Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

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

DaveThePanther2008

Giants control the draft?

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Cam El said:

At some point I would think some QB would say they want to go to the Browns. Someone confident (or cocky) enough to believe they can help turn that franchise around. 

Someone did.  I think it was Allen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Long time Brown's reporter Tony Grossi has been arguing vehemently against them taking Barkley. He believes the Browns absolutely must get the right quarterback first because they've screwed it up far too many years in a row..

He may have a point.

He absolutely has a point. I firmly believe they identified Mitch as their guy last year, but they tried to get cute and thought they'd easily move back up to get him. If they take Barkley - and Kumara and Hunt are just the most recent reasons on why you don't need to take a RB that high - someone will move up to three to get the best QB available and they could miss out on their preferred QB again. 

If you need a QB desperately and you identify which guy you like most in a draft... YOU TAKE HIM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Browns draft Chubb, which I think they should, that would throw a wrench in this draft. Indy will want out of that pick so bad maybe unless the take Barkley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the Browns draft QBs I'd just take a QB at 1 and 4 lol. Probably would flip the draft upside down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, dldove77 said:

He absolutely has a point. I firmly believe they identified Mitch as their guy last year, but they tried to get cute and thought they'd easily move back up to get him. If they take Barkley - and Kumara and Hunt are just the most recent reasons on why you don't need to take a RB that high - someone will move up to three to get the best QB available and they could miss out on their preferred QB again. 

If you need a QB desperately and you identify which guy you like most in a draft... YOU TAKE HIM. 

That is the argument for when folks think you shouldn't take a guy at a certain spot because he was projected lower, the smart thing if you want him and don't think there is anyone comparable lower in the draft is to pull the trigger. If they need a QB them draft him number 1. If Barkeley isn't available at 4 take the second best running back, move back or pick another position. Look at how finding Cam has helped turn the Panthers around after years of searching for the right guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

That is the argument for when folks think you shouldn't take a guy at a certain spot because he was projected lower, the smart thing if you want him and don't think there is anyone comparable lower in the draft is to pull the trigger. If they need a QB them draft him number 1. If Barkeley isn't available at 4 take the second best running back, move back or pick another position. Look at how finding Cam has helped turn the Panthers around after years of searching for the right guy.

And if who the Giants really covet is Barkley and not a QB, the Browns could take Barkley thinking they'll get either their first or second choice at four, and then watch QBs go off the board at picks two and three. Personally, I think they have to take their favorite QB at one and take the BPA at four. Use all those draft picks to go after running backs later in the draft. Maybe Barkley will be the next AP or Tomlinson, but neither of those guys ever made a Super Bowl. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RumHam said:

If the Browns get a FA QB, then Barkley is the shoe-in. However, the two options that they've fuged up on with Alex Smith and Captain Kirk really rule out that happening. I just don't think anyone wants to play up there and they may not have a choice but to draft a QB. They should be breaking the bank for Kirk. Or just sign Kaperneck and get it over with. 

They have to take Barkley regardless...that is the play...there is no QB gead and shoulders above the rest...so you take who is available at #4 or Chubb if he is still there...Indy almost surely not taking Qb ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

That is the argument for when folks think you shouldn't take a guy at a certain spot because he was projected lower, the smart thing if you want him and don't think there is anyone comparable lower in the draft is to pull the trigger. If they need a QB them draft him number 1. If Barkeley isn't available at 4 take the second best running back, move back or pick another position. Look at how finding Cam has helped turn the Panthers around after years of searching for the right guy.

That's backwards...the Qb's are interchangeable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C a. N. W e  p l e a s e s t o p  Gettle threads..... please oh please stop now get help he is gone 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, dldove77 said:

And if who the Giants really covet is Barkley and not a QB, the Browns could take Barkley thinking they'll get either their first or second choice at four, and then watch QBs go off the board at picks two and three. Personally, I think they have to take their favorite QB at one and take the BPA at four. Use all those draft picks to go after running backs later in the draft. Maybe Barkley will be the next AP or Tomlinson, but neither of those guys ever made a Super Bowl. 

If 2 QB go next you take chubb...you end up with 2 best players in draft...if they go qb first then Barkley and Chubb are both gone...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, heel31ok said:

If 2 QB go next you take chubb...you end up with 2 best players in draft...if they go qb first then Barkley and Chubb are both gone...

I don't see a problem with that. They'll get the QB they want, which is paramount, and the fourth best player. You're also assuming that Barkley and Chubb are the two best players in the draft. Only time will tell that. 

Take a look back at 2011 and let's assume Carolina had picks one and four. Let's say they take Von Miller with the first pick. Newton is now available to Denver or Buffalo, and he's off the board for four. So they take AJ Green or Patrick Peterson. Great draft, but who's throwing the ball? Jimmy Clausen? 

You have to identify a QB and you have to take him when you can. You can't play games. 

Now, imagine if we had those picks and we took Newton and the BPA available at four. Now we have Newton and Peterson or Green. Much better haul, IMO. 

Going into that draft, it wasn't like Newton was a slam dunk, so I think the analogy is fair. With picks one and four, Carolina could have said, "We'll pass on Newton and get Gabbert or Locker at four."

Vomit. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dldove77 said:

I don't see a problem with that. They'll get the QB they want, which is paramount, and the fourth best player. You're also assuming that Barkley and Chubb are the two best players in the draft. Only time will tell that. 

Take a look back at 2011 and let's assume Carolina had picks one and four. Let's say they take Von Miller with the first pick. Newton is now available to Denver or Buffalo, and he's off the board for four. So they take AJ Green or Patrick Peterson. Great draft, but who's throwing the ball? Jimmy Clausen? 

You have to identify a QB and you have to take him when you can. You can't play games. 

Now, imagine if we had those picks and we took Newton and the BPA available at four. Now we have Newton and Peterson or Green. Much better haul, IMO. 

Going into that draft, it wasn't like Newton was a slam dunk, so I think the analogy is fair. With picks one and four, Carolina could have said, "We'll pass on Newton and get Gabbert or Locker at four."

Vomit. 

 

Lol if comparing darnold or Rosen to Cam Newton as totally different...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, heel31ok said:

Lol if comparing darnold or Rosen to Cam Newton as totally different...

Jesus, give me a break. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dldove77 said:

Jesus, give me a break. 

Dont give up so soon...lol Darnold and Rosen are Gabbert and Locker that's the whole point these are not generational quarterbacks coming through they are just quarterbacks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Scenarios based on the Browns doing the right thing or the smart thing rarely pan out.

And the fact there coach has won what 5 games in two years? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



×