Jump to content

Vee-Rex

Members
  • Content Count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Vee-Rex

  1. 14 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

    Enjoy the pro bowl. He was not a terrific pick and I still think the next three non-QBs taken all are and will be better. As an "antagonistic" divisional rival fan, I'm glad they passed up the chance to pair Garrett with Bradley Chubb.

    Guess we'll find out. 

    Eh, I'm guessing that if we had taken Chubb over Ward, you'd be sitting here arguing we should've taken a CB pro bowler who graded out very well statistically in a position of need. So you saying you're 'glad' we didn't pair Garrett with Chubb is pretty meaningless to me. As I'm sure you were glad we took Mayfield #1 overall on draft day.

     

  2. 12 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

    K.

    I don't think "objective" fans would call taking Ward over Chubb, Nelson, Roquan Smith, and Derwin James to be a "terrific" or "A+" pick. I think that 85-90% of people who would agree with that are Browns fans. 

    You say I have an antagonistic approach, but I think you are being overly optimistic if you are using that particular pick as a sign of great things to come.

    Terrific doesn't necessarily mean PERFECT or FLAWLESS or BEST. I thought I clarified that before.

    Yes, you are zeroing in on terminology now because your stance is crumbling. Ward, a rookie CB is a pro bowler and grades out extremely well statistically. He was, indeed, a terrific pick.

    • Like 1
  3. 33 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

    Division rival.

    Makes sense. Unfortunate that people can't be more objective.

    I'll refrain from engaging him if that's all it's about since arguing would be pointless. 

  4. 51 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

    Probably beating a dead horse, but it absolutely matters where he is picking. It's not about holding it against him. It's about expecting a high draft pick to be good. Taking Ward isn't a high mark on a resume when every other viable option there now looks as good or better (IMO). They could have traded down for significant capital and still gotten a top rookie, if not Ward. That would be an A+ move. If you pay 250k for a Ferrari, you aren't going to say you a a great car shopper because a Ferrari is a great car.

    I agree with you on Mayfield. That does get "bonus points". Mayfield looks better than the other viable QB selections they could have made there.

    It's less about a couple draft picks and more about turning an entire franchise around. If he only did well on Mayfield and Ward and nothing else then he wouldn't be getting praise. But I listed all the things he has done and completely revived a franchise that was in the dumps. The Browns have very young and extremely promising cornerstone players at QB, EDGE, and CB, with a lot of cap space (with 50+ roster members signed - a lot of other teams who appear to have cap space only have 38'ish roster members under contract), and some draft capital. There is a lot to be hopeful about.

    You have a very antagonistic approach and I'm really not sure why?

  5. 19 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

    Also, where are you getting "a ton of picks"? From what I see, their most significant extra pick in 2019 is a 3rd that belonged to New England. That's basically like a good comp pick. Combine that with picking in the middle of the order, and they have a very normal amount of draft capital. So, it's not like the Browns have a baked in advantage to improve more than other teams in that regard.

    Two 3rd round picks, 3 5th round picks. That's a ton of extra picks. Literally. 

    Sure, they're not the best rounds to be picking from but Dorsey drafted starters for the Browns last year in the 4th and 5th rounds. He also drafted starters for the Chiefs (Hunt, Hill) in the 3rd and 5th rounds. It also gives us trade flexibility to perhaps move up a couple spots in the 1st or 2nd round.

    So yes, it's something to be excited about and it's certainly not a 'very normal amount of draft capital' by any stretch.

  6. 19 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

    Was Denzel Ward a "terrific pick"? They already took a QB, so the next 3 non-QBs they could have taken were Bradley Chubb, Quenton Nelson, and Roquan Smith. I'd rather have any of those 3, with what I know now, to be dead serious. If you want to stump for Ward over those guys that's fine. My point is that I don't give a GM a sticker because the corner he drafted #4 OVERALL looks promising. If he drafted Ward #34 overall, then I'd list that as an achievement.

    **Or if a couple years from now, Ward is a top 5 corner and/or the other guys aren't top players.

    Denzel Ward is a pro bowler in his rookie season at CB, possibly the 2nd hardest position in the entire NFL. Out of 130 qualifying CBs, PFF rated him:

    Passer rating allowed - 13th

    Yards per cover snap - 24th

    Defensive grade - 13th

    Coverage grade - 6th

    Of course he was a terrific pick.

    Honestly, you're over-thinking the hell out of this. COULD the Browns have traded down and still got Ward? Maybe. COULD the Browns have traded down and still got Mayfield? Maybe. COULD the Browns have traded down and still gotten Chubb? I mean you could make the same argument for most draft picks in the history of football. I didn't call it a PERFECT/FLAWLESS/GOD-LIKE pick, I called it terrific... and it was.

    • Like 1
  7. 23 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

     

    Nick Chubb was a good pick. That's a better indicator of future success IMO. It shows better evaluation to take a guy everyone else has a shot at.

    Nick Chubb was a terrific pick. Baker Mayfield was a terrific pick. Denzel Ward was a terrific pick. Genard Avery is a starter and had a good rookie season. Antonio Callaway, while a rough start, finished out pretty strong and had a good rookie season. And it's not just the draft:

    Trading a 4th rounder for Jarvis Landry was a good move. Trading DeShone Kizer for Damarious Randall was a STEAL. Trading Carlos Hyde was a good move. Trading Josh Gordon turned out to be a good move. Signing Terrence Mitchell was a solid move (too bad he got injured). Signing Greg Robinson, who somewhat revived his career, was a good move.

    Firing Hue and Haley was a GOOD move.

    While Dorsey hasn't gotten every move right, the amount of moves he DID get right sparked a significant turnaround season for the Browns. Given his history with the Chiefs, why shouldn't we assume the Browns will improve more in the offseason with a ton of picks (that can be used to trade up) and a ton of cap space?

     

  8. 15 hours ago, Broncofan said:

    Given that it's a Saturday night game, it's definitely a game for pride for both orgs (and man, MNF with DEN @ OAK Week 16 even more so lol).  

    We're not breaking down new ground with our team, but with CLE, it's an interesting matchup for sure, namely...

    1.  Baker Mayfield and how he handles our pass rush pressure - the CLE OL is very good at run blocking, but if there's a weakness, it's in their T play, especially in pass pro (how they had 4 top 40 picks and didn't get a LT out of that yield is a little crazy, although it's hard to criticize Nick Chubb at 2.4; the head scratcher was Austin Corbett, who's not able to transition to T).    Sound familiar?   Well, that means it's a huge matchup problem with our EDGES.   Baker's looked great several games for sure, and this early, it means the likelihood of a pure bust is very, very low.   But he also crumbled hard @ HOU with pressure - how does he fare this week with Von & co.?    This is a huge key, because the matchup that should scare DEN fans is...

    2.  CLE's WR & TE's vs. our leaky pass coverage - man, that was one ugly display.   And while George Kittle is an absolute beast, David Njoku is another emerging young talent (further behind Kittle, probably another year away).   And Jarvis Landry and the mercurial Antonio Callaway (along with reclamation project Breshad Perriman - Rashad Higgins has been a good story, but he's mostly JAG) must be salivating at the thought of facing our secondary.   And if that isn't enough, CLE boasts a top RB pass catching talent in Duke Johnson, Jr.  So yeah....tough draw there.

    3.  Chubb & the run game vs. our run D - gotta say how much Nick Chubb has impressed.   Saquon Barkley and Lindsay probably finish 1-2 in OROY voting this year and deservedly so, but I suspect a fair amount of CLE fans will stump for Chubb, who's been just outstanding in limited work.    And like our OL, the CLE OL does much better in the run game than in pass pro.  This will be a big test for our run D, who's been great some weeks, and baffling in others.

    Now, when we get the ball on O....well, ugh:

    1.  Keenum....sigh - I really don't know what else to say.   Without pressure, with pressure, play-action, from the gun - it's been brutal to watch.   VJ has gone on record that Keenum needs to push the ball downfield - the problem is, he's been awful at doing that.  So this could get really ugly.  And that's really bad news, because this week the worst matchup we face is...

    2.  CLE's pass rush vs. our pass pro - Myles Garrett is certainly justifying the 1.1 pick last year.  Total animal.  And the rest of that front 7 is really emerging (Joe Schobert in the LB corps for sure).    If VJ wants Keenum to push the ball downfield, that means the pass pro has to hold up.   Which is a real problem given the mismatch, so we'll see how that goes.   CLE really has a nasty 2019 D if they can get 1 more difference maker in their...

    3.   Secondary vs. our young WR/TE corps - if CLE gets another top CB to join Denzel Ward, that's a tough draw.  Ward's size difference vs. Sutton in theory gives DEN a way to go there, but Ward's such a great cover guy, tough matchup for sure.  Right now, though, outside of Ward, there is some room to be had - so I'd expect DeSean Hamilton to get a lot of looks.   CLE also has been vulnerable to the TE, so I'd really hope we see more targets there.    

    4.  Their run D vs. our run game - if Keenum can't make D's respect the pass game, then Lindsay & co. are in for rough times.   CLE has been hurt in the deep throwing game, but they've been much better of late at stopping the run (where early on, they struggled).  With SS Peppers there, I expect we'll see a repeat of Week 14 with SF and 8 in the box, stuffing the run, and daring Keenum to beat us.

    Of course, I've not addressed 3 intangibles that are always keys:

    1.   TO's - let's face it, we won 2 games vs. much better teams because we had a 6-0 TO advantage (LAC & PIT).   We lost last week because our O sucked hard, and we turned the ball over 2x on downs (vs. getting the 1 TO by Stewart).   

    2.  ToP/Field Position - with an altitude game, wearing out the D is key on either side.  You get 35+ mins of ToP, very rare to lose games in DEN...which brings up the last one...

    3.  HFA - no doubt, it's always a plus on our side.  CLE was smart enough to come to DEN early, to get used to the altitude.  I'm surprised why more teams don't do this more.


    As I've said all along, I don't really care if we win or lose, given we aren't legit contenders - so long as we try hard, and it develops the character of our young core, and our kids get to play.   I do look forward to watching another emerging franchise - what Sashi Brown to set up the turnaround bearing fruit is truly impressive (and the org finally getting rid of the cancer that was Hue Jackson as HC, he and Jeff Fisher will go down as 2 of the worst HC's in pro sports...ever).    I think with Hue gone, the Browns have been 3-2 (and CIN who hired him..0-4 lol).  OC Freddy Kitchens has been AWESOME in dialing up plays that leverage their best mismatches, really impressed (although they screwed the pooch badly @ HOU, tough place, but that was ugly).    TO's will likely decide it, but with generational talent Von vs. Baker and generational talent Garrett & co. vs. Keenum - even with HFA, I'd see a CLE 24-21 type game (if it was a neutral field, I'd see a 7+ pt CLE win).     Either way though, I look forward to seeing 2 young teams fight it out in prime time.

    Wonderful summary, my friend. Should be a fun game!

  9. On 11/18/2018 at 1:08 AM, SkippyX said:

    Everybody's got a hot take and they are all open to criticism. when that take is moronic.

    • Joe is not calm in this situation.
      • Is he a borderline Hall of Fame lineman? of course he is.
      • Is he an idiot as an analyst? Of course he is.
    • Darnold has had 3 very good games
    • He has had 3 very bad games.
    • He has had 3 games where he was mediocre to bad but not yet in a position to elevate a really bad team with a really bad coach.
      • Oh yeah, they played a game without Darnold
        • Decent backup McCown who had a 94.5 rating as a Jets QB in 2017 had a horrific game against a terrible Buffalo team at home.
        • Anyone with a brain would see that its not just the QB when multiple QBs have a game with a rating in the 30s.

    Maybe clowns like Joe Thomas think Josh Rosen and Baker Mayfield are not set up with better talent on their teams right now?

    • The Jets got guys like Fitzgerald and David Johnson, don't they?

     

    None of this means Darnold will be a good pro or a bad pro.

    • It does mean that Joe Thomas gets an F for his analysis.
      • He was good after the Browns first win. He should stick to talking about the Browns, because he is less clueless in that case.
      • Comparing Sam Darnold to one of the all time worst QB's to ever play just makes Joe sound like an idiot.

     

    Lol at calling Joe Thomas a 'borderline' hall of famer. You're way too triggered, kid.

    • Like 1
  10. On 10/11/2018 at 5:54 PM, Master of Suspense said:

    That ball was not catchable. 

    Actually, if you do simple math, you'd understand it WAS catchable.

    The ball hit the ground 18 yards away from the clothesline, EXACTLY 2 seconds after the clothesline. The average NFL receiver runs a 4.5 in the 40 yard dash. Landry ran a 4.43 at his LSU pro day 5 years ago. It would have taken him 2.215 seconds to run 20 yards. So it would have taken Landry 1.9935 seconds to reach 18 yards (meaning he would have been there on time).

    This is not counting for the fact that you can be a few yards off and the ball still can be deemed 'catchable'.

    This is also not counting for the fact that Landry ran a 4.43 starting at a stopped position, and the 2 second timeframe between the clothesline and the ball hitting the ground would've been even shorter since he was already sprinting.

    It's over and done with, but the point is that it LOOKED uncatchable only because he got destroyed and didn't even have a chance. It should have been a penalty, which likely would've resulted in the game being over sooner. Luckily for the Browns they managed to win anyway.

    Just thought I'd say that for people still babbling about it being uncatchable.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...