Tour2ma Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Except...of course.....Trubisky is graded out far, far ahead of where Gabbert was graded. You also don't pass on a position of need just because some fan on a chat board thinks he knows more than the guys doing the picks. (though....admittedly.....a lot of us could have done better...If I had been drafting last year we would have had probably Bosa and Josh Doctson....or maybe Lynch) What grades are those, Gip? Link? Just as you don't elevate a position of need because some fan on a chat board has read a couple headlines and thinks he knows what our FO is thinking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 ND has been a hot mess in 2016. The Irish cannot run and they cannot stop the run. Yet statistically Kizer has held up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Watched 7 of Kiser's games: Pros: strong arm, hits intermediate routes with zip, athletic, good size Cons: holds onto the ball too long, has a slow throwing motion, no touch-especially on the deep ball, stares down 1 receiver, seems to trust his legs more than his arm, inconsistent accuracy Overall, I do NOT see 1st round talent with Kiser. Just what I see. He is a read-option QB and does less with a better o-line than Turbisky. I see a developmental 2nd-4rd round guy who could become a starter with a few years sitting behind a vet QB- maybe Arizona or New Orleans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 ND has been a hot mess in 2016. The Irish cannot run and they cannot stop the run. Yet statistically Kizer has held up. Wasn't that Texas Tech for like....a bagillion years? And Wazzou now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Wasn't that Texas Tech for like....a bagillion years? And Wazzou now? No, Tech didn't try to run. Can't speak for the Cougs. Leech wasn't a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 What grades are those, Gip? Link? Just as you don't elevate a position of need because some fan on a chat board has read a couple headlines and thinks he knows what our FO is thinking... Not to worry. Mel Kiper and the Gang will have plenty of guys elevated far beyond their usefulness. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Watched 7 of Kiser's games: Which games from what year? Wasn't that Texas Tech for like....a bagillion years? And Wazzou now? Dunno... also unknown (or at least undected) is your point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 What grades are those, Gip? Link? Just as you don't elevate a position of need because some fan on a chat board has read a couple headlines and thinks he knows what our FO is thinking... Grading, ranking. Perhaps I am using the terms interchangeably. I am not sure where you would get anything that would somehow be a separate "grade" for QBs. Is there a PFF type service out there? And I think in your last sentence you have gotten yourself completely lost: A. Are you saying that the QB position does NOT hold an elevated status as a position of need for this team? B. Are you saying that we should completely discount anything that is reported out of the Browns FO? (you may perhaps be right about this.....but you also seem to be implying that you have some source....some direct contact that gives you more knowledge about what the Browns FO is thinking than the reporters who cover the team every day. So? What is this source? Who is your Deep Throat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Which games from what year? Dunno... also unknown (or at least undected) is your point... Point being, college offenses are still able to operate and QB's are able to produce numbers without anything resembling a running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Ah... got it... Grading, ranking. Perhaps I am using the terms interchangeably. I am not sure where you would get anything that would somehow be a separate "grade" for QBs. Is there a PFF type service out there? And I think in your last sentence you have gotten yourself completely lost: A. Are you saying that the QB position does NOT hold an elevated status as a position of need for this team? B. Are you saying that we should completely discount anything that is reported out of the Browns FO? (you may perhaps be right about this.....but you also seem to be implying that you have some source....some direct contact that gives you more knowledge about what the Browns FO is thinking than the reporters who cover the team every day. So? What is this source? Who is your Deep Throat? No... no source. Just discounting your reporting... As for QB need... absolutely it's a need. I do not see franchise level skill and dependability in a single QB on our sideline. I arrived at this Board touting, "You always have to be looking for your next QB," and I've parleyed that approach into a few winning choices over the years. But I have never let "need" blind me to the reality of the options out there... no matter how great the need may appear to be because of its magnification thru the prism of the "elevated" value/importance of the position. And that's what people are now doing... as usual. What is different is how openly they are doing it. I may yet end up there with them on Mitchy-poo... but there has to be a lot of great tape on that road not yet traveled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 Ah... got it... No... no source. Just discounting your reporting... There are massive number of rankings sources. If YOU think you know of one that does "grading"...again please share. As for QB need... absolutely it's a need. I do not see franchise level skill and dependability in a single QB on our sideline. I arrived at this Board touting, "You always have to be looking for your next QB," and I've parleyed that approach into a few winning choices over the years. But I have never let "need" blind me to the reality of the options out there... no matter how great the need may appear to be because of its magnification thru the prism of the "elevated" value/importance of the position. And that's what people are now doing... as usual. What is different is how openly they are doing it. Well, if you think you have prioritized the needs of this team...again, share it. I may yet end up there with them on Mitchy-poo... but there has to be a lot of great tape on that road not yet traveled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 PFF grades collegiate players... meant to mention that earlier. I have no issue with various rankings, however. Draft Scouts, who CBS gets their rankings from, is pretty good in my experience and since they rank overall as well as by position, grades can be easily inferred. But the problem is their 2017 list is incomplete at present because they do not inject underclassmen until they declare. So until they do, I rarely look at their work. As for prioritizing our needs? So far I have LT at the bottom and NT just above LT. Will update later... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 At the moment I would rank the two most important positions of need as edge rusher (so the D gets off the field and the DBs function better) and Center (so the QB's avoid what we saw this year so far, massive casualties and no time to find receivers). QB is 3rd because no use ruining another with such a weak OL. Plus I'd like to see what Kessler can do without having to watch defenders coming to deliver the next blow in 2 seconds or less. I still have that old school mentality, D's win Superbowls and Lines win football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 At the moment I would rank the two most important positions of need as edge rusher (so the D gets off the field and the DBs function better) and Center (so the QB's avoid what we saw this year so far, massive casualties and no time to find receivers). QB is 3rd because no use ruining another with such a weak OL. Plus I'd like to see what Kessler can do without having to watch defenders coming to deliver the next blow in 2 seconds or less. I still have that old school mentality, D's win Superbowls and Lines win football. I struggle to vastly disagree but think a free safety is as big a need as center almost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I think we should just try to sign one.....a C.....if at all possible.... This OL thing is really hurting us...preventing our run game from success....killing our QB's....etc.....and it's been several years of this.....so would prefer to plug a "proven" someone in, as opposed to drafting another prospect and enduring another year(or more) of hoping they develop..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I think we should just try to sign one.....a C.....if at all possible.... This OL thing is really hurting us...preventing our run game from success....killing our QB's....etc.....and it's been several years of this.....so would prefer to plug a "proven" someone in, as opposed to drafting another prospect and enduring another year(or more) of hoping they develop..... I can't disagree with that Mud. Pay "The Man". Anyone up in the FA market this year? Edit-found this. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/center/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 None of those names leap out, maybe Schwenke? The ones above are probably too old for our plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 None of those names leap out, maybe Schwenke? The ones above are probably too old for our plan. Sign a vet and draft a kid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Could be. But when considering drafting a kid and the inherently unknown aspect of that, we also need to consider the guy on our IR, Reiter, who is also an unknown but clearly has something about him and doesn't cost a draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Could be. But when considering drafting a kid and the inherently unknown aspect of that, we also need to consider the guy on our IR, Reiter, who is also an unknown but clearly has something about him and doesn't cost a draft pick. I think the knock mentioned before is that Reiter appeared to be performing well but it was a limited sample size due to the injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 I think the knock mentioned before is that Reiter appeared to be performing well but it was a limited sample size due to the injury. Of course. But from at least one aspect, he is essentially a draft pick that the browns get to work with from now until next season, not just from march to next season. Basically, as risky as it is to go in to the season with a (for example) third round rookie at center, it's no riskier to do so with a guy like Reiter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Of course. But from at least one aspect, he is essentially a draft pick that the browns get to work with from now until next season, not just from march to next season. Basically, as risky as it is to go in to the season with a (for example) third round rookie at center, it's no riskier to do so with a guy like Reiter. What kind of prospects are out there at center going into this draft? *paging Tour* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Couple of decent ones including from LSU and OSU. But they're top 50 picks easily, as it stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 What kind of prospects are out there at center going into this draft? *paging Tour* ** beep beep beep beep** "Your call cannot be competed as dialed. Please hang up and try again." If you expand Ag's sporttrac search to RFA Centers, not much more shows up... mostly back ups. Big name Centers are not common... Mack, the brothers Pouncey, the one Seattle traded away... a couple years ago the younger Martin brother... In the draft they come from all positions... Glasgow moved from OG to C in KC and stepped right into a starting job. So some vision is required... and a little tape at the position, like Glasgow had, doesn't hurt.... then again... *sigh*... Cam had "a little" tape, too. I would point out that Greco did well filling in at C for us each of the past 3 years. His injury now raises some uncertainty, but he's still a viable enough alternative to allow us to fish a little and draft a promising OG (or two) investing a Day 2 and a Day 3 pick. Also allows us to peruse the OG FAs... some interesting names there... a couple of which TCPO mentioned in his "if I were GM" post last week... http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/guard/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Couple of decent ones including from LSU and OSU. But they're top 50 picks easily, as it stands. I'd target Pocic of LSU as one of those 2nd rounders if we don't go FA route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Tour - following the same logic, having seen Pasztor play well at guard allows us to look at right tackle prospects as well, and shuffle them both (Paz and Greco) inside one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Absolutely, Chris... however the board falls, if the next OL prospect is an OT, go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 PFF grades collegiate players... meant to mention that earlier. I have no issue with various rankings, however. Draft Scouts, who CBS gets their rankings from, is pretty good in my experience and since they rank overall as well as by position, grades can be easily inferred. But the problem is their 2017 list is incomplete at present because they do not inject underclassmen until they declare. So until they do, I rarely look at their work. As for prioritizing our needs? So far I have LT at the bottom and NT just above LT. Will update later... Except Trubisky IS ranked by CBS. Hell, Peppers, a 3rd year sophomore is listed: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings Allen, Garrett and Peppers are 1,2,3,...then Trubisky 4th. But, hell, Peppers, at 207 has been playing LB for UM...he ain't playing that in the pros, and even our UM denizen has disparaged Peppers as a DB (but we could use his return skills). So, the me, the question will be: do we take the QB (I vote yes)...or do we take one of the defenders. Hard choice....given our needs. But I go for the franchise QB. How often do we get the chance to get a franchise QB with the #1 pick. We took Couch, but never supported him. I think this FO will do better protecting MT if he is taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 At the moment I would rank the two most important positions of need as edge rusher (so the D gets off the field and the DBs function better) and Center (so the QB's avoid what we saw this year so far, massive casualties and no time to find receivers). QB is 3rd because no use ruining another with such a weak OL. Plus I'd like to see what Kessler can do without having to watch defenders coming to deliver the next blow in 2 seconds or less. I still have that old school mentality, D's win Superbowls and Lines win football. While I agree somewhat.....I think franchise QBs win Superbowls more often than great Ds.....not that you don't need both. There are outliers: last year, 2005 Steelers, 2000 Ravens. The thing is this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 Absolutely, Chris... however the board falls, if the next OL prospect is an OT, go for it. Ramczyk Wisconsin? We have done OK going for Wisc. OTs. Maybe even as high as our second 1st rounder. I see where he may be shooting up the boards. He was at mid 2d, now late first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.