have to know to as close to an absolute certainty as is humanly possible, that Trubs is "the one".

 

It was not about "knowing" he'll be there at 12.

 

 

So the question is is Trubs as much of a slam-dunk, franchise-plus, all-pro prospect for decades as Gip believes? Or is he at best a 50/50 shot as most of the rest of the Trub optimists here believe? And which camp is the FO in?

 

If the former, then he's in the same top grouping as Garrett, and by virtue of the positional importance tie-breaker, you take him #1 overall.

 

If not, you don't.

 

And I am in Camp don't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point to the case being made to take Trubs at #1, so you stand no chance of missing him, is you have to know to as close to an absolute certainty as is humanly possible, that Trubs is "the one".

 

It was not about "knowing" he'll be there at 12.

 

 

So the question is is Trubs as much of a slam-dunk, franchise-plus, all-pro prospect for decades as Gip believes? Or is he at best a 50/50 shot as most of the rest of the Trub optimists here believe? And which camp is the FO in?

 

If the former, then he's in the same top grouping as Garrett, and by virtue of the positional importance tie-breaker, you take him #1 overall.

 

If not, you don't.

 

And I am in Camp don't...

You obviously don't read my posts. I said that any player that we take at #1 overall is a 50/50 proposition.....including Trubisky...including Gayrett.

I do say that MT is as good a prospect that has come out in years....but he is still a prospect. I said that if you want a franchise QB you have to take a risk. What did you think I was talking about with those words: "take a risk". Of course its a risk.

 

I am the one that has tried to cool the jets on all the Gays for Gayrett who claim he is a no doubt sure fire Hall of Fame talent.

Well, so, theoretically were these guys:

1999 Tim Couch QB Kentucky Cleveland Browns

2000 Courtney Brown DE Penn State Cleveland Browns

2001 Michael Vick* QB Virginia Tech ]

2002 David Carr QB Fresno State Houston Texans

2003 Carson Palmer* QB USC Cincinnati Bengals

2004 Eli Manning*[A 13] QB Ole Miss San Diego Chargers

2005 Alex Smith* QB Utah San Francisco 49ers

2006 Mario Williams* DE North Carolina State Houston Texans

JaMarcus Russell QB LSU Oakland Raiders

2008 Jake Long* T Michigan Miami Dolphins

2009 Matthew Stafford* QB Georgia Detroit Lions

2010Sam Bradford QB Oklahoma St. Louis Rams

2011 Cam Newton* QB Auburn Carolina Panthers

2012 Andrew Luck* QB Stanford Indianapolis Colts

2013 Eric Fisher T Central Michigan Kansas City Chiefs

2014 Jadeveon Clowney DE South Carolina Houston Texans

2015 Jameis Winston QB Florida State Tampa Bay Buccaneers

2016 Jared Goff QB California Los Angeles Rams

 

There is a mixed bag there.

All QBs certainly didn't live up to their #1 status. And, I would say that none of the DEs have lived up to their defensive status...so far. Maybe Clowney has a chance.

So taking the "sure fire" DE is no less risky than taking the "sure fire" QB.

 

Lets ask ourselves....of all the #1 overall draft picks listed above...how many at this point are in fact "Sure fire Hall of Fame" players.

 

I see exactly NONE. Eli is closest at this point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You obviously don't read my posts. I said that any player that we take at #1 overall is a 50/50 proposition.....including Trubisky...including Gayrett.

I do say that MT is as good a prospect that has come out in years....but he is still a prospect. I said that if you want a franchise QB you have to take a risk. What did you think I was talking about with those words: "take a risk". Of course its a risk.

 

I am the one that has tried to cool the jets on all the Gays for Gayrett who claim he is a no doubt sure fire Hall of Fame talent.

Well, so, theoretically were these guys:

1999 Tim Couch QB Kentucky Cleveland Browns

2000 Courtney Brown DE Penn State Cleveland Browns

2001 Michael Vick* QB Virginia Tech ]

2002 David Carr QB Fresno State Houston Texans

2003 Carson Palmer* QB USC Cincinnati Bengals

2004 Eli Manning*[A 13] QB Ole Miss San Diego Chargers

2005 Alex Smith* QB Utah San Francisco 49ers

2006 Mario Williams* DE North Carolina State Houston Texans

JaMarcus Russell QB LSU Oakland Raiders

2008 Jake Long* T Michigan Miami Dolphins

2009 Matthew Stafford* QB Georgia Detroit Lions

2010Sam Bradford QB Oklahoma St. Louis Rams

2011 Cam Newton* QB Auburn Carolina Panthers

2012 Andrew Luck* QB Stanford Indianapolis Colts

2013 Eric Fisher T Central Michigan Kansas City Chiefs

2014 Jadeveon Clowney DE South Carolina Houston Texans

2015 Jameis Winston QB Florida State Tampa Bay Buccaneers

2016 Jared Goff QB California Los Angeles Rams

 

There is a mixed bag there.

All QBs certainly didn't live up to their #1 status. And, I would say that none of the DEs have lived up to their defensive status...so far. Maybe Clowney has a chance.

So taking the "sure fire" DE is no less risky than taking the "sure fire" QB.

 

Lets ask ourselves....of all the #1 overall draft picks listed above...how many at this point are in fact "Sure fire Hall of Fame" players.

 

I see exactly NONE. Eli is closest at this point.

 

 

Got it, so we shouldn't take a QB at #1 because, as you've pointed out, none of them are surefire Hall of Famers. We can just grab one at #12 or later, since it's at best a 50/50 shot anyway.

 

Glad to see you jumped over to the logical camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Got it, so we shouldn't take a QB at #1 because, as you've pointed out, none of them are surefire Hall of Famers. We can just grab one at #12 or later, since it's at best a 50/50 shot anyway.

 

Glad to see you jumped over to the logical camp.

Again....you are either being completely moronic...or simply perverse. EVERY position you take.....QB, DE, OT, ....is a risk. So we should not take a DE either....by YOUR logic.

Half the QBs were flops, half the OTs were flops, half the DEs were flops.

 

So....maybe we should just trade down.

 

I am still not necessarily opposed to doing a trade down: #1 to the Tits for #5 and #18?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of u expecting 4 sacks out of garett his first game need to step back a moment. He is not as of now as NFL ready as mack or bosa were....but his ceiling is potentially higher. We have nassib and ogbah whom im expecting to do the heavy lifting early on and garett comes in on pass rushing downs. And i want that to go on for awhile. I dont want garett thrown in there on day one and gets himself in an awkward pile and boom something blows out.

 

The nfl game is different than college, the physics is different. Those situations u could throw urself into in college will get u fucked up in the nfl. They teach different footwork to the guys on tjeblines for that reason so that their knees are less exposed. This takes time to learn.

 

Im not going to be calling garett a bust mudeay through next seadon when he may only have a sack or two. That way if he exceeds that expectation ill be pleasantly surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh god no not again. We need to stockpile elite talent, trading down never works for us. Trading down cost is mack and bosa.....just contemplate for a moment either of those two, or both (delirious thoughts), being on the browns?

Bosa was gone we never had a chance of getting him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again....you are either being completely moronic...or simply perverse. EVERY position you take.....QB, DE, OT, ....is a risk. So we should not take a DE either....by YOUR logic.

Half the QBs were flops, half the OTs were flops, half the DEs were flops.

 

So....maybe we should just trade down.

 

I am still not necessarily opposed to doing a trade down: #1 to the Tits for #5 and #18?

 

 

If the odds are 50/50 regardless of position, why would you not take the highest rated player regardless of position?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If the odds are 50/50 regardless of position, why would you not take the highest rated player regardless of position?

 

Because this is the Browns. It's what they do....................................Q the chainsaw ad (Are you crazy, not the running car!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true. The Browns had the #2 pick. Could have picked him. They traded #2 to the Eagles. Then SD took Bosa with pick #3.

Yes, they could have had Bosa with pick #2...which IS what I wanted.

Assumed he meant on draft night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If the odds are 50/50 regardless of position, why would you not take the highest rated player regardless of position?

Well, that is one approach....but it is an approach that is not often followed. Perhaps there have been years when the highest rated player was an OG, or an OC, or a DB, or a TE

But, in the history of the NFL ..and AFL draft since 1936:

A. NO OG has ever been taken #1.

B. 1 OC was: Ki Aldrich in 1939,

C. 1 DB was: Gary Glick in 1956.

D. 1 TE was: Billy Cannon 1960

E. 3 DTs

F. 4 OTs

G. 5 WRs

H. 11 DEs

I. 22 RBs (none since 1995...Kijana Carter was the last)

J. 34 QBs

 

So, obviously, the QB position is considered the most critical....and over 3 times as many QBs than DEs have been taken #1.

If there IS a reason to go against the "best rated player" it is to get a QB.

You can believe in that philosophy or not...but the fact is whether YOU do or don't....NFL teams do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assumed he meant on draft night.

Not sure why that matters. On draft night they had the 15th pick. And they made the trade only a day or two earlier, no?

Point is...unlike what TCPO advocates the Browns did NOT elect to select the highest rated player when they basically had to chance to do so.

If I recall correctly, Bosa's "rating/grade" was much higher essentially than either of the QBs.

 

I mean, it is hindsight, but we should have gone for the DE last year (as I think Bosa was a better prospect than Garrett), and we shoulda gone QB this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I mean, it is hindsight, but we should have gone for the DE last year (as I think Bosa was a better prospect than Garrett), and we shoulda gone QB this year.

 

ikr? sigh. If only we had gotten Marrone or another 4-3 guy instead of Horton. I believe the belief in Berea that Bosa was not suited to the 3-4 was the reason they balked on him. But then again Pettine Balked on Mack who might could very well be in the hall of fame at 3 different positions by the time it's his turn. Why he wasn't seen as a fit for the 3-4 is beyond me too. Only in Cleveland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So can any of you unbiased A&M (oxymoron?) ;) guys give your honest thoughts on Garrett being the next Khalil Mack vs the next Mingo? I haven't seen him play a snap, but hearing things from some of the 'experts' in the media (oxymoron?) about him disappearing against top talent has me concerned.

 

Just looking for someone who has watched him play multiple games and can give an honest good vs bad scouting opinion, as well as your overall prediction, whether he's a Brown or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why that matters. On draft night they had the 15th pick. And they made the trade only a day or two earlier, no?

Point is...unlike what TCPO advocates the Browns did NOT elect to select the highest rated player when they basically had to chance to do so.

If I recall correctly, Bosa's "rating/grade" was much higher essentially than either of the QBs.

 

I mean, it is hindsight, but we should have gone for the DE last year (as I think Bosa was a better prospect than Garrett), and we shoulda gone QB this year.

So you think Bosa was a better prospect than Garrett, despite the fact that Garrett's prospect score is higher?

 

But I thought the NFL prospect score was all that matters...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So can any of you unbiased A&M (oxymoron?) ;) guys give your honest thoughts on Garrett being the next Khalil Mack vs the next Mingo? I haven't seen him play a snap, but hearing things from some of the 'experts' in the media (oxymoron?) about him disappearing against top talent has me concerned.

 

Just looking for someone who has watched him play multiple games and can give an honest good vs bad scouting opinion, as well as your overall prediction, whether he's a Brown or not.

 

I only watched 3 A&M games last year, and the guy is strong and athletic as hell.

 

But just because you're good in college, doesn't always carry over into the NFL.

 

If the Browns go defense on the first pick I hope it's Garrett.

 

I just hope he doesn't turn into another FRAB (First Round Aggie Bust).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...