(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

I have Goff #1 and Tunsil #2 as "can't miss" prospects and due to the key positions on the field they play (QB and LT). After that, it's a toss up for me. It will definitely be interesting come Thursday night. The front office personnel get paid the big bucks to make these decisions.

(04-24-2016 06:20 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

I have Goff #1 and Tunsil #2 as "can't miss" prospects and due to the key positions on the field they play (QB and LT). After that, it's a toss up for me. It will definitely be interesting come Thursday night. The front office personnel get paid the big bucks to make these decisions.

My concern with Goff is he comes from a Air Raid Offense-(Tim Couch) and JMO his ceiling is Matt Ryan-(solid QB But not a Franchise QB) and with Tunsil his injury history...plus I like Conklin and Stanley as much as him.

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

(04-24-2016 07:59 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 06:20 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

I have Goff #1 and Tunsil #2 as "can't miss" prospects and due to the key positions on the field they play (QB and LT). After that, it's a toss up for me. It will definitely be interesting come Thursday night. The front office personnel get paid the big bucks to make these decisions.

My concern with Goff is he comes from a Air Raid Offense-(Tim Couch) and JMO his ceiling is Matt Ryan-(solid QB But not a Franchise QB) and with Tunsil his injury history...plus I like Conklin and Stanley as much as him.

Goff is considered the most NFL ready of the QB's in this year's draft and for that reason is lower risk based on "knowns" to include his strengths (accuracy/football IQ/pocket presence) career production, playing competition and starting experience. You are absolutely correct Maize, what his ultimate ceiling is - who knows? It may be Matt Ryan level tops but considering what the Browns have had for starting QB's since Tim Couch I would take Matt Ryan. I actually was not aware of Tunsil's injury history so thanks for the heads up on that. He'd still look pretty good at the RT spot across from Thomas. I agree that I like Stanley and Conklin as well but I prefer Stanley.

(04-24-2016 08:05 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

Was not aware of specifics on Mack's knee. Thanks for that tidbit. I would not draft him at the #8 spot if I'm picking for the Browns.

(04-24-2016 08:05 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

Thanks for the heads up...whoever picks him the medical staff better be correct.

(04-24-2016 08:33 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 07:59 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 06:20 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

I have Goff #1 and Tunsil #2 as "can't miss" prospects and due to the key positions on the field they play (QB and LT). After that, it's a toss up for me. It will definitely be interesting come Thursday night. The front office personnel get paid the big bucks to make these decisions.

My concern with Goff is he comes from a Air Raid Offense-(Tim Couch) and JMO his ceiling is Matt Ryan-(solid QB But not a Franchise QB) and with Tunsil his injury history...plus I like Conklin and Stanley as much as him.

Goff is considered the most NFL ready of the QB's in this year's draft and for that reason is lower risk based on "knowns" to include his strengths (accuracy/football IQ/pocket presence) career production, playing competition and starting experience. You are absolutely correct Maize, what his ultimate ceiling is - who knows? It may be Matt Ryan level tops but considering what the Browns have had for starting QB's since Tim Couch I would take Matt Ryan. I actually was not aware of Tunsil's injury history so thanks for the heads up on that. He'd still look pretty good at the RT spot across from Thomas. I agree that I like Stanley and Conklin as well but I prefer Stanley.

Tunsil didn't run at the NFL Combine or at his Pro Day @ Ole Miss...plus he did miss time at Ole Miss with some injuries and if I'm not mistaken was with Robert Nkemdiche when he had his incident in Atlanta.

The Los Angeles Rams are now on the clock...



Can't wait!

(04-24-2016 08:36 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:05 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

Was not aware of specifics on Mack's knee. Thanks for that tidbit. I would not draft him at the #8 spot if I'm picking for the Browns.

You guys are saying Mack, but you mean Myles Jack right? Easy mix up or I'm just out of touch with nicknames or I need to find out who Mack is. Regardless, Myles Jack would be one of my top draft picks if I knew he was healthy. His skills are so rare for a linebacker that he would be a difference maker like Luke Kuechly. Both him and Jaylon Smith are real shames.

(04-28-2016 06:14 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:36 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:05 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

Was not aware of specifics on Mack's knee. Thanks for that tidbit. I would not draft him at the #8 spot if I'm picking for the Browns.

You guys are saying Mack, but you mean Myles Jack right? Easy mix up or I'm just out of touch with nicknames or I need to find out who Mack is. Regardless, Myles Jack would be one of my top draft picks if I knew he was healthy. His skills are so rare for a linebacker that he would be a difference maker like Luke Kuechly. Both him and Jaylon Smith are real shames.

Wow, can't believe I said Mack. How did none of us recognize that mistake? Oh well, thanks for noticing

(04-28-2016 06:14 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:36 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:05 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:32 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Elliott will definitely be there at 8. As for Mack, the concern over his knee is clouding everything. Seems like he could go anywhere from 6 to 25

Mack to me is this year Todd Gurley...him and Ramsey are the two best players in the draft this year with Elliot #3...would take those three over Bosa, Tunsil, Stanley, Buckner and Goff/Wentz.

read something today that said Mack's problem is a lack of cartilage, meaning that his knee will never be 100%. He won't be in pain, but if you're drafting him you're essentially rolling the dice. Gurley didn't have any kind of lingering concerns. Once his knee healed it was good as new.

Was not aware of specifics on Mack's knee. Thanks for that tidbit. I would not draft him at the #8 spot if I'm picking for the Browns.

You guys are saying Mack, but you mean Myles Jack right? Easy mix up or I'm just out of touch with nicknames or I need to find out who Mack is. Regardless, Myles Jack would be one of my top draft picks if I knew he was healthy. His skills are so rare for a linebacker that he would be a difference maker like Luke Kuechly. Both him and Jaylon Smith are real shames.

Don't disagree on Jack (not Mack) or Smith if healthy. Someone will draft them because they are too good to pass up despite the injuries.

No surprises after the first two picks. Now it will get interesting.

3 Buckeyes taken in the first 10 picks. Urban Meyer is grinning ear to ear. The fall continues for Tunsil.

Not sure what to make of the Rams' pick, or more importantly, what to make of the trade that got them the pick. As a former/original LA Rams fan, I requiring some "wooing" to get back on the bandwagon and I think the team recognizes that they need to do something splashy to get the new/old fanbase excited. And I get how important QBs are and how overspending to get one is pretty much a requirement. But it doesn't feel like this was the year to trade what feels like two years worth of draft picks. Goff seems like he could be a nice QB but it's hard to see him as a franchise-type, leverage your next couple of years type guy.

(04-28-2016 09:25 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Not sure what to make of the Rams' pick, or more importantly, what to make of the trade that got them the pick. As a former/original LA Rams fan, I requiring some "wooing" to get back on the bandwagon and I think the team recognizes that they need to do something splashy to get the new/old fanbase excited. And I get how important QBs are and how overspending to get one is pretty much a requirement. But it doesn't feel like this was the year to trade what feels like two years worth of draft picks. Goff seems like he could be a nice QB but it's hard to see him as a franchise-type, leverage your next couple of years type guy.

Everything I have read is he was the most NFL-ready QB in this year's draft. Translation: he was the safest, most logical QB pick. He should develop into at least a consistent, quality starting QB IMHO. Franchise, carry-the-team-on-your-back QB? Only time will tell on that. You are correct that this is now a QB driven league and often they come at a premium. The Rams did give up a lot to get him but the risk-reward equation made them comfortable enough to make this move. Definitely why team management personnel are many pay grades higher than me.

(04-28-2016 09:44 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 09:25 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Not sure what to make of the Rams' pick, or more importantly, what to make of the trade that got them the pick. As a former/original LA Rams fan, I requiring some "wooing" to get back on the bandwagon and I think the team recognizes that they need to do something splashy to get the new/old fanbase excited. And I get how important QBs are and how overspending to get one is pretty much a requirement. But it doesn't feel like this was the year to trade what feels like two years worth of draft picks. Goff seems like he could be a nice QB but it's hard to see him as a franchise-type, leverage your next couple of years type guy.

Everything I have read is he was the most NFL-ready QB in this year's draft. Translation: he was the safest, most logical QB pick. He should develop into at least a consistent, quality starting QB IMHO. Franchise, carry-the-team-on-your-back QB? Only time will tell on that. You are correct that this is now a QB driven league and often they come at a premium. The Rams did give up a lot to get him but the risk-reward equation made them comfortable enough to make this move. Definitely why team management personnel are many pay grades higher than me.

Yeah, I get why they did this but I was thinking they'd get a year or two grace period before they really needed to do something like this. That said, you're right about personnel folks - it's entirely possible they're looking at the next couple of likely drafts and have determined their QB choices might not be any better.

Goff will do very well in LA. The only caveat is that he doesn't have the luxury of sitting for 2-3 years and will likely have to play this year - - though as one of the LA Times writers pointed out, that makes him a good fit because he's proven he's tough enough to play well and keep his composure on a struggling team. (He started his freshman year at Cal and played well on a 1-11 team.)

Having watched all of his Cal games, I'll make this comparison to another Cal QB: IMO, Goff has more upside than Aaron Rodgers. Time will tell whether his NFL career turns out as well, or if he is as lucky as Rodgers in getting to play with as much offensive talent as GB has had.

http://dailysnark.com/weighing-options-b...ds-retire/

(04-29-2016 01:15 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  http://dailysnark.com/weighing-options-b...ds-retire/

Ha ha. Check out this link...

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/media-cen...1c9ac31257

Browns have four picks tonight including #32, #65, #76 and #77. They are talking with other teams to trade with at the #32 spot. In addition to some extra picks this year, they've added an extra first and second round pick in 2017 and an extra second rounder in 2018.

(04-29-2016 03:34 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-29-2016 01:15 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  http://dailysnark.com/weighing-options-b...ds-retire/

Ha ha. Check out this link...

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/media-cen...1c9ac31257

Browns have four picks tonight including #32, #65, #76 and #77. They are talking with other teams to trade with at the #32 spot. In addition to some extra picks this year, they've added an extra first and second round pick in 2017 and an extra second rounder in 2018.

The way the Browns are handling the Draft Process these aren't the same ole Browns...Paul DePodesta, Sashi Brown and Hue Jackson have done a outstanding job collecting draft picks and improved their team speed.