Draft Rumors

[Iamcanadian]

21 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

The Browns are going to draft Saquon Barkley first overall and lose their shot at a QB just like when they decided to pass on Carson Wentz. I considered Josh Allen at 4 maybe but I think they'll be too tempted to take Chubb or Fitzpatrick now that they've got Tyrod Taylor. Josh Rosen could be there at 4 but do you really think the Browns will draft him? I don't. He seems like a good quarterback and typically a good pick, but I still don't think the Browns will take him because of his supposed attitude. There is always next year to try finding another QB if Taylor isn't the answer or right fit. The Browns should be a lot better either way, be it Rosen, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Allen, Lamar Jackson, or a trade down. Oh, by the way, I have Sam Darnold and Baker Mayfield going 2, 3.

Sorry, but the owner will never allow Dorsey to pass on a QB, unless he wants to see a half empty stadium every Sunday. It would only cost Haslam about 200 million in lost revenue. The Cleveland fan base would be in open rebellion if they pass again on a QB and Dorsey also knows passing on Wentz cost Sachi his job and you really think he will follow Sachi's lead into joblessness!!! I do not think so!!!

The owner previously forced the FO to draft Manziel and I guarantee you, he will insist they take a QB at #1 overall!!! End of story!!!

 

[Iamcanadian]

On 3/10/2018 at 9:20 PM, DoleINGout said:

@The LBC Jackson did make plays last season, only he isn't overly athletic, and he is limited to a zone scheme. I don't currently see Jackson as a bonafide playmaker, nor beliveve he necessarily translates into a one, (unless he is apart of a good defense with a heavy emphesis on zone coverage). You're right, that the corner position has been prioritized in the last decade, but the trend of how many taken in the first will depend on how strong the choices are. Even with that said, I named three corners this year, (with two potential fourth options in the first), that could go this year, (and match the data trends). The Artie Burns, Byron Jones, and Eli Apple guys you mentioned were all filled out, where as this years corners are viewed as skinnier than preferred, (Carlton Davis and Tarvarus McFadden being the lone exceptions). In 2015, I saw Byron Jones as a first round prospect early because be was so athletic, (and I may have been on this website at that time for someone to check on that). The major downside to Bryon Jones was he had no position. Still doesn't, and his tackling is average. But Jones is just such a special athlete that he can still contribute on defense. In Joshua Jackson's case, he is neither an outstanding athlete nor a special, (i.e. surefire fire round talent), coverage guy. His playmaking ability is a one year fluke at this point from playing on a bad team in a zone scheme. He has more to prove and less size than Artie Burns, Byron Jones, or Eli Apple. Combined with the depth at most positions in this years draft class, that profiles Jackson as still a late first or early second, (because of corner position prioritization/importance/value).

Well, I suspect he will get drafted somewhere in the 20's, his Combine was weak, but his production speaks for itself and he will not last till round 2.

[Iamcanadian]

On 3/10/2018 at 8:03 PM, DoleINGout said:

Good. Derwin James is the guy Greg with two G's Williams wants? Have him. James is an elite athlete but not as good at football. Nice player in the right scheme but overrated at this point. Potential? For sure. Way too much to fix to claim he's on the level of Minkah Fitzpatrick, much less the top 10 of the draft. Who ever takes him that high, have him.

Joshua Jackson in the second round is a good fit.

Maybe the Browns will trade down and get Mike McGlinchey but I think they're more likely to take Kolton Miller at 33.

Both will probably be available at 33 although the shortage of OT's may drive up McGlinchey's stock. I do not like either, McGlinchey plays beside Nelson and it is my experience that prospects who get to play beside future All Pros, often turn out to be overvalued on draft day, because the player beside them made them look better than they actually are, so prospects like McGlinchey I would avoid.

As for Miller, he could have a lot of problems at he next level, teams attack him low and he has a lot of problems defending himself against a low attack. Sometimes, you can be too tall and it opens you up if you cannot defend your lower body.

As for James, he will go high in the draft, before Fitzpatrick, I doubt it as Fitz can play CB as well. What Cleveland will do at #4, obviously will be determined by what happens at #2 and #3, they could be in a position to trade the pick if a high rated QB is still there or they could draft Barkley if he is still there or Chubb or Fitz, they have many, many options, but it will all come down to what happens with 2 and 3. 

[Tugboat]

On 3/10/2018 at 1:18 PM, Don Roshi said:

Fournette averaged 3.9 per carry in the regular season. He also wasn't missed when he didn't play. I'm not discounting having a good running game, but injuries happen to RBs, so investing a lot into one running back isn't smart.

This is also a deep draft when it comes to running backs. Grab one in the second.

This reads like someone who didn't really watch Jaguars football games this year.  That 3.9ypc may not be flashy, but it was hard earned...and a massive difference maker for the Jaguars offense.  Fournette did that facing completely stacked boxes, constantly.  And he didn't flatter things with designed touches to get him in space.  That was a lot of really ugly up the gut work in the trenches, pushing piles, etc.  The hard yards.

He was also very definitely missed when he wasn't there.  Or probably more aptly, when he wasn't fully healthy (which definitely impacted his YPC figure).  There were times in certain games where he was very clearly gimped, yet they still handed him the ball repeatedly.  And he did all this behind an OLine that wasn't altogether significantly better than the Browns unit.

I think the biggest thing about taking a RB that high, is that 1)they have to have some sort of special skillset, and 2)you have to be willing to fully commit to that skillset offensively and legitimately build your offense around it.  The Jaguars did that.  And combined with a dominant defense...a grinding ball possession running game that churns out 3.9 yards per carry, is a recipe for some surprising success.  After all...3.9 yard x 3 downs is...a First Down.  It ain't always pretty, but it moves the chains, and those long grinding drives give the defense rest so they're ready to eat the opposition alive.

I don't think Barkley has anywhere near the same pure physical "tone setting" ability of Fournette.  But he does have some really special ability in space that Fournette doesn't have.  So you build around that instead.  Obviously you can't just throw any ol' RB behind a garbage line and expect miracles...but an elite RB can very much change the entire dynamic of an offense, and seriously help turn a team's fortunes around.

 

Also kinda disagree on the notion that this is a particularly deep draft RB-wise.  At least, in terms of high-end depth like you're talking.  2nd round types.  Lots of interesting mid-round fliers with potential, but at the top-end...i'm not impressed.  I'd call this a deep draft in that's it's seriously  bottom-heavy with interesting RBs if anything.

 

On 3/10/2018 at 2:02 PM, Don Roshi said:

Every NFL organisation that Dorsey has been a part of hasn't taken a RB in the first two rounds. As a GM, the highest pick he's spent on a RB was a 3rd (on K.Hunt).

Dorsey is paid to separate the QBs. You shouldn't be fine with one of three. I hope we take a QB at 1-1. Any other position, I get trying to be cute. QB is a position you shouldn't get cute with.

This is also very true though.  If you like a QB as your franchise guy at #4, you should also be comfortable with him at #1.  Franchise QB > all else.

I'd be curious to see a breakdown on exactly how many RBs of Barkley's "elite calibre" he's actually had a shot at drafting though.

[Tugboat]

On 3/10/2018 at 10:20 PM, Iamcanadian said:

Great formula for staying in last place, yeah, I can count on one finger, no maybe a thumb, on how many winning franchises there are without a franchise QB, Hu....m!!! 

Did you perhaps miss this year's playoffs, wherein 1/4 finalist teams were very definitely playing without true "franchise QBs"?  It's certainly not easy, and you can't do it with a total hack under center...but there are ways of winning without a superstar QB.

[Broncofan]

Teams shouldn’t pass up a shot at a franchise QB if they don’t have one.  Again though here there is a 100 percent chance one of the top 3 QB who all are seen as franchise QB talents (perennial top 10 long term guys), albeit some with more risk / higher ceiling than others.   And a 80-90 percent chance imo it’s picking between the top 2 if you go QB Rd2. 

There are arguments to be made to go QB 1.1 if you really want 1 guy so much more the other 2 (or if the 3rd guy terrifies you that much).   But that’s really it.  This situation is like none seen before with CLE owning 1.1 and 1.4 and the QB’s available (of course more on how they view them too).  

 

[sammymvpknight]

3 hours ago, Tugboat said:

Did you perhaps miss this year's playoffs, wherein 1/4 finalist teams were very definitely playing without true "franchise QBs"?  It's certainly not easy, and you can't do it with a total hack under center...but there are ways of winning without a superstar QB.

The teams that consistently are in the playoffs have stability at the QB position. 

[Broncofan]

6 hours ago, Tugboat said:

Did you perhaps miss this year's playoffs, wherein 1/4 finalist teams were very definitely playing without true "franchise QBs"?  It's certainly not easy, and you can't do it with a total hack under center...but there are ways of winning without a superstar QB.

 

3 hours ago, sammymvpknight said:

The teams that consistently are in the playoffs have stability at the QB position. 

I think once a team makes the playoffs, though - their ultimate goal is to be a legit SB contender.   FWIW, an owner in our league came up with a compelling argument to the philosophies you are both making - there is no magic formula anymore to SB contention/winning.

If you look at the discussion on FFGen and here, 4 themes come out as to what is the key to a legit championship contender/team:

1.  The franchise QB.  Can hide a lot more weaknesses on a team, and in the case of a mobile/elusive QB, can help the OL play up (and even a guy like Brady can move around enough to maximize his OL performance.   Russell Wilson, A-Rod, TB12, the list goes on.

2.   Trench strength.   Be powerful in the OL/DL, and you control the run game, eat clock, and on D, you negate the franchise QB by burying them with pressure.  Certainly, PHI was the most dominant team if you look at both OL/DL.  I'd argue that pretty much every elite SB QB also had a top 10 OL with them (even Wilson's OL was top 10 back then in the SB48 years, not so much now).  Even last year, you look at NE's OL, and they were a top 6 unit, and their DL is what keyed the comeback D-wise on ATL, getting pressure at key moments on Ryan and co.   Trey Flowers was a SB animal.   We didn't quite follow this to a T, but it's fair to say our run D was stellar, and CJ's run game behind our OL played great, except for RT.   Still, this applies more for PHI.

3.   Elite D.   Our formula, and you can very clearly make the argument that JAX followed this formula to a T - they were literally a 2H of bad coaching (more on that) away from the SB, they had the AFCG in their hands and let it slip away.  As great as Wilson was SEA’s elite D was the foundation of their earlier success.  They had both 1 and 3 and an OK line at their peak.      

4.  Great playoff coaching.   The anti-Andy Reid philosophy - play to win, and come up with innovate plans that make the difference.  This is what has set BB apart from the AFC competition - I'd point out JAX's refusal to do anything but run on 1st down with a dive in the 3rd/4th Q cost them the game - when they tried to sit on a 10 point lead.    I'd point out how great Pederson was in maximizing Foles' skills - becoming RPO driven, and those gutsy 4th down calls, when other coaches would have played to not lose.   When you have similarly talented teams, it makes a huge difference in the playoffs.

You look at the SB winning teams, it used to be people pointed only to the elite QB's.  But now, we look at the SB winner, and we also look at the top NFL teams this year - MIN, JAX, PHI post-Wentz, you can't say it's elite QB.   You also can't say it's elite D every time - but JAX now, and DEN in 2016, proved that you can do it.   But I'd also say that #4 is needed if you only have 1 of the first 3.   PHI won with #2 and #4 this year.   We won with #3 and #4 (remember that Phillips didn't go into a conservative game plan vs. NE / CAR, but attacked & attacked, no off-coverage zone, and it was a masterpiece).   I'd say MIN had #3 and #4 this year (Shurmur on O, and that elite D).   NE wins with #1 and #4, and sometimes, #2 - and because they have #1 and #4 all the time, they're perennial contenders.   

Point being, it's no longer a set formula.   Cap management means there are different ways to get an elite contender.   It sure helps when you have 3 of the 4 - that's what makes PHI scary, with Wentz back, they should have #1, #2 and #4 covered.   But it also explains why we're seeing different teams contend.   The other common element - finding value in the draft (and in NE's case, Brady uber-cheap helps them in giving them more leeway).    We still haven't broken past the highest-paid QB's winning the SB - that speaks to the need to have more than just #1 - you have to excel in the trenches, or have the great D.    But it helps to have the franchise QB for sure - just like being incredible in the trenches can overcome not having the elite QB.   

Food for thought, I thought the argument was compelling.  

[BleedTheClock]

You don't need a great QB to win games. It is a big factor and can change the fortunes of your team around the fastest, but it's not like there were only a few teams that ever were title contenders/winners without having a QB. It's becoming extremely common for average QB'ed squads to make it to the conference championship/Super Bowl.

There is literally no set way to build your team. Teams of all shapes and sizes are successful every year. Sure, having a great QB is the most traditional and successful path, but it's not a prerequisite for success. If you don't have the QB though, you better have some other elite characteristic on your team whether it be run game, pass rush, lockdown DB's, etc...

[49erurtaza]

 

[G08]

To anyone/everyone reading this:

With the FA QB signings that have(will) occurred, how would you rank the top 5 NFL teams in terms of need for selecting a QB high in this draft?

For example:

Denver has Lynch and just signed Keenum to a 2 year/36 million deal... are they still gunning for a QB at 5?

Arizona signed Bradford and Glennon... are they looking QB at 15/trading up?

NY Jets re-signed McCown and added Bridgewater as well... is QB at 6 in play for them?

 

Buffalo for sure is going QB and likely will be trading up in order to do so... who is looking to move down to 12?

[DalCowboyzRule]

8 minutes ago, G08 said:

To anyone/everyone reading this:

With the FA QB signings that have(will) occurred, how would you rank the top 5 NFL teams in terms of need for selecting a QB high in this draft?

For example:

Denver has Lynch and just signed Keenum to a 2 year/36 million deal... are they still gunning for a QB at 5?

Arizona signed Bradford and Glennon... are they looking QB at 15/trading up?

NY Jets re-signed McCown and added Bridgewater as well... is QB at 6 in play for them?

 

Buffalo for sure is going QB and likely will be trading up in order to do so... who is looking to move down to 12?

I mean in the top 10 Cleveland, the Giants, Denver (Lynch is meh and Keenum is a placeholder), the Jets (both on 1 year deals) should all take a QB if there's one they like.

Outside of the top 10 Miami, Buffalo, Arizona, Los Angeles could also all go QB.

I'm hoping as many go before our pick at #19 as possible.

[bananabucket]

I don't understand why the Jets signed both Bridgewater and McCown.  They are in good position to get their next franchise guy and they certainly don't need 2 bridge QBs.

[BleedTheClock]

1 hour ago, 49erurtaza said:

 

...in reference to?

[JBURGE]

2 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

...in reference to?

I think Oklahoma ?