Sam Darnold

[LionOfBuddha]

2 hours ago, jiggins7919 said:

If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis. 

Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously). 

We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd

[mjp28]

1 hour ago, LionOfBuddha said:

We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd

Drafting two quarterbacks would be the dumbest move in the NFL draft history, what a way to miss on #1 and 4.

I'd rather see them draft -0- and look at it next year......but I doubt that will happen. 

[Dutch Oven]

16 minutes ago, mjp28 said:

Drafting two quarterbacks would be the dumbest move in the NFL draft history, what a way to miss on #1 and 4.

I'd rather see them draft -0- and look at it next year......but I doubt that will happen. 

It's like you want this team to average .5 wins a season forever, mjp. 

[mjp28]

9 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

It's like you want this team to average .5 wins a season forever, mjp. 

Dag nabbit you youngsters don't know crap about football. (too ghool?)  Hey I've waited 54 years since I saw the last championship. 

Actually I don't see any near franchise quarterback material in this draft I'd go any number of other combinations and trade up for a late R1 or use the R2 picks for a project quarterback and go with the two recent adds. But that's just me. 

They aren't a quarterback away from competitive football......yet. GO BROWNS 2019.

[Browns1216]

 

5 hours ago, jiggins7919 said:

If we do take two quarterbacks, I think it will be at #1, and it will be later in the first round (if we trade up a tad) or with #33. I seriously doubt we'd go QB at 1 and 4, but I COULD see us grabbing one Lamar Jackson if he is available later in the first. I sincerely believe our interest in Lamar Jackson is real. Now, I don't think it's "#1 real" like some crazy writers recently said, but I KNOW Hue Jackson loves read-option wrinkles, and nobody runs that formation like Lamar. Even as a rookie, Lamar would let you create a small package of plays that revolve around the shotgun, read-option formation. Even if it's one formation that has 3-5 variations, it's still enough to warrant the opposing defensive coordinator spending some time preparing for it. Can you imagine getting inside the red zone and then trotting out Lamar Jackson? Perhaps not the red zone, but more like inside the 10. He'd be a nightmare. And it'd be a great way to get him just a little experience on a weekly basis. 

Do I think we'll do it? Not really. But think about this....if we make a trade with Buffalo and move down to 12 and 22 (after presumably taking a QB at 1), then it's possible Lamar plops into our laps at 22. We could theoretically draft a QB at 1, take a CB/S at 12, Lamar at 22, and then play around with the other picks Buffalo would most certainly give up to move up to 4. That would give us the flexibility to move back into the first round to basically guarantee we'd get the RB of our choice (other than Saquon, obviously). 

i like the way you  think:  trade down and nab another QB with the #22 pick!  drafting QBs at #22 is a Browns tradition, and Lamar at #22 would fit perfectly.

[Tour2ma]

I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.

The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.

And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?

[Orion]

If any QB just seems to 'fit' being a Cleveland Browns QB it's Sam Darnold.  Tough lookin'...not the absolute perfect throwing motion...but gets the job done.  - Just ask Rosen's coach.

[mjp28]

1 hour ago, Tour2ma said:

I've said it before... I can honestly see taking QBs at 1 and 4. If the mission, the main mission if to find our future franchise QB and the right remaining QB presents himself at #4, I'd do it.

The "too many holes" argument doesn't carry weight with me because as long as QB is one of those holes, then the rest don't matter.

And when you additionally consider that we aren't going to fill all the holes in this draft anyway... what does one more matter?

I agree that a possible franchise quarterback would be fantastic especially with the #1 and/or #4 picks which they may not have in 2019 I just don't see any of the top 4 or 5 as worthy of a top pick -but- since the BROWNS can not get a true blue chip FA quarterback they must go ahead and pick one and hope he develops into a starter in the coming year(s).

And yes they definitely have holes but also have some near unprecedented draft pick positions to get some starters in the coming year. 

So far their offseason moves have been very encouraging. 

[Tour2ma]

9 hours ago, mjp28 said:

but- since the BROWNS can not get a true blue chip FA quarterback they must go ahead and pick one and hope he develops into a starter in the coming year(s).

Not hard to read that as a two-pick endorsement.

[Westside Steve]

36 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Not hard to read that as a two-pick endorsement.

Tim Couch was a blue chip Prospect.

WSS

[DieHardBrownsFan]

With a team thrown together of hasbeens and reprobates.  

[Tour2ma]

Also was not a FA...

[LondonBrown]

As soon as Tyrod went down (he will) then both the QB's taken at #1 and #4 would be chopped and changed quarter after quarter by the moron we have at HC.

The only reason we should take two QB's is if the Browns are bored of ruining just one rookie QB and want to make it two.

[Tour2ma]

Jeff Risdon‏Verified account @JeffRisdon

I spent 5 of the last 7 days in Cleveland, banging on sources old and new in and around the Browns. Other than one individual who I don't know well enough to trust, everyone says it's Darnold.

6:04 PM - 7 Apr 2018

[LionOfBuddha]

20 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Jeff Risdon‏Verified account @JeffRisdon

I spent 5 of the last 7 days in Cleveland, banging on sources old and new in and around the Browns. Other than one individual who I don't know well enough to trust, everyone says it's Darnold.

6:04 PM - 7 Apr 2018

Sam Darnold is going to be good. Josh Allen is going to be great, or be a bust. I still hope we take Darnold. Although the Patriots apparently love Darnold, and are looking to sell the farm + Gronk to us for that first pick

[hoorta]

2 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Jeff Risdon‏Verified account @JeffRisdon

I spent 5 of the last 7 days in Cleveland, banging on sources old and new in and around the Browns. Other than one individual who I don't know well enough to trust, everyone says it's Darnold.

6:04 PM - 7 Apr 2018

I sincerely hope all the Allen talk is a heavy blanket of smoke...   

2 hours ago, LionOfBuddha said:

Sam Darnold is going to be good. Josh Allen is going to be great, or be a bust. I still hope we take Darnold. Although the Patriots apparently love Darnold, and are looking to sell the farm + Gronk to us for that first pick

Bust? Did you say BUST?  That's what I'm afraid of LoB.  That Josh may have the highest ceiling, he also has the lowest floor- by far. Regarding the Pats moving to #1, no way Jose. #4? Two firsts, two seconds this year, and throw in a couple future firsts, I might be interested. 

[LionOfBuddha]

19 minutes ago, hoorta said:

I sincerely hope all the Allen talk is a heavy blanket of smoke...   

Bust? Did you say BUST?  That's what I'm afraid of LoB.  That Josh may have the highest ceiling, he also has the lowest floor- by far. Regarding the Pats moving to #1, no way Jose. #4? Two firsts, two seconds this year, and throw in a couple future firsts, I might be interested. 

If the Patriots want Darnold, the 4th pick has no value to them. Darnold won’t be there at 4. If this offer is true, Dorsey has to decide if it’s worth giving up QB 1 for QB. 1A or 1B.

Keep in mind that all 4 QBs are graded across the board very high and are all considered to very likely be franchise QBs. Highest graded QB class in a long time. So at 4, we’re guaranteed to get one of them

[mjp28]

3 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Tim Couch was a blue chip Prospect.

WSS

Well Donovan McNabb was!

[mjp28]

4 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Not hard to read that as a two-pick endorsement.

Do two mediocre picks = one great quarterback pick? No.

Oh what a mess  no good experienced FA quarterbacks want to come to Cleveland to play.  

[LionOfBuddha]

[hoorta]

4 hours ago, LionOfBuddha said:

If the Patriots want Darnold, the 4th pick has no value to them. Darnold won’t be there at 4. If this offer is true, Dorsey has to decide if it’s worth giving up QB 1 for QB. 1A or 1B.

Keep in mind that all 4 QBs are graded across the board very high and are all considered to very likely be franchise QBs. Highest graded QB class in a long time. So at 4, we’re guaranteed to get one of them

 The other way of looking at it is- if we're convinced Darnold is the guy, then the Patriots entire draft this year, and a first next year isn't worth it. Even in the '99 and '83 drafts- not every one of the"highly rated" first round QBs in those years panned out.   

PS- Dorsey already turned down the Jets- which would only have meant moving down to #6, and IMHO was a superior package anything the Patriots could come up with, LOL short of tossing Gronk and Brady in with the deal.  Mindless pre-draft speculation that has zero chance of happening in reality. 

[Dutch Oven]

4 hours ago, LionOfBuddha said:

 

 

 

 

[LionOfBuddha]

2 hours ago, hoorta said:

 The other way of looking at it is- if we're convinced Darnold is the guy, then the Patriots entire draft this year, and a first next year isn't worth it. Even in the '99 and '83 drafts- not every one of the"highly rated" first round QBs in those years panned out.   

PS- Dorsey already turned down the Jets- which would only have meant moving down to #6, and IMHO was a superior package anything the Patriots could come up with, LOL short of tossing Gronk and Brady in with the deal.  Mindless pre-draft speculation that has zero chance of happening in reality. 

That’s a good point. I forgot the Jets tried with us. Would indicate we’re locked in on Darnold

[jiggins7919]

On 4/7/2018 at 8:56 AM, LionOfBuddha said:

We’ve got too many holes to draft 2 “top tier” QBs. At least that’s what’s on Dorsey’s mind. I could see him drafting a mid-late round guy like Mike White, Kyle Lauletta, or Logan Woodside and stashing him on the practice squad for a year. But I’d be shocked if we take a second QB in the first or second rd

Oh I totally agree, I was just trying to figure out how we'd go about doing it. We have fewer holes than a year ago, and that's BEFORE the draft. Right now our biggest holes are LT, QB, secondary depth, RB, and that's about it. Now, do we have have decent STARTERS at most positions? Yeah, shockingly enough, we actually DO. Problem is, we lost Hall of Fame Joe freaking Thomas right when we actually get a QB worth a darn. The good news is that we have Tyrod, who is completely mobile. And that's a good thing because this draft isn't strong for LT and Tyrod may be running for his life. 

But look at our starters really quickly. It's pretty...like...decent. Our problem is depth. We all know injuries happen to every team, and we also have the misfortune of our best offensive weapon being a malicious fart away from NFL expulsion. When I think of our defense, I like what I see. We have a legit front 7, and we've made additions to the secondary. Heck, check out our linebackers. Jamie Collins, Christian Kirskey, and Joel Schobert. That's not too shabby. But we need people behind them. We need people behind Myles Garrett and Ogbah. We need a RB to spell Hyde, and then be groomed to take over. I gotta tell you guys, we can't fix EVERYTHING in this draft, but we can get pretty darn close. 

 

[LionOfBuddha]

3 minutes ago, jiggins7919 said:

Oh I totally agree, I was just trying to figure out how we'd go about doing it. We have fewer holes than a year ago, and that's BEFORE the draft. Right now our biggest holes are LT, QB, secondary depth, RB, and that's about it. Now, do we have have decent STARTERS at most positions? Yeah, shockingly enough, we actually DO. Problem is, we lost Hall of Fame Joe freaking Thomas right when we actually get a QB worth a darn. The good news is that we have Tyrod, who is completely mobile. And that's a good thing because this draft isn't strong for LT and Tyrod may be running for his life. 

But look at our starters really quickly. It's pretty...like...decent. Our problem is depth. We all know injuries happen to every team, and we also have the misfortune of our best offensive weapon being a malicious fart away from NFL expulsion. When I think of our defense, I like what I see. We have a legit front 7, and we've made additions to the secondary. Heck, check out our linebackers. Jamie Collins, Christian Kirskey, and Joel Schobert. That's not too shabby. But we need people behind them. We need people behind Myles Garrett and Ogbah. We need a RB to spell Hyde, and then be groomed to take over. I gotta tell you guys, we can't fix EVERYTHING in this draft, but we can get pretty darn close. 

 

You’re right. But we need depth. A couple injuries would turn us from an average team to a bad one. Getting young depth in the draft is what’s Dorsey is probably thinking about after a QB at 1

[jiggins7919]

And let's be honest. We need a little luck, and that's putting it mildly. We can't lose Tyrod in the 1st game like we did RG III in 2016. Garrett and Ogbah have to not only remain healthy, they each need to take "the step". Gordon needs to stay on track, Coleman has to keep his freaking hand from breaking, and so on. Every team gets injuries, but often the teams with the best records are the ones with the fewest impact, catastrophic accidents that sideline the best players for the year. The truly interesting aspect of our team (to me anyway) is that we appear to have a decent squad. We're not going to be depending on rookies for the most part, and that's a dramatic change in philosophy. Do we hope our draft picks make an early impact? Heck yes. But let's face it, there aren't too many open jobs on our roster, and when is the last time we could say THAT? Are we going to draft a RB in the first 3 rounds? I'd say yes, but he's likely NOT to start because rookie RBs generally aren't great at pass protection, whereas Hyde definitely is. 

Likewise, we're probably drafting a CB high, but he's not guaranteed to start either. He'll have to compete with Jamar Taylor, EJ Gaines, Boddy-Calhoun, Howard Wilson (I think that's his name?), and whoever else. Our rookie, even if drafted in the first round, will have to earn his way onto the field. I don't want to make excuses for our veteran corners, but we didn't exactly do a bunch to give them help. A nonexistent pass rush, a ridiculous "Angel Safety" who was manned by a rookie strong safety/linebacker, and our DC's tendency to consistently blitz WAY too much that left our secondary completely exposed time and time again. It was like clockwork....big 3rd down arrives, we send the house, and our DBs either gave a giant cushion or were exposed by screens and simple crossing routes. Yuck. 

What's this mean? It means we need defensive studs who can impact the other team's passing game! Bradley Chubb at #4, or Minkah Fitzpatrick, or possibly Denzel Ward. That's what I want. We need to hit the QB, do it without blitzing, and we need to force turnovers and actually MAKE the freaking play when it comes our way. How many times did we not recover the fumble? Drop the pick-6? Not strip the QB? Turnovers win games, and conversely, they will COST you the game, too. Kizer threw about 15 more interceptions than Tyrod. That's reeeee-diculous. We now have offensive weapons, REAL weapons that can make the plays. Corey Coleman will draw the #3 CB, and he can win that match up. Josh is Josh (assuming he's on the field), and I'm totally excited to see Jarvis play. Tyrod is the king of the dump off, short pass, and nobody catches more of those than Jarvis. I'm excited for the first time in years. 

[Tour2ma]

15 hours ago, LionOfBuddha said:

That’s a good point. I forgot the Jets tried with us. Would indicate we’re locked in on Darnold

With at least one Berea visit to go anointing Darnold at this point is premature. We might be leaning Darnold, but what I see us being locked onto is drafting the QB we believe is "the one" at #1.

The Jets did not talk to us about the #1 so they could take any of three or more prospects, but they settled for #3 overall because they are willing to accept any of 3.

[Tour2ma]

14 hours ago, jiggins7919 said:

We're not going to be depending on rookies for the most part, and that's a dramatic change in philosophy.

Is it? Or is it the natural progression of rookies becoming second year players?

How many rooks started in 2017? 4? Kizer, Njoku (eventually), Garrett and Peppers.

Not hard to see 3 starters this season... a DL, DB and WR... possibly 4 with a RB.

[Dutch Oven]

31 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Is it? Or is it the natural progression of rookies becoming second year players?

How many rooks started in 2017? 4? Kizer, Njoku (eventually), Garrett and Peppers.

Not hard to see 3 starters this season... a DL, DB and WR... possibly 4 with a RB.

Unless there is an onslaught of late free agent additions, I agree, this is still going to be an extremely young team. A good portion of the roster will be made up of guys entering their rookie, 2nd or 3rd season. 

[jiggins7919]

On 4/9/2018 at 11:14 AM, Tour2ma said:

Is it? Or is it the natural progression of rookies becoming second year players?

How many rooks started in 2017? 4? Kizer, Njoku (eventually), Garrett and Peppers.

Not hard to see 3 starters this season... a DL, DB and WR... possibly 4 with a RB.

Kicker? DL? QB? FS? We had youth all over the place, even if they didn't start, we still depended heavily on them. I feel like there will be a change from that.