2012 Cleveland Browns thread: AKA Pat Shurmur Memorial thread

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ 2012 Cleveland Browns thread: AKA Pat Shurmur Memorial thread
dazedconfused's avatar

dazedconfused

Senior Member

2,662 posts
Jan 9, 2012 12:27 PM
rg3 at 4 is a pipedream...no way washington or miami doesn't trade up to either 2 or 3 to get ahead of us
Jan 9, 2012 12:27pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 1:13 PM
http://networkedblogs.com/svX04
Jan 9, 2012 1:13pm
dazedconfused's avatar

dazedconfused

Senior Member

2,662 posts
Jan 9, 2012 1:36 PM
BR1986FB;1045026 wrote:http://networkedblogs.com/svX04
green bay isn't going to pay the backup to the league mvp 16 mil when they are only paying rodgers 6 mil. flynn will hit free agency
Jan 9, 2012 1:36pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 1:39 PM
dazedconfused;1045063 wrote:green bay isn't going to pay the backup to the league mvp 16 mil when they are only paying rodgers 6 mil. flynn will hit free agency
I agree. I don't see them rolling the dice and then nobody giving up their asking price (getting stuck).
Jan 9, 2012 1:39pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 2:35 PM
Jan 9, 2012 2:35pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:03 PM
I am def not sold on flynn. I don't see the love for him. He's set up in an offense that is pass heavy, with a lot of weapons around. He definlitely looked baller on the 6td day, but at the same time, would he look the same and consistently do it on the browns? Highly doubtful in my eye, but then again, I am one of the few that want to build weapons around the qb and see where it goes.
Jan 9, 2012 3:03pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:07 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045206 wrote:He's set up in an offense that is pass heavy, with a lot of weapons around.
I'm pretty sure that's the direction they are going (heavy on the pass). That's why I think grabbing Richardson with their first 1st rounder would be foolish. I saw stats of the remaining teams left in the playoffs and Willis McGahee was the only 1st round RB left of the playoff teams.
Jan 9, 2012 3:07pm
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:12 PM
BR1986FB;1045211 wrote:I'm pretty sure that's the direction they are going (heavy on the pass). That's why I think grabbing Richardson with their first 1st rounder would be foolish. I saw stats of the remaining teams left in the playoffs and Willis McGahee was the only 1st round RB left of the playoff teams.
Running back is probably the most interchangeable position in the NFL where you don't need to be a high draft pick or even drafted to be successful. Like last night. Without first-round draft pick Mendenhall, the Steelers got 120 or so from undrafted Redman. They lost, but you can't put the blame on the running game, which did better than I was expecting. If you have decent talent evaluation in the front office, you can get capable-to-good backs pretty much anywhere during or after the draft instead of reaching to use a top 5 pick on one.
Jan 9, 2012 3:12pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:13 PM
BR1986FB;1045211 wrote:I'm pretty sure that's the direction they are going (heavy on the pass). That's why I think grabbing Richardson with their first 1st rounder would be foolish. I saw stats of the remaining teams left in the playoffs and Willis McGahee was the only 1st round RB left of the playoff teams.

I don't want to take richardson if we don't trade back. But if we trade back and he falls to us, I just see too much value to pass up. I think he's going to be a stud, and a great running back really helps an offense(texans, ravens). I want to get a DE/LB with our first pick, as I think that's a bigger concern at that spot in the draft. It's not sexy, but it would greatly improve the defense.
Jan 9, 2012 3:13pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:14 PM
Heretic;1045218 wrote:Running back is probably the most interchangeable position in the NFL where you don't need to be a high draft pick or even drafted to be successful. Like last night. Without first-round draft pick Mendenhall, the Steelers got 120 or so from undrafted Redman. They lost, but you can't put the blame on the running game, which did better than I was expecting. If you have decent talent evaluation in the front office, you can get capable-to-good backs pretty much anywhere during or after the draft instead of reaching to use a top 5 pick on one.
Redman was on that list (undrafted) along with Arian Foster and others. Pass happy teams like the Packers, Saints & Patriots seem to be successful doing it with no names, by committee. They use the pass to set up their running game.
Jan 9, 2012 3:14pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:16 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045220 wrote:I want to get a DE/LB with our first pick, as I think that's a bigger concern at that spot in the draft. It's not sexy, but it would greatly improve the defense.
I don't think there will be a player, at either of those positions, worthy of a pick at #4 if they don't trade down. Kuechly would be too high and Coples...blech.
Jan 9, 2012 3:16pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:18 PM
BR1986FB;1045227 wrote:I don't think there will be a player, at either of those positions, worthy of a pick at #4 if they don't trade down. Kuechly would be too high and Coples...blech.
If no team wants to trade up, and rg3 is gone..that means either blackmon or kalil will be there. If it's blackmon, you take him. If it's kalil, I dunno what you do to be honest
Jan 9, 2012 3:18pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:21 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045230 wrote:If no team wants to trade up, and rg3 is gone..that means either blackmon or kalil will be there. If it's blackmon, you take him. If it's kalil, I dunno what you do to be honest
If it's Kalil you hope like Hell someone needs a franchise LT and you trade down.
Jan 9, 2012 3:21pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:22 PM
BR1986FB;1045235 wrote:If it's Kalil you hope like Hell someone needs a franchise LT and you trade down.
Well that's what I'm saying..if no one wants that trade, what do you with that pick?
Jan 9, 2012 3:22pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:26 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045238 wrote:Well that's what I'm saying..if no one wants that trade, what do you with that pick?
Claiborne to pair with Haden, I guess. He'd be BPA besides Kalil.
Jan 9, 2012 3:26pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:28 PM
BR1986FB;1045243 wrote:Claiborne to pair with Haden, I guess. He'd be BPA besides Kalil.
I hate that pick..a great defensive front/LB core makes your corner's that much better. I get he's BPA, but at the same time, I'm taking a DE or LB regardless of the value or not. Hell, haden wasn't a BPA type situation when they took him.
Jan 9, 2012 3:28pm
se-alum's avatar

se-alum

The Biggest Boss

13,948 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:31 PM
With the new rookie scale, it will be easier to take the player you need the most earlier than what they may be projected.
Jan 9, 2012 3:31pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 3:34 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045245 wrote:I hate that pick..a great defensive front/LB core makes your corner's that much better. I get he's BPA, but at the same time, I'm taking a DE or LB regardless of the value or not. Hell, haden wasn't a BPA type situation when they took him.
I don't necessarily think that Heckert always goes by value. I think when they do their big board he has a bunch of players he wants and goes after them (trades picks, etc). So, in your scenario, you could be correct.
Jan 9, 2012 3:34pm
S

Sonofanump

Jan 9, 2012 5:19 PM
DeyDurkie5;1045238 wrote:Well that's what I'm saying..if no one wants that trade, what do you with that pick?
Run an unbalanced line with two LTs. Seriously, why can Kahlil not play RT or is it that you don't want to pay a RT money that a LT would get?
Jan 9, 2012 5:19pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 5:21 PM
Sonofanump;1045359 wrote: you don't want to pay a RT money that a LT would get?
This
Jan 9, 2012 5:21pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Jan 9, 2012 5:22 PM
se-alum;1045252 wrote:With the new rookie scale, it will be easier to take the player you need the most earlier than what they may be projected.
I agree with that. In my opinion, it's made the whole "you can't draft X position that high" bullshit. You fill the holes you need to fill now.

I'm torn on Coples. The guy is a monster when he wants to play. I just don't know if he'd be motivated to play in Cleveland. Risk is probably > Reward for him in my opinion, but I wouldn't be surprised if he put up big numbers.

Regarding Flynn, I didn't see the whole game but I did see the 1st two touchdowns. One was a swing pass to Jordy Nelson that he stiff-armed a guy and took it in for a TD. The 2nd was a dump-off/screen to Ryan Grant that he turned into an 80 yard TD with the YAC.

Obviously you need to make throws to end up with 480 yards, but that was 87 and 2 TDs right there where Flynn didn't put the ball more than 3 yards downfield. Maybe he made some great throws after that point, but those 2 alone didn't do anything to sell me on him as a QB. I'd still be demoralized if the Browns seriously went after him, especially with the contract he'll now command after that game.
Jan 9, 2012 5:22pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 5:30 PM
Mulva;1045361 wrote: Regarding Flynn, I didn't see the whole game but I did see the 1st two touchdowns. One was a swing pass to Jordy Nelson that he stiff-armed a guy and took it in for a TD. The 2nd was a dump-off/screen to Ryan Grant that he turned into an 80 yard TD with the YAC.

Obviously you need to make throws to end up with 480 yards, but that was 87 and 2 TDs right there where Flynn didn't put the ball more than 3 yards downfield. Maybe he made some great throws after that point, but those 2 alone didn't do anything to sell me on him as a QB. I'd still be demoralized if the Browns seriously went after him, especially with the contract he'll now command after that game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDYZYmn7tE
Jan 9, 2012 5:30pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Jan 9, 2012 5:50 PM
^ Nice find. TD passes 3 and 4 were nice passes. The other 4 were easy throws. Bad defense or good YAC.
Jan 9, 2012 5:50pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Jan 9, 2012 6:46 PM
Mulva;1045389 wrote:TD passes 3 and 4 were nice passes. The other 4 were easy throws. Bad defense or good YAC.
Agree but it doesn't look like he throws a bad long ball when he has to.
Jan 9, 2012 6:46pm
Pick6's avatar

Pick6

A USA American

14,946 posts
Jan 9, 2012 6:56 PM
BR1986FB;1045360 wrote:This
Mulva kind of touched on it, but would it be that much money to spend with the new rookie pay scale?
Jan 9, 2012 6:56pm