Sammy Watkins' Rib
-
Posts
6,659 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Sammy Watkins' Rib
-
-
RB's should never be taken in the first. That's obvious to a lot of fans. But for some reason teams still get enamored enough with some to take them in the first round. Some even in the top 10. Crazy. I do think the Browns take Barkley #1. I don't think they should though.
-
If he were to land in Indy I would think it would have to be for their 2nd round pick. Eagles may give Reich a discount. Plus the value is close to a late first anyway. But I don't see this happening.
-
This move certainly takes the stink off of the Chris Ivory signing.
I'm sure Cleveland will be fine. Best case scenario for Cleveland is that the rookie they draft at #1 or #4 beats Taylor out in training camp and pre-season and wins the job. Worst case, Taylor throws for 3100 yards and 20 TDs plus his rushing impact. That would be A LOT better than what Cleveland has been used to these last 20 years at the position.
-
Not a big fan of this move. We'll see how it turns out.
-
On 3/4/2018 at 8:30 AM, BobChalmers said:
Badly missing my point.
Who is the #1 QB? Who are the top 3? 6?
Look - if the Browns are convinced that one of those QB's is a surefire franchise guy AND definitely better than the other 2, 4, or whatever, they should certainly take the QB.
BUT the apparent truth is there is good and bad about all of these guys - none of them is guaranteed better than the other guys.
OTOH, Barkley is the best RB prospect in several years.
Giving up an easy choice for your first among multiple unknowns makes zero sense.
I agree with your point here. BUT, that can also be seen as an indictment on the failures of the Browns GM's and scouting department. It's possible nobody really knows which QB is the best or even which two QBs are the best. But it's likely one of them or two of them will be the better QBs. Browns not being able to decipher which QB or QBs those are is not a good thing.
-
1. Darnold
2. Mayfield
3. Rosen
4. Jackson
Those are the only four quarterbacks I would consider drafting. I see all four has first round picks. I see all four being drafted by #21. Allen might go top #21 too just hope it's not us drafting him. I have a feeling Mayfield is going to be special. I would rank Darnold and Mayfield in the top tier. Rosen in the second tier. And Jackson in the third tier. Again, with all four being worthy of being drafted by the middle of the first round.
-
On 2/28/2018 at 11:39 PM, Doc Brown said:
There's a rumor the Browns could trade for Andrew Luck which would throw the beginning of the draft into chaos with the Colts having three of the first four picks. How fun would that be?
Is Andrew Luck worth the 1st and 4th overall picks in a draft that is considered to have multiple franchise QBs? If I'm Cleveland I'd only trade the 1st overall and one of their seconds for Luck.
On 3/1/2018 at 4:50 AM, JinxedBill1 said:I like the bravado but I doubt Darnold is there at 4. I think Darnold and Rosen go 1 and 2 to the highest bidder at 2. JMO
I see us having to give up three firsts to get it done at minimum. #21, #22 and our first in 2019. It will depend on how far down the draft board the Giants or willing to fall. If they really like a couple prospects that are likely to go top 10 then they might not be willing to trade with us. They'll make a deal with either Denver, NY Jets or Arizona. They can stay in the top ten, draft an elite talent and pick up a 2019 1st.
On 3/1/2018 at 5:44 AM, BobChalmers said:If Sequon Barkley runs well at the combine at 230+ pounds, Cleveland would be nuts not to take him FIRST and then take whatever QB they can get at #4.
I disagree. You don't take a RB #1 overall over a franchise QB in today's NFL. Waiting till #4 to select their QB guarantees they are taking the 3rd best QB in the draft because I see QBs going #2 and #3 in that scenario. Teams will trade up with the Colts and Giants. That's if the Giants don't draft one themselves.
-
I've been saying the same since the season ended. The defense had no improvement over 2016 and the offense completely fell apart compared to 2016. Yet the 2017 team was the one that ended the drought. Didn't make a lot of sense but we were all just happy for a playoff game. Lot's of work to do still though.
-
I'm not very high on Bridgewater. Could he be better than Taylor? Maybe. Could he be a lot better than Taylor? Doubt it.
-
This would hurt Brady and the Patriots more than any other team so I can't be completely against it.
I think the the thin most of us hate is when a team gets the ball at the one yard line or even inside of the 5 because of a iffy call that happened on a 50 yard pass play. They need to fix those calls for those situations. Not necessarily the entire rule.
-
Just now, Spiderweb said:
Whoa... Johnson was adequate.... Wright was terrible. Fixed it..
My standards are a little lower based on the last 17 years.
-
Johnson was a terrific nickle corner for us last year I thought.
Wright was so-so. I see Gaines as likely gone.
-
He's going to get paid way to much to be second fiddle to Shady in our system. Unless we plan on a near even split in touches between the two I can't see it making sense. I'd kick the tires on seeing if we could get Gills back since apparently Belicheck doesn't have a use for him.
-
15 hours ago, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:
Refuted by people who think Brady and Wilson and Brees were top prospects going into the draft. All wrong.
What does that even matter? Josh Allen is considered by some to be the top prospect in this draft? Yet most of us will put our remote through the TV if we pick him in the first round. The only thing that matters is if they end up being good in the NFL and if our scouts and GM were able to recognize their potential and spend a draft pick on them.
I think our biggest problem since Kelly retired is that we hold onto bad to average QBs too long. JP, Edwards, Fitz, Taylor all were given multiple seasons to develop. The plug should have been pulled on these guys immediately. EJ was the only one really who was pulled quickly thanks to Marrone. But we didn't really have a back up with potential. That is where repeatedly trying comes into play and the Bills just don't try hard enough as others have said.
1 minute ago, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:Ummm...lol...you really didn’t read the OP did you. Didn’t think so.
buuuuuut. Trading away multiple picks also fell under suffering.
and listening to enough fans and some media...trading up seems to be suffering in many people’s eyes.
anyhing else? Or maybe you should go have a coffee and wake up?
Your OP is wrong then. Trading away multiple picks is not suffering. You only suffer when you finish 1-15, 3-13. It is completely possible to trade away player and picks and not finish 3-13. Trading away picks and players in no way automatically equals suffering.
-
18 hours ago, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:
Wilson wasn’t what I would deem a TOP Prospect in that Draft.
and The Eagles gave up picks and Players which many in our fan base can’t even bring themselves to want to do.
i do agree though we haven’t really suffered enough,
Nice spin. The poster you quoted clearly stated the Bills haven't tried hard enough to get a good QB. He gave three examples of teams that tried hard without tanking.
Both the Eagles and Rams acquired their franchise QBs 1 and 2 without having to tank.
-
As others have said, love him at #21 or maybe in a trad up from #21 to #17 or so. Both Mayfield and Jackson have too much upside to not be mid-first round picks.
-
Allen is Brock Osweilier with more mobility. But not enough mobility to make him worth having as a QB.
-
16 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:
I don’t think Mccarron is going to choose to sign anywhere that he doesn’t have a decent chance to start out of the gate.
He should sign with New England. Back up Brady for a couple years and then either take over or build even more value and get traded to a team that will pay him a huge contract.
Tyrod is likely looking at a back up role no matter where he goes. Miami might not be a bad chose for him. Tannehill is not a set in stone franchise QB so a window very well could open that makes him the starter.
-
I think after years and years of tentative QBs like Edwards, EJ and Taylor having a guy like Darnold would be a breath of fresh air.
I think my favorites are still Rosen, Darnold and Mayfield in that order. Why didn't the OP consider Jackson?
-
1 hour ago, aristocrat said:
do you hate the idea of success?
Cousins has been doing as much winning as Taylor over the last three years. The guy may be able to throw the ball a lot but success has been limited.
-
13 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
And most of that is the Cassel year when they had an extremely easy schedule. The Dolphins went 1-15 the year before, then 11-5 that year against the incredibly nice AFC East schedule, and then 7-9 the year after. That year was a fluke.
And as you know, turns out the NFL thinks Garoppolo is pretty good too, even without being in Foxboro.
And Brady could have had that 2008 team finish 15-1 possibly. They just went 16-0 the season prior. So while 11-5 is generally considered good. It's still a 4-5 game drop off compared to what Brady likely could have done.
-
43 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:
Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield, Allen, Rudolph, and possibly Jackson. While the #1 Browns, #2 Giants, (even the #3 Colts if Luck's shoulder is still in question) #5 Broncos, #6 NY Jets, (#11 Miami if a top QB is still there they like)#15 Arizona, #21 Buffalo. A possible Six first round QBs and six teams or more with a strong need.
And then you have Pittsburgh and the LA Chargers who could draft a QB earlier to groom under Big Ben or Rivers.
-
I hope Washington does this so they can get stuck with him and Smith. That would be too funny.
-
IMO Brady surpassed Montana after he won his fourth against the Seahawks. He cemented himself as the GOAT after last years comeback against the Falcons to the point where he could literally go 0-4 to finish out his career and it would have zero negative impact. I'm mean the dude is old as dirt by QB standards. Any Super Bowl appearances at this point to finish out his career are just icing on top. We might not ever see another QB play in 8 Super Bowls ever again. I doubt we even see one play in six.
-
1
-
Good morning, boys
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by Sammy Watkins' Rib
I think there was a very small chance he would have been here next year but only under the condition of a first round pick waiting in the wings. I was fine with him coming back in 2017. And we ended the drought in a wacky way, so hey, all things worked out.
Our running game in 2016 fell under the category of explosive. Browns could find similar success if Barkley is as advertised.