Barkley should go #1.

[PossibleCabbage]

I'll take A.  A secondary pass rusher is more important than a starting RB in real football, IMO.

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

Take it from a SB winning fan- You should want both of those.

Ah, ok. So, fantastic. Every Super Bowl winning fan ever knows more than fans whose teams don't. Can't fault that logic...

[Jeezla]

5 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

I'll take A.  A secondary pass rusher is more important than a starting RB in real football, IMO.

I'd take A too, even though I love the F outta Barkley. Chubb + Garrett?? Oy Vey! And it's not like Royce Freeman sucks. Sometimes you just need the next Jay Ajayi without the bad cartilage, which is basically how I view Royce.

[Jeezla]

1 minute ago, MWil23 said:

Ah, ok. So, fantastic. Every Super Bowl winning fan ever knows more than fans whose teams don't. Can't fault that logic...

Team couldn't have done it without the Eagle forum, so yea, we know what it takes to win in this league. 

[PossibleCabbage]

 I mean absolutely nothing that happened at the combine has (or could, really) resolve my concerns about Barkley shying away from contact and bouncing everything outside.  It's entirely possible that's not what you want out of an NFL RB.  Real possibility that Barkley's NFL career ends up like Reggie Bush's, albeit in an era of football that values this skillset more highly.

[Danger]

On 3/3/2018 at 12:07 PM, PapaShogun said:

No. Cleveland has been doing this kind of thinking for years. It's gotten them nowhere. It's time to take the franchise quarterback you need. Doesn't matter if a couple might be left over by the time you pick 4th. You have the first selection of whomever you want. Stop settling for the leftovers. 

Barkley may be the next Tomlinson, Sanders, or Peterson. All of those guys didn't get a ring. Runningbacks don't carry a team like a quarterback does no matter how good they are. They also play a position that is highly susceptible to injury in addition to having a shorter shelf life compared to a quarterback. You can get excellent value later on at the same position. 

Everyone is falling in love with Barkley because of his combine numbers. So what. At the end of the day he's still a runningback. 

I'd completely agree 100%, if they didn't have the #4 overall pick, and ammunition to move that pick up as well if they want.

[PossibleCabbage]

I also want to point out that as much sense as it might make for Cleveland to take Barkley at 1 or 4, I think it's extremely unlikely they do so.  Since Cleveland GM John Dorsey came into the league in 1991 as a scout with the Packers, including his year with the Seahawks and 3 with the Chiefs (so 27 drafts), his teams have selected exactly 0 running backs in the first round and 1 in the 2nd (3 in the 3rd though).  Sure, he hasn't had the opportunity to take one of Barkley's calibre, but if we zoom out and look at the entire Ron Wolf scouting tree (which also includes Cleveland executives Elliot Wolf and Alonzo Highsmith), you really don't see a high value placed on running backs high in the draft.  In fact the closest thing to a 1st round RB from someone in this tree was when Ted Thompson was the VP of Football Ops under GM Mike Holmgren in Seattle when  they took Shaun Alexander #19.  If we look at other NFL teams with GMs in this tree (including Reggie McKenzie in Oakland and John Schneider in Seattle) we don't see much of a priority on "high picks spent on elite running backs".

It's not as though we're at a high water mark for "positional value of running backs" since 1991 either.

I honestly think a lot of the "Cleveland wants Barkley" buzz is going to be a smokescreen to get someone to try to trade up to #1 (or to #2 because the Giants want people to think Cleveland will not take a QB at 1, so the Giants can hold a sale on QB1.) We can either try to understand organizational philosophy and how it informs how a team drafts, or we can argue that they should do things differently, but I will say that a lot of teams run by Wolf or Wolf disciples have had a whole lot of success so we should probably expect Cleveland to start drafting more like Green Bay or Seattle or Oakland than the Cleveland of old.

Unless of course Haslam pulls rank again.

[BrownLeader]

 

2 hours ago, PossibleCabbage said:

I also want to point out that as much sense as it might make for Cleveland to take Barkley at 1 or 4, I think it's extremely unlikely they do so.  Since Cleveland GM John Dorsey came into the league in 1991 as a scout with the Packers, including his year with the Seahawks and 3 with the Chiefs (so 27 drafts), his teams have selected exactly 0 running backs in the first round and 1 in the 2nd (3 in the 3rd though).  Sure, he hasn't had the opportunity to take one of Barkley's calibre, but if we zoom out and look at the entire Ron Wolf scouting tree (which also includes Cleveland executives Elliot Wolf and Alonzo Highsmith), you really don't see a high value placed on running backs high in the draft.  In fact the closest thing to a 1st round RB from someone in this tree was when Ted Thompson was the VP of Football Ops under GM Mike Holmgren in Seattle when  they took Shaun Alexander #19.  If we look at other NFL teams with GMs in this tree (including Reggie McKenzie in Oakland and John Schneider in Seattle) we don't see much of a priority on "high picks spent on elite running backs".

It's not as though we're at a high water mark for "positional value of running backs" since 1991 either.

I honestly think a lot of the "Cleveland wants Barkley" buzz is going to be a smokescreen to get someone to try to trade up to #1 (or to #2 because the Giants want people to think Cleveland will not take a QB at 1, so the Giants can hold a sale on QB1.) We can either try to understand organizational philosophy and how it informs how a team drafts, or we can argue that they should do things differently, but I will say that a lot of teams run by Wolf or Wolf disciples have had a whole lot of success so we should probably expect Cleveland to start drafting more like Green Bay or Seattle or Oakland than the Cleveland of old.

Unless of course Haslam pulls rank again.

Out of Ron Wolf's scouting tree..

In John Schneider's first year as GM in Seattle he traded for Marshawn. Thompson traded for Ahman Green his first year as VP in Green Bay. Scott McCloughan already had Frank Gore in SF and Alfred Morris in Was when he took over. He still drafted Matt Jones in his first draft. Dorsey had Jamal Charles in KC and drafted Knile Davis his first draft. And a big part of KC's record this past year was the running game returning. Reggie Mckenzie had Darren McFadden a year removed from leading the league in rushing for half the season before getting injured. Then he lucked into Latavius Murray. And I bet the Raiders take a RB high this year.

Regardless of how they acquire the parts, I think these guys know the value of a strong running game. The Browns don't have a starting RB, so they need to find one in either FA or the draft. And more importantly they need a potential franchise QB. Having two top 5 picks and a RB that's being looked at as the best prospect in the draft allows them to try and get both.

Another key thing is that that top QBs are basically, who's your preference, type guys. Highly regarded but no one has clearly separated. And the team is likely to sign a vet starting QB, so that rookie QB should get a chance to develop some, lessening the necessity to get your first choice. Whoever you take at #4, you say that's who you wanted all along.

[Broncofan]

Frankly this is the biggest criticism I can cite for Barkley right now...his choice of training partners. 

 

[Iamcanadian]

8 hours ago, BrownLeader said:

 

Out of Ron Wolf's scouting tree..

In John Schneider's first year as GM in Seattle he traded for Marshawn. Thompson traded for Ahman Green his first year as VP in Green Bay. Scott McCloughan already had Frank Gore in SF and Alfred Morris in Was when he took over. He still drafted Matt Jones in his first draft. Dorsey had Jamal Charles in KC and drafted Knile Davis his first draft. And a big part of KC's record this past year was the running game returning. Reggie Mckenzie had Darren McFadden a year removed from leading the league in rushing for half the season before getting injured. Then he lucked into Latavius Murray. And I bet the Raiders take a RB high this year.

Regardless of how they acquire the parts, I think these guys know the value of a strong running game. The Browns don't have a starting RB, so they need to find one in either FA or the draft. And more importantly they need a potential franchise QB. Having two top 5 picks and a RB that's being looked at as the best prospect in the draft allows them to try and get both.

Another key thing is that that top QBs are basically, who's your preference, type guys. Highly regarded but no one has clearly separated. And the team is likely to sign a vet starting QB, so that rookie QB should get a chance to develop some, lessening the necessity to get your first choice. Whoever you take at #4, you say that's who you wanted all along.

I suspect that Cleveland absolutely knows which QB they will select and teams that are looking for a QB would in most cases, take exactly the same guy. IMO, it will be Darnold. All the doubt floating around, is simply misinformation being put out by teams to confuse other drafting teams, trying perhaps to garner interest in a trade!!!

I think Cleveland will sign a possible veteran backup QB although they just might go with Kizer for that job. Darnold will be the starter by game 7 or 8 at the latest, so no decent FA QB will want to sign with the Browns, knowing full well, they will be nothing more than a backup by mid season.

As for Barkley, a lot has happened in the last 2 seasons, making RB's a little more attractive than they were in the last decade and so Barkley is no longer the shocker pick he might have been as recently as 4 or 5 years ago. If Cleveland intends to start Darnold in game 1, what better way to protect him than having Barkley as your main offensive weapon till Darnold develops. It would take all the pressure off Darnold and potentially set up Cleveland to have a dominate offense within 2 seasons. great QB/great RB, does not happen too often!

Not saying we will draft Barkley, but it is not out of the realm of possibility, because the rest of the top 5 talent, isn't quite as good as one usually suspects.

 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

9 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

I suspect that Cleveland absolutely knows which QB they will select and teams that are looking for a QB would in most cases, take exactly the same guy. IMO, it will be Darnold. All the doubt floating around, is simply misinformation being put out by teams to confuse other drafting teams, trying perhaps to garner interest in a trade!!!

I think Cleveland will sign a possible veteran backup QB although they just might go with Kizer for that job. Darnold will be the starter by game 7 or 8 at the latest, so no decent FA QB will want to sign with the Browns, knowing full well, they will be nothing more than a backup by mid season.

As for Barkley, a lot has happened in the last 2 seasons, making RB's a little more attractive than they were in the last decade and so Barkley is no longer the shocker pick he might have been as recently as 4 or 5 years ago. If Cleveland intends to start Darnold in game 1, what better way to protect him than having Barkley as your main offensive weapon till Darnold develops. It would take all the pressure off Darnold and potentially set up Cleveland to have a dominate offense within 2 seasons. great QB/great RB, does not happen too often!

Not saying we will draft Barkley, but it is not out of the realm of possibility, because the rest of the top 5 talent, isn't quite as good as one usually suspects.

 

I think it’s possible the QB sits the whole year if the vet is playing well.

Zampese was in Cincy when Palmer starts and Hue came to Cincy the following year. Hue seems to prefer a vet.

Dorsey trades up and drafted a guy last year with the intention of him sitting an entire year.

I wouldn’t dismiss the idea that quickly.

[NFL_Fan]

I hope they dont. I dont want to see a trent richardson again....hard to do anything on the worst offense and a horrible front office...id rather see him a Giant

[Da_Ducktator]

22 minutes ago, NFL_Fan said:

I hope they dont. I dont want to see a trent richardson again....hard to do anything on the worst offense and a horrible front office...id rather see him a Giant

Barkley arguably has a better chance to succeed in Cleveland than he does in New York. The Browns O-Line is far superior to the Giants O-Line. It's one of the few strengths of that team as they have two top 10 OG's in the league (Zeitler and Bitonio), a really solid center in Tretter, and Joe Thomas coming back from injury, even if it may just be for a year. 

[Iamcanadian]

5 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I think it’s possible the QB sits the whole year if the vet is playing well.

Zampese was in Cincy when Palmer starts and Hue came to Cincy the following year. Hue seems to prefer a vet.

Dorsey trades up and drafted a guy last year with the intention of him sitting an entire year.

I wouldn’t dismiss the idea that quickly.

2 losses and the Browns will likely be looking at a half empty stadium and nothing gets you fired quicker than unsold seats. There is zero chance Darnold sits a year, he will IMO, be very lucky if he isn't starting game 1. 

The Cleveland fan base is in no mood for patience and will demand through ticket sales, that Darnold starts ASAP and I can guarantee you, the owner will absolutely demand it.

WE are looking at a 1-31 team, so do not try to tell Cleveland fans to be patient. 

[Iamcanadian]

On 3/5/2018 at 7:24 AM, 1ForTheThumb said:

It's pretty clear to me the Barkley is the best player in this draft. If I'm the Browns, I go BPA at #1 and then take the best available QB at #4. You have the luxury and the ability to get the best player in the draft AND a franchise QB.

Take Barkley #1.

Let the Giants make the decision between Rosen, Darnold and Allen.

Colts don't need a QB.

Then you still have a shot at probably Darnold. 

This draft is SO important for the Cleveland Browns. I'm going with the safe, BPA #1 and then making the call at QB. I'd be pretty damn excited about the future of the Browns offense is the draft played out this way and they get Barkley, Darnold, to pair with their receiving targets. Darnold, Barkley, Njuku, Gordon, Coleman, Duke Johnson, etc.

Fans may think there is no difference between QB prospects, but you can be sure, the Scouts, HC's and GM's have already decided on who is head and shoulders, the best QB in the draft and you want them to take the 3rd best QB prospect!!!

NFL teams run the ball about 33% of the time and pass the ball 67% of the time, so why in the world, would you want a RB over a top 5 QB, RB's who are usually washed up after 5 years of taking a pounding, to the point where few teams resign them, preferring to draft a younger one, while a franchise QB can often play till he is close to 40???

The Colts do not need a QB, last I looked Luck will not be available at the start of the season and has been injured the last 2 seasons and you really think they will not draft a QB. I would not count on it!!!

There is zero chance Darnold is there at #4 even if the Colts do not want a QB, they will get a ton of offers from QB desperate teams to trade up for the Colt's pick, ditto for the Giants if they don't go QB.