LOCKED: Browns BS Drama Continued...

posted by SportsAndLady

And ask Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Carolina, Dallas, LAR and other teams with great young RB's how good they feel about having that RB on their team. If Barkley turns into one of those RB's, we'll be happy too.

What do all of the teams you mentioned have in common?

They all had an established QB when they added what they thought was a missing "piece" to get them over the top. Pittsburgh (Fat Boy) took Bell in the 2nd round, New Orleans (Brees) took Kamara after the 1st round, Carolina (Newton) took McCaffrey in 1st, Dallas (Romo before he got injured and Dak shocked everyone) took Zeke with a top 5 pick and LAR (Bradford) took Gurley.

Except for Zeke, none of these were top 5 picks. The fact that you mentioned teams that found their bell cow in the 2nd round or later kind of proves our point.

You add a RB when your other positions are solidified and you have that QB in place. Get your QB up to speed and THEN add the RB, once the QB's established. You take a RB like Barkley high, it takes the QB 2-3 years to get established, and you've used 2-3 of the stud RB's prime years for what?

posted by SportsAndLady

Lol the Browns aren't lacking in talent. They're lacking a QB worth a shit. We have more talent at some of our positions than other teams do. Spare me the "Browns can't afford to risk a pick on a RB! We need to risk a pick on a defensive lineman!" bullshit because that's exactly waht it is.

Yes, a team that has gone 1-31 isn't lacking in talent.  Come on man. 

posted by like_that

Yes, a team that has gone 1-31 isn't lacking in talent.  Come on man. 

As to this, I will say there were teams the Browns faced last year (Bills, Colts, Dolphins (didn't face) and Packers) that I think the Browns had more talent than. The only thing that moved the needle in the opponents favor was the fact that they had a functioning QB. In fact, I'd say the Browns have more talent than both the Colts & Packers, except for QB (Luck & Rodgers).

posted by BR1986FB

And ask Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Carolina, Dallas, LAR and other teams with great young RB's how good they feel about having that RB on their team. If Barkley turns into one of those RB's, we'll be happy too.

What do all of the teams you mentioned have in common?

They all had an established QB when they added what they thought was a missing "piece" to get them over the top. Pittsburgh (Fat Boy) took Bell in the 2nd round, New Orleans (Brees) took Kamara after the 1st round, Carolina (Newton) took McCaffrey in 1st, Dallas (Romo before he got injured and Dak shocked everyone) took Zeke with a top 5 pick and LAR (Bradford) took Gurley.

Except for Zeke, none of these were top 5 picks. The fact that you mentioned teams that found their bell cow in the 2nd round or later kind of proves our point.

You add a RB when your other positions are solidified and you have that QB in place. Get your QB up to speed and THEN add the RB, once the QB's established. You take a RB like Barkley high, it takes the QB 2-3 years to get established, and you've used 2-3 of the stud RB's prime years for what?

But like S&L said, he's a generational RB.. not one you just pick next year or 2 or 3 years from now when you think you're set at QB. You're not always going to have that talent every year.

posted by like_that

Yes, a team that has gone 1-31 isn't lacking in talent.  Come on man. 

Decent O-line (at least when JT was here), one of the best WR corps in the NFL, good LB (Kirksey), solid D-line. We are 1-31 because our coach has shit for brains, we don't have even below average QB play, and when we need to close out a game we didn't (probably just bad coaching). But we do have some talent. 

posted by BR1986FB

And ask Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Carolina, Dallas, LAR and other teams with great young RB's how good they feel about having that RB on their team. If Barkley turns into one of those RB's, we'll be happy too.

What do all of the teams you mentioned have in common?

They all had an established QB when they added what they thought was a missing "piece" to get them over the top. Pittsburgh (Fat Boy) took Bell in the 2nd round, New Orleans (Brees) took Kamara after the 1st round, Carolina (Newton) took McCaffrey in 1st, Dallas (Romo before he got injured and Dak shocked everyone) took Zeke with a top 5 pick and LAR (Bradford) took Gurley.

Except for Zeke, none of these were top 5 picks. The fact that you mentioned teams that found their bell cow in the 2nd round or later kind of proves our point.

You add a RB when your other positions are solidified and you have that QB in place. Get your QB up to speed and THEN add the RB, once the QB's established. You take a RB like Barkley high, it takes the QB 2-3 years to get established, and you've used 2-3 of the stud RB's prime years for what?

3/5 of those teams took their stud RB in the top 10 lol

posted by SportsAndLady

Talent is talent. And Barkley is considered a once in a generation talent. If you QQ over taking him at 4 because you have some personal belief that the RB position in the NFL doesn't matter, then that's on you. But at this point, coming off a 1-15 and 0-16 season, I'll take talent anywhere we can get it. 

And ask Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Carolina, Dallas, LAR and other teams with great young RB's how good they feel about having that RB on their team. If Barkley turns into one of those RB's, we'll be happy too.

You must have short term memory, because there have been numerous RBs in recent drafts who were "once in a generation" talents.  Guess what?  There were equal or better RBs drafted after them.  

All of those teams you mentioned already had well established teams.  They focused on positions of HIGHER VALUE and then they drafted a RB.  As I mentioned previously the Steelers value Bell (not a first round pick btw) so much that they haven't offered him an extension.  Their offense remained high powered when Bell was injured/suspended, because they were solidified at positions that are much more valuable (QB, line, wr).  The same shit applies to all of the other teams you have mentioned.  Nobody is saying a great RB doesn't help any team.  The fact of the matter is every team that has won a SB focused on high value positions before they worried about a RB.  Look at the last 10+ SBs and tell me how many of those teams looked for a RB early in the process of building a contending team.  Talent is not talent in the NFL.  There are positions that are valued more than other positions.  You comprehend this when it comes to a QB (the most valued position in the NFL), but apparently not every other position.  Give me a talented non RB at #4 and then draft a RB in the later rounds.  There are plenty of good RBs to pick from.  History has shown us this and teams don't need to draft a RB in the first round let alone the top 4.

The point is, we find a QB at 1, and it doesn't really matter who we take at 4 as long as they're productive. Whether we improve our O line, D line, RB, etc. it doesn't matter because EVERYONE looks better with a great QB.

posted by SportsAndLady

The point is, we find a QB at 1, and it doesn't really matter who we take at 4 as long as they're productive. Whether we improve our O line, D line, RB, etc. it doesn't matter because EVERYONE looks better with a great QB.

I don't disagree with that, but I still value the other positions well before a RB, and so does the rest of the NFL.  As BR has stated most RBs have a short shelf life.  Let's say we draft an elite QB.  How long before he becomes a legit QB?  Most QBs don't come in lighting it up.  By the time he figures it out, our first round RB will be on the wrong side of his shelf life and at that point we all will be wishing we drafted (insert a position of a higher need). 

posted by SportsAndLady

Decent O-line (at least when JT was here), one of the best WR corps in the NFL, good LB (Kirksey), solid D-line. We are 1-31 because our coach has shit for brains, we don't have even below average QB play, and when we need to close out a game we didn't (probably just bad coaching). But we do have some talent. 

The o-line looked terrible without JT,  saying we have one of the best WR corps in the NFL is a reach (let's see how Gordon pans out with a full off season), Kirksey is above average, and I am not quite sure I would call our d-line solid yet (although it has potential, especially if we get Chubb).  

posted by SportsAndLady

3/5 of those teams took their stud RB in the top 10 lol

I said top 5. There is a difference.

posted by SportsAndLady

3/5 of those teams took their stud RB in the top 10 lol

As stated all of those teams had established rosters, but with that being said the NFC has been won by teams who didn't  need to draft a RB in the first round. 

posted by iclfan2

Ha, 92.3 reporter that Dorsey won’t be telling Hue who is going #1 until Wednesday night. Seems normal

Dorsey doesn't tell Hue anything and the leaks have stopped. Interesting.

posted by Commander of Awesome

Dorsey doesn't tell Hue anything and the leaks have stopped. Interesting.

And I love it because it's probably killing him and even more so his lap dog, Mike Silver.

posted by kizer permanente

I get the logic, but there’s a reason Barkley is slated to be picked early. People obviously value his talent at those sports. I’d be shocked if he falls just bc rb’s aren’t valued that high. 

Same ppl also said the same thing about Trent Richardson. Who do you think the Cowboys would rather have right now? Zeke or the best Corner in the game; Jalen Ramsey?

Who do you think the Jags would have right now? Leonard Fournette or Patrick Mahomes?

posted by Commander of Awesome

Same ppl also said the same thing about Trent Richardson. Who do you think the Cowboys would rather have right now? Zeke or the best Corner in the game; Jalen Ramsey?

Who do you think the Jags would have right now? Leonard Fournette or Patrick Mahomes?

Not everyone is over the moon for Barkley. I've heard he's not great between the tackles and needs to be out in space.

posted by BR1986FB

Not everyone is over the moon for Barkley. I've heard he's not great between the tackles and needs to be out in space.

Yeah his vision is average and tried to bounce a lot of runs outside.

posted by Commander of Awesome

Same ppl also said the same thing about Trent Richardson. Who do you think the Cowboys would rather have right now? Zeke or the best Corner in the game; Jalen Ramsey?

Who do you think the Jags would have right now? Leonard Fournette or Patrick Mahomes?

Or Eli Apple? Who fucking sucks.

It's so easy to do what you're doing (looking back and cherry picking who the best player was without taking into account that whoever YOU want COULD be a bust).

posted by Commander of Awesome

Yeah his vision is average and tried to bounce a lot of runs outside.

Sounds like T-Rich.

posted by SportsAndLady

Or Eli Apple? Who fucking sucks.

 

It's so easy to do what you're doing (looking back and cherry picking who the best player was without taking into account that whoever YOU want COULD be a bust).

That's not true, you're cherry picking now lol. Bottom line, you don't take RBs in the top 10.