Sideline Scouting Seven Round Mock

[SidelineScouting]

See... there's my issue. You can't agree that Wright is a 2nd tier WR yet hold that he is a freak and/ or a stud.

 

Our "tier" system must be different. I consider the first tier like the Calvin/Andre Johnson's of the world. Second tier would be the Greg Jennings, Steve Smith, Roddy White's of the world. Second tier is not a bad thing.

[SidelineScouting]

Overall, I think you need a new hobby. And if this is your job, you should quit and get one you are good at.

 

Zombo

 

What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.

[Harry Buffalo]

What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.

 

I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.

 

I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.

 

I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.

 

Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).

[Zombo]

What kind words. Please elaborate on your issues.

 

Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.

 

Zombo

[SidelineScouting]

Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.

 

Zombo

 

Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.

[SidelineScouting]

I can. Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.

 

I will agree with the Wright pick. Wright because Heckert goes more off of game tape than combine numbers, meaning that he is goig to see Wright's game day speed is good and Hill's combine numbers don't necessarily make him a good WR. But then you have us taking Martin when Miller, the clear cut #2 RB in the draft, doesn't go until much later. I don't know how you justify that.

 

I agree with Curry if he falls to the 3rd, but I also think Nick Perry DE USC is a very real option if he is still there for us at #22. After I can't say much except for the TE from MSU. If we take any TE in the draft it is going to be the guy from Louisiana Lafayette. We have too many TE that our FO actually believe in for them to spend any pick on a TE other than him who they have seen at his pro day and invited for a visit.

 

Really your #4 and #37 picks are the head scratchers, the ones that show you are A: eating into the stupid media hype called McShay and B: are literally unaware of some of the top guys talents (ie the Martin over Miller pick).

 

I actually really like Lamar Miller. I think Martin, Miller, and David Wilson are all on the exact same level. I have hard time doing my RB rankings because they're so close. Right now though I have the rankings as Martin, Wilson, and then Miller. The reasoning is because Martin is a Ray Rice type of player who can carry the load and is versatile in the passing game. He's a strong guy with surprising quickness. Wilson is a bit smaller but much more explosive. Lamar Miller was #2 on my rankings for most of the year, I love his style and think he can be a second round steal; however, Miller battled a shoulder injury all year and will be having surgery after the draft. So that little bit of a concern bumped him below Martin and Miller who are both (relatively) healthy. But all three are great players.

 

Media hype has nothing to do with my rankings. I don't really follow McShay or Kiper's rankings, I have my own that I keep all season. Kiper today has AJ Jenkins as an early second round pick. I don't have him in my top 100, and won't be putting him in.

 

Edit: Not sure where you get that Lamar Miller is the clear cut #2 RB in this draft. Most of the people I talk to don't have him at #2. I know a few draft guys I chat with have Chris Polk at #2. With running backs it's more about fit than anything when you have guys on a similar tier. Blocking schemes, current personnel, etc.

[Mark O]

Only an idiot would think Tannehill is a good pick at #4. H&H are looking at him to have knowledge on him in case teams come calling. Tannehill is a late 1st/early 2nd round talent at best and all the "experts" in the media are hyping him because that is what you do with QB's now a days. I have also read the same stupid reports saying that Kirk Cousins is going to make a great franchise QB. HA!!! You just can not justify drafting a guy who is litterally going to need to sit for at least a year when 1: There are still talents like Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne still on the board and 2: the 3 top QB's who are coming out next season are better than him.

 

Zombo

 

 

I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.

 

I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.

[SidelineScouting]

I am by far an expert but I'll take Mike Mayocks opinion....he said Tannehill is a great prospect and will be a franchise QB, but he also will need to sit for at least 1 year before he's ready becuase of a lack of experience playing QB.

 

I want no part of a guy at #4 that isn't going to contribute this year. Give me Richardson or Blackmon, at least they will be on the field this year.

 

Honest question/Devil's advocate: Why does it matter if he doesn't contribute this year if you feel that he can be a franchise quarterback? If Colt McCoy is manning the quarterback position, you're pretty mush setting your win cap at six or seven. If you take Richardson, that's one year and 250 carries added to his career total on a (very) likely non-playoff team. Considering most runners these days only last a few years, wouldn't adding that future franchise quarterback be in the best interest of the organization if the goal is to win games? Now, as I said, I'd draft Richardson because he's BPA. But curious to hear your thoughts on that.

[Zombo]

Close mindedness like this on prospects and strategies is why I can't debate with you. Teams don't even listen to media hype, they have their own scouting reports and people that they look to for personnel decisions. The fact that ESPN is hyping up Tannehill has nothing to do with the Browns' possible interest in him. Tannehill is a better prospect than you're giving him credit for. I'm not a Cousins fan, he'll probably go second round, but he's not starting material. I'm on record as saying that if I were the GM, I would take Richardson. He's the BPA, which is the strategy I like to go by. However, it's not unfathomable that the Browns would take Tannehill. It's a mock draft, we try to have fun with it. The selection of Tannehill isn't as crazy as you make it sound. I wouldn't do it, but I can see it happening, so we went with it.

 

It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.

 

If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.

 

Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.

 

BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.

 

You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.

 

Z

[Mark O]

I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?

[SidelineScouting]

It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.

 

If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.

 

Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.

 

BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.

 

You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.

 

Z

 

I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.

 

No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?

[SidelineScouting]

I think we have a team that has so many holes, that when you draft #4 overall and there are that many playmakers available, you have to take one that can come right in and make a difference. Doesn't matter if its Richardson, Blackmon or Claiborne. Any one of those 3 make the Browns better in 2012. Tannehill might be the next Dan Marino, but if he's sitting on his ass on the bench, what good is he?

 

Good response. IMO, he'd only sit on the bench for a season, so it's good for the next decade after that. It's a move for the future. And the Browns aren't really in the position to compete next year no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the situation. but I can understand why a fan base would want a playmaker who can come in and have a difference. Can't be fun watching the current offense that the front office has been trotting out there.

[Harry Buffalo]

It's not going to happen, I'm not close minded, I just know the Browns better than you and absolutely know they will not take Tannehill at four.

 

If you are going to come to our board and post a mock at least put some thought into it from the Browns point of view, the Browns would not spend the fourth pick in the draft on such a questionable prospect. It's just not going to happen.

 

Your mock is a lazy man's mock, no attempt to scout the guys making the picks and not just the picks.

 

BTW, just for shits and giggles, I copied Harry Buffalo's response verbatim and you never noticed, you responded to both of them with totally different tones.

 

You're weak, lazy and you bore me ... other than that your mock sucked.

 

Z

 

Zing!

[Mark O]

A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.

[SidelineScouting]

Zing!

 

Not really a zing. I don't take it personally. I do this for a living. All fans have their opinions.

[Zombo]

I did notice. I just responded to them both because you're two different people. Responded to you on the part that you copied. Responded to him on the whole post.

 

No attempt to scout the prospects? I watch games all year, I attend post-season all-star games, speak with agents and scouts. Not sure what you're getting at. You do more than that?

 

I said no attempt to scout the guys making the picks, I.e. Heckert & Holmgren ... no way do they spend 4 overall on such a questionable prospect. They either get a surefire Top 5 quality starter or they trade out of there ... they would never take Tannehill at 4 ... Heckert likes to bring in guys that start right away and Holmgren isn't going to spend that high of a pick on a QB project ... he just isn't.

 

Z

[SidelineScouting]

A year is one year too long. There are always QB's to pick. RGIII wasn't on the radar before the season started and now he's the #2 pick in the draft. I'd rather run Colt out there another year with Richardson or Blackmon to help, or just build a fantastic defense with Claiborne and worry about offense later. But I don't pick a guy at #4 who can't help this year. Mid to late 1st round for a project and I wouldn't be as opposed to it, just not at #4.

 

That's not really true. RG3 was a top 5 pick back in October... and was a "future first round pick" two years ago before his bad injury. It's really hard to find quarterbacks. There's really only 10-12 QBs in the world that make teams feel comfortable going into the playoffs. If you think you found a guy who can enter that top grouping, then you make the move to get him.

 

But I understand not wanting to see your #4 pick on the bench in year one. I think it's a more probable scenario than some people on this board are willing to recognize. But it makes sense why you'd rather take Richardson.

[Mark O]

I'd rather take anyone at 4 other than Tannehill. Blackmon would be fine and so would Claiborne. I don't want a project with a top 5 draft pick.

[SidelineScouting]

I'd rather take anyone at 4 other than Tannehill. Blackmon would be fine and so would Claiborne. I don't want a project with a top 5 draft pick.

 

The thing with Tannehill is that he's not a "project" in the same way that a guy like John Skelton is/was a project. He's raw, but not as raw as most think he is. People harp on the "converted WR" thing too much. He was a quarterback in high school and a quarterback to start his career at Texas A&M. He converted to WR for one season because Jerrod Johnson was doing so well and it didn't look like Tannehill was going to get playing time. Johnson tore a bicep and Tannehill started and never gave up the job.

 

He has all of the tools and should be a good NFL quarterback. But he's just not a guy I'd want to start in year one. Give him a year to learn the offense, get acclimated with the speed of the NFL. I felt the same way about Blaine Gabbert last year. Give that guy a year on the bench to learn and he can be great. But if you throw him to the wolves, you run the risk of ruining him because he doesn't develop any confidence.

 

This is what I just said on Twitter and I wanted to bring it here: The longer I do this, the more I start to understand why teams reach for QBs. If you think a guy can be your franchise guy, you take him. Quarterbacks affect the win column infinitely more than any other position. If you think a guy can do it, reach for him and coach him. But on the other hand, you have to believe said player can be THAT guy. Don't take a QB just to take a QB.

 

 

I understand your position on the matter. But just wanted to clarify about my opinion on Tannehill being a "project". There's a lot of project quarterbacks out there. Tannehill isn't like them, he's just a guy you wouldn't want to throw to the wolves in year one.

[calfoxwc]

The big question is simply this:

 

Can the Browns afford to give up an immediate, dynamic impact player in the first few draft picks, because

 

they drafted a qb that may/could be an elite, starting qb in a few years?

 

I don't think so.

 

But I defer to the Browns coaches and FO.

[Canton Mike]

On further review- Tannehill @ #4 IMHO would be the biggest reach in the history of the first round. Much moreso than Gabbert or Ponder last year. Most Browns fans aren't buying into the ESPN hype machine. Six weeks ago the kid was low first round talent - at best- now fourth overall with Richardson, Claiborne, or Blackmon on the board? Please!!!

 

Suck it up this year with McCoy, get him some weapons, and if he flops, go for the franchise qb in 2013.

 

Agreed. I don't get the "desperation" attitude toward QBs in this year's draft. I agree we should take one somewhere, & I'll defer to Heckert on who & when, but Tannehill IS a project & that's not 4th pick material. I don't give a damn WHAT his upside is....Leak, Marinovich, Akili Smith & others all had GREAT upside, but the "down" got 'em. I see 3 slam dunks available, at least 2 of whom will be available to us at #4...Trich, kahlil, & Claiborne. We have so many holes to fill that we CANNOT afford a question mark at 4.....PERIOD!! That pick, barring unforeseen serious injury, MUST produce immediately.

Mike

[Unsympathetic]

Minnifield will be around on the last day of the draft - his pro day was horrible, 40 was in the mid-4.6 range and he didn't finish the rest of the workout. Maybe the knee surgery held him back, but I hope Cleveland picks him up with our first pick in round 5 - he won't go before then.

 

Throw out all those drafts from a month ago that had Cleveland picking him up in rd 3.

[The Gipper]

Minnifield will be around on the last day of the draft - his pro day was horrible, 40 was in the mid-4.6 range and he didn't finish the rest of the workout. Maybe the knee surgery held him back, but I hope Cleveland picks him up with our first pick in round 5 - he won't go before then.

 

Throw out all those drafts from a month ago that had Cleveland picking him up in rd 3.

 

What about the ones that had them picking him up with the #22 overall pick?

[Harry Buffalo]

Minnifield will be around on the last day of the draft - his pro day was horrible, 40 was in the mid-4.6 range and he didn't finish the rest of the workout. Maybe the knee surgery held him back, but I hope Cleveland picks him up with our first pick in round 5 - he won't go before then.

 

Throw out all those drafts from a month ago that had Cleveland picking him up in rd 3.

 

He fell to the 3rd round after his combine/pro day. He isn't going to make it into round 4 let alone 5.

[hoorta]

 

If you think a guy can be your franchise guy, you take him. Quarterbacks affect the win column infinitely more than any other position. If you think a guy can do it, reach for him and coach him. But on the other hand, you have to believe said player can be THAT guy. Don't take a QB just to take a QB.

 

I understand your position on the matter. But just wanted to clarify about my opinion on Tannehill being a "project". There's a lot of project quarterbacks out there. Tannehill isn't like them, he's just a guy you wouldn't want to throw to the wolves in year one.

 

Sorry- you don't draft a qb @ #4 overall to sit him for a year, doesn't happen anymore. Especially since in the Browns case guys like Richardson or Claiborne would be starters from the first day of training camp. This isn't Green Bay where Rodgers had the luxury of sitting behind Bret Favre for years. Tannehill is far, far from a sure-fire can't miss prospect. FWIW, Browns fans are damn tired of seeing high picks bust or underachieve.

 

Speaking of Rodgers, should Tannehill do a similar free fall down the board taking him @ #22 is another story. Though I'd still rather go franchise qb shopping in 2013, should McCoy flop this year.

[kamac19]

Sorry- you don't draft a qb @ #4 overall to sit him for a year, doesn't happen anymore. Especially since in the Browns case guys like Richardson or Claiborne would be starters from the first day of training camp. This isn't Green Bay where Rodgers had the luxury of sitting behind Bret Favre for years. Tannehill is far, far from a sure-fire can't miss prospect. FWIW, Browns fans are damn tired of seeing high picks bust or underachieve.

 

Speaking of Rodgers, should Tannehill do a similar free fall down the board taking him @ #22 is another story. Though I'd still rather go franchise qb shopping in 2013, should McCoy flop this year.

 

You have the same feeling as myself, sure H&H will pick a QB this year but I dont see it before the 3rd round at the earliest and if you look at some of the possible QB's that will be in next years Draft there are some big sized QB's likely to be declaring for the Draft in 2013 so going all out for the best available then might be the best way for the Browns to go, If again like everyone thinks McCoy doesnt come through.