Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The newsiest trend in the League today is:

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Joey_Potter View Post
    Sorry but I have no choice but to disagree about one thing here. Ryan Tucker Jumped off sides more than the amount of games he played costing the Browns points many times. I wanted to slam him in the head with a beer bottle when he had 4 in one half one game. But the rest I agree with.
    Well why did the Coaching staff when reevaluating the OL say he graded higher then anyone of the starters in 2007. Tucker gives the Browns attitude on the OL and what he brings to the table far out ways his few mistakes.
    Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

    Comment


    • #32
      Well, being that I'm a Bears fan, here's to hoping one of the top three OT's are still on the board at 14.

      Looking at it from an unbiased viewpoint though, drafting OL's high isn't a bad "trend" to copy. In my opinion, OT, DT, QB, and RB are the only positions worthy of a top 5 pick.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by PuppyPuncher View Post
        Because Samuel wanted 10 million a year. TEN MILLION A YEAR. I don't think they could afford it.
        Like I said Bill does not like to pay a lot of money for his CB's
        Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

        Comment


        • #34
          Not that I agree with this or disagree, but a few years ago i sat next to an NFL scout on a plane trip. He said that the conventional wisdom in the league is to never draft an OL high unless he is an "enormous" talent.

          Reason being that once you get below that Joe Thomas, Jake Long level the differences are not that great, an OL is only 1 person in a group of 5, and a satisfactory person can be gotten in the lower rounds. Good offensive lines are only good when they function as a 5 man unit (6 if you count the TE), not as good individuals.

          He says that you use your high picks on people who can make impacts right away as individuals, the so called skill positions.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by animal52 View Post
            Not that I agree with this or disagree, but a few years ago i sat next to an NFL scout on a plane trip. He said that the conventional wisdom in the league is to never draft an OL high unless he is an "enormous" talent.

            Reason being that once you get below that Joe Thomas, Jake Long level the differences are not that great, an OL is only 1 person in a group of 5, and a satisfactory person can be gotten in the lower rounds. Good offensive lines are only good when they function as a 5 man unit (6 if you count the TE), not as good individuals.

            He says that you use your high picks on people who can make impacts right away as individuals, the so called skill positions.
            You pretty much summed up my whole point of this thread. When you are looking at a blue chip talent you don’t reach for a red chip prospect even with a position of need. They still have to be BPA….you don’t draft a 4-3 DE if you run the 3-4 unless he can play OLB, you then look at the next player on your value board. That’s conventional wisdom.
            Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

            Comment


            • #36
              yeah i'm with Matt. NE's OL was a strong point for them all season. the giants had one of the few DLs that could mess with them. also i think the Giants outplayed them... obviously. that doesnt mean that NE freaks and goes OL. none of their current OL were taken in the first so they have to believe they can find some competition in a later round.

              as for OTs i could actually see them dropping a little more than expected because of the depth this year. teams who arent desperate know that they can get good talent in the 2nd so they'll go for some flashier picks. thats all

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by bufordht View Post
                yeah i'm with Matt. NE's OL was a strong point for them all season. the giants had one of the few DLs that could mess with them. also i think the Giants outplayed them... obviously. that doesnt mean that NE freaks and goes OL. none of their current OL were taken in the first so they have to believe they can find some competition in a later round.

                as for OTs i could actually see them dropping a little more than expected because of the depth this year. teams who arent desperate know that they can get good talent in the 2nd so they'll go for some flashier picks. thats all
                Wrong….Logan Mankins was a 1st round pick for the Patriots and they don’t have a second round selection.
                Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by FL_Dawg View Post
                  Wrong….Logan Mankins was a 1st round pick for the Patriots and they don’t have a second round selection.
                  Why don't the Pats have their second round selection?
                  2014-2015 Kentucky Wildcats (38-1)

                  Congrats to Wisconsin. Even more congrats to UK haters.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Matt McGuire View Post
                    Why don't the Pats have their second round selection?
                    Okay they do the 61st pick. who at 61 would be an up grade?
                    Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      roy sheuning (however you spell it) at guard would be better than Stephan Neal.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Matt McGuire View Post
                        Why don't the Pats have their second round selection?
                        Bill Belichick is meticulously anal when he knows he has a chink in his armor. He has signed two CB’s, nothing to write home about, but as I have stated before he typically thinks he can get more for less on that side of the ball and doesn’t feel he needs a shout down corner on his defense. I think he would go LB with the 7th pick before he takes a CB that high. He likes to use his high picks on the DL and get veteran LB’s threw FA if given the choice.
                        Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by huskers3333 View Post
                          roy sheuning (however you spell it) at guard would be better than Stephan Neal.
                          yes he might be a good pick, Stephan Neal has served them well, but he is getting old and is not a good pass blocker anyway. I just think if Branden Albert is on the board and he might not be. they will take him. Branden Albert
                          Is a special talent and is a highly rated OL prospect, so It’s not like they would be getting a bum. I think there will be better value with a CB with the 61st pick then the OL.
                          Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Bill Belicheck doesn't feel he needs a shut down corner?

                            So he wants the offensive WRs to be wide open?

                            lol saying you don't want a shut down corner is like saying you don't want a HOF quarterback.

                            Also the value of corners at #7 is huge (especially with McKelvin who fits the pats scheme).

                            I don't see any chance a team drafts a guard at No. 7, especially in the Pats pass-heavy offense.
                            2014-2015 Kentucky Wildcats (38-1)

                            Congrats to Wisconsin. Even more congrats to UK haters.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Matt McGuire View Post
                              Bill Belicheck doesn't feel he needs a shut down corner?

                              So he wants the offensive WRs to be wide open?

                              lol saying you don't want a shut down corner is like saying you don't want a HOF quarterback.

                              Also the value of corners at #7 is huge (especially with McKelvin who fits the pats scheme).

                              I don't see any chance a team drafts a guard at No. 7, especially in the Pats pass-heavy offense.
                              i don't think they'll draft albert either, but what does the pass heavy offense have to do with anything?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Matt McGuire View Post
                                Bill Belicheck doesn't feel he needs a shut down corner?

                                So he wants the offensive WRs to be wide open?

                                lol saying you don't want a shut down corner is like saying you don't want a HOF quarterback.

                                Also the value of corners at #7 is huge (especially with McKelvin who fits the pats scheme).

                                I don't see any chance a team drafts a guard at No. 7, especially in the Pats pass-heavy offense.
                                LOL…… well what about protecting their HOF QB? And no he uses mostly zone coverage’s in his secondary so he thinks he can protect his secondary with a good DL and a good pass rush. thats where he puts his money on defense.
                                Browns fan since 1961.....(semper-fi)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X