I usually don't follow pro football as closely as other sports, but I have to admit I am intrigued with some of the goings-on this off-season.

From the Rams' move back to LA (where I feel they belong) to the two recent blockbuster trades for the Top 2 draft picks by the Titans and Browns to the Rams and Eagles, it certainly will be interesting to follow not only who gets drafted where, but what happens with all 4 teams as a result the next few years.

(04-20-2016 02:34 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I usually don't follow pro football as closely as other sports, but I have to admit I am intrigued with some of the goings-on this off-season.

From the Rams' move back to LA (where I feel they belong) to the two recent blockbuster trades for the Top 2 draft picks by the Titans and Browns to the Rams and Eagles, it certainly will be interesting to follow not only who gets drafted where, but what happens with all 4 teams as a result the next few years.

Both the Rams and Eagles IMO gave up a lot to select these two QB

(04-20-2016 04:22 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:34 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I usually don't follow pro football as closely as other sports, but I have to admit I am intrigued with some of the goings-on this off-season.

From the Rams' move back to LA (where I feel they belong) to the two recent blockbuster trades for the Top 2 draft picks by the Titans and Browns to the Rams and Eagles, it certainly will be interesting to follow not only who gets drafted where, but what happens with all 4 teams as a result the next few years.

Both the Rams and Eagles IMO gave up a lot to select these two QB

With so many needs I think the Browns made the right decision. 12 picks in this draft and some high picks in the next two drafts as a result of the Eagles trade. Of course, you still have to make the right picks and this is something the Browns have struggled with overall since 1999. I remain optimistic that the current regime can evaluate talent and hit more than they miss on picks. They still get the #8 selection and I wouldn't be surprised if they try to trade up in the lower end of the first round and take a Paxton Lynch or Connor Cook at QB.

(04-20-2016 04:22 PM)Maize Wrote:  Both the Rams and Eagles IMO gave up a lot to select these two QB

I agree. But both have been chasing quarterbacks since their last franchise QB's were run out of town, Warner for the Rams, and McNabb for the Eagles. If they hit on the QB's, it will be worth it.

(04-20-2016 09:42 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  With so many needs I think the Browns made the right decision. 12 picks in this draft and some high picks in the next two drafts as a result of the Eagles trade. Of course, you still have to make the right picks and this is something the Browns have struggled with overall since 1999.

That is what I was going to point out. History shows, just because it was the Browns, that the Eagles will select a HOF player with their pick, and every one of the Browns picks will range from "eh" to "blows."

(04-21-2016 01:44 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 04:22 PM)Maize Wrote:  Both the Rams and Eagles IMO gave up a lot to select these two QB

I agree. But both have been chasing quarterbacks since their last franchise QB's were run out of town, Warner for the Rams, and McNabb for the Eagles. If they hit on the QB's, it will be worth it.

(04-20-2016 09:42 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  With so many needs I think the Browns made the right decision. 12 picks in this draft and some high picks in the next two drafts as a result of the Eagles trade. Of course, you still have to make the right picks and this is something the Browns have struggled with overall since 1999.

That is what I was going to point out. History shows, just because it was the Browns, that the Eagles will select a HOF player with their pick, and every one of the Browns picks will range from "eh" to "blows."

For the Rams, Eagles and Browns sake they better hope they are all correct or you will have 3 new front offices in 3 years...the Titans have time since they have Mariota

I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

(04-23-2016 11:27 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

For me, there becomes a point that quantity is not better than quality. They've already traded down 6 spots and picked up extra picks. This franchise needs a "can't miss" prospect and I believe at #8 still gives them a top talent player. I don't disagree with your suggestions in Elliot or Jack but I would also not be upset if they took the best available O Lineman (Stanley assuming Tunsil is off the board) as well after losing two starters to FA. I believe Cam Erving is another reason they let Mack go as his natural position is playing center so they should be set there but the right side of the line is a question mark.

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

You can't make a player resign with you, but you can't build a team based solely on players on rookie contracts. You have a game day roster of 46 players. If all are on rookie contracts, that's at most four years of draft picks. You would basically need 11-12 picks per draft and to either hit all of them or be stubborn enough not to replace them with free agents. What good is saving a salary cap (which rolls over unused space to the next year) if you don't use it? I'm not saying spend just to spend (however there is a salary cap floor so why not spend on players you know and have spent the resources on already) but Schwartz, Gipson, and Benjamin are building blocks any young team can use. Building through the draft is great but retaining the talent should be a priority as well.

(04-23-2016 11:58 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 11:27 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

For me, there becomes a point that quantity is not better than quality. They've already traded down 6 spots and picked up extra picks. This franchise needs a "can't miss" prospect and I believe at #8 still gives them a top talent player. I don't disagree with your suggestions in Elliot or Jack but I would also not be upset if they took the best available O Lineman (Stanley assuming Tunsil is off the board) as well after losing two starters to FA. I believe Cam Erving is another reason they let Mack go as his natural position is playing center so they should be set there but the right side of the line is a question mark.

The reason why I would not go OL that high is that IMO you need either a TD Maker-(Elliot) or a impact player on defense-(Mack)...if they trade down get the best WR in a weak crop-(Treadwell) and come back in the 2nd Round and get the TE Henry from Arkansas. I would address the OL a little later in the draft.

(04-23-2016 02:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

You can't make a player resign with you, but you can't build a team based solely on players on rookie contracts. You have a game day roster of 46 players. If all are on rookie contracts, that's at most four years of draft picks. You would basically need 11-12 picks per draft and to either hit all of them or be stubborn enough not to replace them with free agents. What good is saving a salary cap (which rolls over unused space to the next year) if you don't use it? I'm not saying spend just to spend (however there is a salary cap floor so why not spend on players you know and have spent the resources on already) but Schwartz, Gipson, and Benjamin are building blocks any young team can use. Building through the draft is great but retaining the talent should be a priority as well.

The only one that I would have resigned was Schwartz...Mack is 30 along with I'm not giving $8 Million a year to a Center and just me Benjamin and Gipson are on any other roster average players.

(04-23-2016 02:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 02:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 09:27 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I didn't expect the Eagles to move up. I didn't expect anyone to trade with the Browns and I thought they'd draft the leftover QB, specifically Wentz. The Eagles better know who they are getting. They have a solid nucleus of players to build around but their depth will be hurting for a while. We'll see how that affects their new quarterback (if that's who they select of course).

The Browns need bodies everywhere. What's the point of having the most salary cap space in the league to watch your young, productive players leave in free agency? Those are the exact types of players you want to be resigning on their second contract. I get it that they didn't win with them, but that just leaves one more hole for each that will need filled, and whoever replaces them likely won't be as good. You could use the draft picks to enhance other parts of the roster rather than hopefully fill a hole left by a departing player.

In the Browns case they let 4 players go that only won 3 games last year...I would have not overpaid to keep them either....but for the next 3 years with this thread and compensatory picks 20 NFL Draft picks....make them count Cleveland.

The only "young, productive" players that the Browns should have "tried harder" to resign was the RT Schwartz. The All-Pro center Mack was going to leave for FA regardless. The moves to get younger and open up cap space was not just about this coming season but for the next several IMO. The front office accepts that this year will again be a struggle to put up wins but over the next several seasons it will improve due to building through the draft and having cap space gives them flexibility to sign FA's that they feel fit their particular schemes and philosophy and/or lock up players they like longer term. Of course, only time will tell but I don't have a problem with this philosophy for a franchise that really hasn't yet gotten it right in terms of a consistent winner. Heck, just a record of .500 and above. To Maize's point, making the right draft picks is key for any franchise that wants to have sustainable winning. To this end, I want Cleveland to stay put at #8 and draft the best available player on their board. They need a top 10 talent that can contribute on the field this coming season regardless of the position IMHO.

You can't make a player resign with you, but you can't build a team based solely on players on rookie contracts. You have a game day roster of 46 players. If all are on rookie contracts, that's at most four years of draft picks. You would basically need 11-12 picks per draft and to either hit all of them or be stubborn enough not to replace them with free agents. What good is saving a salary cap (which rolls over unused space to the next year) if you don't use it? I'm not saying spend just to spend (however there is a salary cap floor so why not spend on players you know and have spent the resources on already) but Schwartz, Gipson, and Benjamin are building blocks any young team can use. Building through the draft is great but retaining the talent should be a priority as well.

The only one that I would have resigned was Schwartz...Mack is 30 along with I'm not giving $8 Million a year to a Center and just me Benjamin and Gipson are on any other roster average players.

Fair enough. I wouldn't pay that much for Mack at his age and recent injury history either. I don't think he's the best center anyway but he's getting paid like it. Centers are important but making someone the highest paid at his position is risky.

I think the elite players who are paid elite money are overpaid compared to the, say tenth best player or so at a position. I think having a team full of good players at good player salary is more prudent than the "stars and scrubs" mentality.

(04-23-2016 11:27 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

For me, there becomes a point that quantity is not better than quality. They've already traded down 6 spots and picked up extra picks. This franchise needs a "can't miss" prospect and I believe at #8 still gives them a top talent player. I don't disagree with your suggestions in Elliot or Jack but I would also not be upset if they took the best available O Lineman (Stanley assuming Tunsil is off the board) as well after losing two starters to FA. I believe Cam Erving is another reason they let Mack go as his natural position is playing center so they should be set there but the right side of the line is a question mark.

The reason why I would not go OL that high is that IMO you need either a TD Maker-(Elliot) or a impact player on defense-(Mack)...if they trade down get the best WR in a weak crop-(Treadwell) and come back in the 2nd Round and get the TE Henry from Arkansas. I would address the OL a little later in the draft.

Again, it comes down to a team's philosophy of value at the pick selected. I'm not necessarily advocating selecting a lineman at #8 - it depends on what happens 7 picks above it. Jack also had a knee injury so there is some risk with his selection. Remember too that play makers on either side of the ball aren't as effective if your lines aren't doing their job up front.

(04-23-2016 03:01 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 02:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 02:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  You can't make a player resign with you, but you can't build a team based solely on players on rookie contracts. You have a game day roster of 46 players. If all are on rookie contracts, that's at most four years of draft picks. You would basically need 11-12 picks per draft and to either hit all of them or be stubborn enough not to replace them with free agents. What good is saving a salary cap (which rolls over unused space to the next year) if you don't use it? I'm not saying spend just to spend (however there is a salary cap floor so why not spend on players you know and have spent the resources on already) but Schwartz, Gipson, and Benjamin are building blocks any young team can use. Building through the draft is great but retaining the talent should be a priority as well.

The only one that I would have resigned was Schwartz...Mack is 30 along with I'm not giving $8 Million a year to a Center and just me Benjamin and Gipson are on any other roster average players.

Fair enough. I wouldn't pay that much for Mack at his age and recent injury history either. I don't think he's the best center anyway but he's getting paid like it. Centers are important but making someone the highest paid at his position is risky.

I think the elite players who are paid elite money are overpaid compared to the, say tenth best player or so at a position. I think having a team full of good players at good player salary is more prudent than the "stars and scrubs" mentality.

To be fair, as a Browns fan I am familiar with their roster and despite the FA losses to include Benjamin and Gibson (Benjamin was hit and miss and Gibson was injury prone) there isn't a dearth of players with good playing experience/talent on the roster.

(04-23-2016 06:42 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 11:27 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

For me, there becomes a point that quantity is not better than quality. They've already traded down 6 spots and picked up extra picks. This franchise needs a "can't miss" prospect and I believe at #8 still gives them a top talent player. I don't disagree with your suggestions in Elliot or Jack but I would also not be upset if they took the best available O Lineman (Stanley assuming Tunsil is off the board) as well after losing two starters to FA. I believe Cam Erving is another reason they let Mack go as his natural position is playing center so they should be set there but the right side of the line is a question mark.

The reason why I would not go OL that high is that IMO you need either a TD Maker-(Elliot) or a impact player on defense-(Mack)...if they trade down get the best WR in a weak crop-(Treadwell) and come back in the 2nd Round and get the TE Henry from Arkansas. I would address the OL a little later in the draft.

Again, it comes down to a team's philosophy of value at the pick selected. I'm not necessarily advocating selecting a lineman at #8 - it depends on what happens 7 picks above it. Jack also had a knee injury so there is some risk with his selection. Remember too that play makers on either side of the ball aren't as effective if your lines aren't doing their job up front.

The linchpin is San Diego @ #3...if they take Tunsil more than likely both Elliot and Mack will be their at #8...if that the case just make the pick.

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

(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.

(04-23-2016 06:42 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 11:27 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:37 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 10:12 AM)Maize Wrote:  Myself...I would still trade down to either 13-(Miami) or 15-(Tennessee) but I want at least 2 extra picks...if they trade down to those spots I could live with a LaQuan Treadwell...if they stick at 8 to me it is either Myles Jack or Ezekiel Elliot.

For me, there becomes a point that quantity is not better than quality. They've already traded down 6 spots and picked up extra picks. This franchise needs a "can't miss" prospect and I believe at #8 still gives them a top talent player. I don't disagree with your suggestions in Elliot or Jack but I would also not be upset if they took the best available O Lineman (Stanley assuming Tunsil is off the board) as well after losing two starters to FA. I believe Cam Erving is another reason they let Mack go as his natural position is playing center so they should be set there but the right side of the line is a question mark.

The reason why I would not go OL that high is that IMO you need either a TD Maker-(Elliot) or a impact player on defense-(Mack)...if they trade down get the best WR in a weak crop-(Treadwell) and come back in the 2nd Round and get the TE Henry from Arkansas. I would address the OL a little later in the draft.

Again, it comes down to a team's philosophy of value at the pick selected. I'm not necessarily advocating selecting a lineman at #8 - it depends on what happens 7 picks above it. Jack also had a knee injury so there is some risk with his selection. Remember too that play makers on either side of the ball aren't as effective if your lines aren't doing their job up front.

I also would not be surprised if the Browns trade down to #15 and take their QB at that spot with Lynch...to me no difference at all with Carson Wentz...both compare to Joe Flacco IMO:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foot...raft-class