Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

2016 Browns Season Thread

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ 2016 Browns Season Thread
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 1:17 PM
Let's say Goff, Wentz, Jack, Ramsey, Tunsil, Bosa, and Buckner go top 7. Browns can't trade down, who do you guys want us to draft?
Apr 22, 2016 1:17pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 22, 2016 1:22 PM
sleeper;1792821 wrote:I am hopeful that he can turn it around but I have my doubts. It's hard to believe a player who can't hack it on the Redskins can come make the Browns a contender.
He's awful. He might be able to win 3-4 games but that's about it. I'm sure their plan was to trade the 2nd pick for more picks, get a stopgap QB in here to at least prevent them from complete disaster (0-16), and try and be good in 2-3 years.

I think another piece of their plan is to get some more picks for some of their vets. I think they'll trade Thomas soon. My opinion.
Apr 22, 2016 1:22pm
Benny The Jet's avatar

Benny The Jet

Senior Member

2,987 posts
Apr 22, 2016 1:42 PM
Commander of Awesome;1792822 wrote:Let's say Goff, Wentz, Jack, Ramsey, Tunsil, Bosa, and Buckner go top 7. Browns can't trade down, who do you guys want us to draft?
Ronnie Stanley/Jack Conklin

I am hopeful and confident though that Jets will go full Jets and completely reach and trade up with us to grab Lynch.
Apr 22, 2016 1:42pm
S

Sonofanump

Apr 22, 2016 2:02 PM
Commander of Awesome;1792822 wrote:Let's say Goff, Wentz, Jack, Ramsey, Tunsil, Bosa, and Buckner go top 7. Browns can't trade down, who do you guys want us to draft?
Hargreaves/ Stanley. Is Jack cleared medically?
Apr 22, 2016 2:02pm
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 2:11 PM
Benny The Jet;1792828 wrote:Ronnie Stanley/Jack Conklin

I am hopeful and confident though that Jets will go full Jets and completely reach and trade up with us to grab Lynch.
I'm really not a big fan of Stanley. Conklin is alright, but I prefer Decker over both of them. I also think reaching for a RT at #8 is dumb, and would piss me off to see Schwartz, best RT in football walk for nothing then use a premium resource to replace him. Get a RT in the 3rd round and use the #8 pick on something else.
Apr 22, 2016 2:11pm
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 2:11 PM
Sonofanump;1792829 wrote:Hargreaves/ Stanley. Is Jack cleared medically?
I would pretty pissed with either of those picks.
Apr 22, 2016 2:11pm
S

Sonofanump

Apr 22, 2016 2:14 PM
Commander of Awesome;1792831 wrote:I would pretty pissed with either of those picks.
Could see drafting a tackle there would be upsetting, but I don't see the CB as strong as you do. Do you want a DE at #8, Lawson?
Apr 22, 2016 2:14pm
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 2:19 PM
Sonofanump;1792832 wrote:Could see drafting a tackle there would be upsetting, but I don't see the CB as strong as you do. Do you want a DE at #8, Lawson?
DE/OLBer would be a position I would look at. Lawson/Floyd/Dodd (I think Floyd and Dodd a little better than Lawson, think they're better pass rushers). Also wouldn't QQ at the best DT available. I really like Billings out of Baylor, this allows Shelton to be moved around the line, which I think is a better fit for him over purely NT. IF we went after OT, I prefer Decker to Conklin or Stanley (personally I think Stanley is a late first at best). I would rather draft Zeke over Stanley or Conklin and I would hate drafting Zeke. Darren Lee is a sleeper prospect who I wouldn't QQ if we drafted.

I guess I would go:

Dline prospect
WR
Lee
Decker
Apr 22, 2016 2:19pm
Benny The Jet's avatar

Benny The Jet

Senior Member

2,987 posts
Apr 22, 2016 2:30 PM
I've seen some that have Buckner at 8. Don't know much about him other than he went to Oregon..and I know I don't trust much of anything that comes from Oregon NFL wise
Apr 22, 2016 2:30pm
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 2:53 PM
Benny The Jet;1792837 wrote:I've seen some that have Buckner at 8. Don't know much about him other than he went to Oregon..and I know I don't trust much of anything that comes from Oregon NFL wise
TJ Ward, MM, Armsted, Kiko, Blount, Bryd, Chung, Kyle Long, Ngata, Jake Fisher some pretty good players right off the top of my head.
Apr 22, 2016 2:53pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:23 PM
Max Unger and J Stew were ducks if you want to go back a little farther
Apr 22, 2016 3:23pm
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:27 PM
Benny The Jet;1792828 wrote:Ronnie Stanley/Jack Conklin

I am hopeful and confident though that Jets will go full Jets and completely reach and trade up with us to grab Lynch.
Stanley....lineman in the NFL is like pitchers in MLB....you can never have too many and we do not have much talent on the O line with departure of Schwartz and Mack.
Apr 22, 2016 3:27pm
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:28 PM
Vegas line for Browns is 4.5 wins this year. I say under with a high level of confidence.
Apr 22, 2016 3:28pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:31 PM
slingshot4ever;1792851 wrote:Vegas line for Browns is 4.5 wins this year. I say under with a high level of confidence.
Where the fuck did someone get they were odds on favorites to go 0-16?
Apr 22, 2016 3:31pm
HitsRus's avatar

HitsRus

Senior Member

9,206 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:32 PM
Wow...everybody is on the "more picks" bandwagon...yeah I'm good with that as long as we don't go full Mangini.
Apr 22, 2016 3:32pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:35 PM
Azubuike24;1792854 wrote:Where the fuck did someone get they were odds on favorites to go 0-16?
Probably because they are underdogs in every one of their matchups. Still very misleading with the 0-16 talk.
Apr 22, 2016 3:35pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:36 PM
like_that;1792856 wrote:Probably because they are underdogs in every one of their matchups. Still very misleading with the 0-16 talk.
True, but obviously being predicted to lose every game doesn't make it a cumulative thing. I think 3-13 would be a fair prediction...but this is the NFL. Half the games that look hard now, could be easy, and vice versa.
Apr 22, 2016 3:36pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:47 PM
Give me someone who can get to the QB, or trade down and take a receiver.
Apr 22, 2016 3:47pm
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:52 PM
Azubuike24;1792854 wrote:Where the fuck did someone get they were odds on favorites to go 0-16?
They are projected as the team to win the fewest number of games; therefore, would be odds on favorite to be the most likely team to go 0-16. Makes sense to me...
Apr 22, 2016 3:52pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Apr 22, 2016 3:54 PM
That's not what he said. He said Vegas projects them to go 0-16, not that they have the best odds to go 0-16. Big difference.
Apr 22, 2016 3:54pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Apr 22, 2016 4:17 PM
slingshot4ever;1792850 wrote:Stanley....lineman in the NFL is like pitchers in MLB....you can never have too many and we do not have much talent on the O line with departure of Schwartz and Mack.
Sorry but no. You can have too many and no team other than the Browns is a perfect example at that. We had one of the best offensive lines in the league and we still were god awful because we didn't have any talent on offense elsewhere to utilize that line.

We may need some OL talent in the draft because we are depleted after some FA departures but let's not go overboard here.
Apr 22, 2016 4:17pm
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Apr 22, 2016 4:20 PM
Azubuike24;1792869 wrote:That's not what he said. He said Vegas projects them to go 0-16, not that they have the best odds to go 0-16. Big difference.
But you said "odds on favorite"....big difference as well
Apr 22, 2016 4:20pm
S

slingshot4ever

Senior Member

4,085 posts
Apr 22, 2016 4:22 PM
sleeper;1792876 wrote:Sorry but no. You can have too many and no team other than the Browns is a perfect example at that. We had one of the best offensive lines in the league and we still were god awful because we didn't have any talent on offense elsewhere to utilize that line.

We may need some OL talent in the draft because we are depleted after some FA departures but let's not go overboard here.

Need 5 starters....more than any other type of position....should be the largest number of roster spots
Apr 22, 2016 4:22pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Apr 22, 2016 4:24 PM
slingshot4ever;1792878 wrote:Need 5 starters....more than any other type of position....should be the largest number of roster spots
Sure, but you don't need all starters and all backups to be studs. Lineman are pretty durable so having 5 good starters and a couple of bodies to fill in is enough.
Apr 22, 2016 4:24pm
Commander of Awesome's avatar

Commander of Awesome

Senior Pwner

23,151 posts
Apr 22, 2016 4:29 PM
Doesn't help our run game when the WRs are the size of smurfs, thus can't block, and our TEs are as effective as a tissue in blocking as well.
Apr 22, 2016 4:29pm