The Dawg Pound! - Page 445 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > 32 NFL Teams > Cleveland Browns

  #4441  
Old 13.04.2016, 07:37 AM
British Bulldawg's Avatar
British Bulldawg British Bulldawg is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.08.2007
Posts: 1,276
Default

Any future players with past character flaws or history should just be wiped clean off our list. I'm fed up of hiring bums and giving then drink and weed money.

At least Haslam has done something right moving us in the right direction with Hue. We must be doing something right for him to choose us over going to New Jersey and having Manning.
Reply With Quote
  #4442  
Old 14.04.2016, 04:45 PM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Well that was predictable! Yet again we don't get our pick of the QBs! I honestly thought it was too good to be true. The gut punch (and I know we "won" the tie-breaker) is that we finished on the same record as the Titoons
Reply With Quote
  #4443  
Old 20.04.2016, 07:59 AM
Bish bang wallop Bish bang wallop is offline
Rookie
 
Join Date: 28.02.2016
Posts: 9
Default

I think the Browns are really going to regret it if they trade out and don't take a QB at 2, sure I get the attraction to picks and the need to rebuild but along with that is IMO an all to easy assumption that we will just find the QB in next few years easy Peassy, he is going to be there in round 3 or 4 and we will bring him through or the other option well we will have a top 5 pick so we just get him next year

Maybe I'm wrong here but it never works out like that, you need to ask yourself the real question, as in Hue needs to ask this, can Wentz or Goff be my franchise guy for next 10 years, if the answer is yes then this might be the only time you are in position to get this guy so you have to take him IMO
Reply With Quote
  #4444  
Old 20.04.2016, 07:21 PM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

I would have preferred to take our chance at #2 as well. So I suppose we will keep Josh in QB room or do you think that Hue has another QB in mind for later picks? If so, I would hope it's not our 32nd.

I also wonder if we would consider trading further back with the last probable elite prospect spot? to pick up more picks for future ammo to possibly get our QB next year?
Reply With Quote
  #4445  
Old 20.04.2016, 10:06 PM
kevmacca35 kevmacca35 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 03.01.2016
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce70 View Post
I would have preferred to take our chance at #2 as well. So I suppose we will keep Josh in QB room or do you think that Hue has another QB in mind for later picks? If so, I would hope it's not our 32nd.

I also wonder if we would consider trading further back with the last probable elite prospect spot? to pick up more picks for future ammo to possibly get our QB next year?
I think lynch cook is an option later in draft.
Reply With Quote
  #4446  
Old 20.04.2016, 10:06 PM
kevmacca35 kevmacca35 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 03.01.2016
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce70 View Post
I would have preferred to take our chance at #2 as well. So I suppose we will keep Josh in QB room or do you think that Hue has another QB in mind for later picks? If so, I would hope it's not our 32nd.

I also wonder if we would consider trading further back with the last probable elite prospect spot? to pick up more picks for future ammo to possibly get our QB next year?
I think cook is an option later in draft.
Reply With Quote
  #4447  
Old 22.04.2016, 07:33 PM
Tractor boys 350 Tractor boys 350 is offline
Rookie
 
Join Date: 12.03.2016
Posts: 28
Default

I think both Lynch and Cook are gone first round, neither San Fran or Denver can afford to pass up a QB in first
Reply With Quote
  #4448  
Old 29.04.2016, 04:17 PM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Round 1 went according to the apparent plan. I was pleased we managed to Go down, pick up extra picks and have our choice of the WRs.
I was also pleased we didn't waste picks to trade back up to the first round. That appears to have contributed to our problems in the past, trading back up and losing assets for questionable talent. I feel now this front office were to do so, it wouldn't necessarily show we're panicking or doing it to be the story, rather it is being done for the purpose of achieving a likely better outcome.

Have to say, while we could still mess up, this is a different office and when I read another article with "same old Browns" I think cheap, premature shot.
Reply With Quote
  #4449  
Old 30.04.2016, 08:00 AM
kevmacca35 kevmacca35 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 03.01.2016
Posts: 115
Default

I like our picks.if you look at the analysis on all of them everyone appears to indicate a real desire to play and a nasty violent approach to the game. We have been too nice and to easy to beat. It's about time we introduced competitiveness into the organisation. We could have selected cook but the questions around his character appear to have frightened teams off. When you look at the qb position we have rg3 who is still fairly young and better than all the ones in the draft so it would make no sense to pick a QB high. Add to the bounty of picks we have in the next two drafts I am quietly confident we are moving in the right direction
Reply With Quote
  #4450  
Old 30.04.2016, 03:55 PM
Bruce70's Avatar
Bruce70 Bruce70 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 29.04.2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevmacca35 View Post
I like our picks.if you look at the analysis on all of them everyone appears to indicate a real desire to play and a nasty violent approach to the game. We have been too nice and to easy to beat. It's about time we introduced competitiveness into the organisation. We could have selected cook but the questions around his character appear to have frightened teams off. When you look at the qb position we have rg3 who is still fairly young and better than all the ones in the draft so it would make no sense to pick a QB high. Add to the bounty of picks we have in the next two drafts I am quietly confident we are moving in the right direction
Agreed! I still remember being stunned when the preseason practice against the Bills had them apparently manhandling us and they didn't get the attitude returned. I get the impression from the press conference that the picks are being made on a team basis. I hope they succeed because more than anything, I want us to have these guys in place long term. To have confidence in a team of coaches being able to coach up players would be nice!
Despite the headlines, I get the impression the picks are being made on traditional basis but an emphasis is being placed on character. Where the analytics seems to come in is approaching the Draft in a business like manner, appreciating that the more picks you have, the better your chances of hitting on a player. If you think you can get your guy lower, drop down and get him there and pick up additional picks. I think we've tried it in the past, but in a less organised way and as a result been erratic.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 11:37 PM.