Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 59

Thread: Article: TOP TEN ... BOTTOM FIVE

  1. Quote Originally Posted by ScottDCP View Post
    Points of divergence with you, Turk:




    TOP 10 LIKES

    4. Pittsburgh Steelers - The Steelers had to address their O Line. Getting David DeCastro and Mike Adams was prudent, and necessary to the health of Big Ben. I think they had a great draft, picking players I would prefer in red, white, and blue at almost every turn. I hate them for it.
    7. Philadelphia Eagles - I liked the fact that they addressed the defensive side of the ball with 4 of their first 5 picks. With an entire offseason ahead, this team will be dangerous if the defense improves and they don't turn the ball over so much on offense. See above.
    10. Buffalo Bills - I liked their draft. They addressed a lot of needs. I really liked their 2nd round pick Cordy Glenn, he's massive and athletic ( I thought he would go in the first round). This team could break their playoff drought this season, Buddy Nix and Chan Gailey have done a nice job putting this team together. I think they were guided by need at the top. I like the back half well enough, I suppose, or at least can't manage a hearty argument. I like much of what they've been doing, but at about a 67% rate. Gilmore I might get convinced on, but to pass up both Melvin Ingram and Vinny Curry makes me grind my teeth.

    BOTTOM 5 DISLIKES

    4. Miami Dolphins - Didn't like them taking Tannehill this high. I would rather have liked seeing them take Michael Floyd while getting their QB later (possibly Tannehill by trading up from their 2nd rd pick). I just think that they were pressured into taking Tannehill, and that usually doesn't work out as planned. I hate the Dolphins, soooo....
    2. Jacksonville Jaguars - This offense was putrid last year. Taking a punter in the 3rd round over an offensive player just doesn't make sense. Do they think the punter is going to be one of their better offensive players? If so, it could be another long offensive season for the Jaguars. Roadkill is sometimes fascinating.
    1. Seattle Seahawks - I didn't get their draft strategy. They reached in the 1st and 2nd rounds, then drafted a back up at best QB in the 3rd. They have 4 RB's listed on the roster but took a RB in the 4th round.
    Just didn't understand their thinking I guess. Not so much a disagreement except on Wilson, who I think can be fantastic. I think you give Petey too much credit in assigning the word "thinking." I suspect he has a holistic approach, based entirely on on personal chemistry. If his heart rate increases and his face flushes when he meets a guy, he takes him. Dude's goofy.
    I love points of divergence!!

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by BuckeyeRidley View Post
    Cool to hear you tutored Chandler. Those Turk Talks videos will hopefully be recommended.

    Agree!
    Turk,Do you think Griff Whalen has a chance to stick with the Colts given his familiarity with Luck?
    There is only one immutable law in life - in a gentleman's toilet, incoming traffic has the right of way.
    -Hugh Leonard

  3. #33
       
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    11,544
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottDCP View Post
    I suspect he has a holistic approach, based entirely on on personal chemistry. If his heart rate increases and his face flushes when he meets a guy, he takes him. Dude's goofy.
    That there is funny.

    Speaking of goofy, the Falcons have added former Colts GM Chris Polian to help with scouting and player evaluation. Let's see how he does on his own.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Colts01 View Post
    Agree!
    Turk,Do you think Griff Whalen has a chance to stick with the Colts given his familiarity with Luck?
    His concern is being able to beat NFL Db's. He's going to have to rely on his quickness and smarts. Having a working relationship with Luck won't hurt his chances.

  5. #35
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    3,869
    Blog Entries
    5
    Maybe Turk can shed a bit more light on this, but I'm really hesitant to beat the Browns up for the Schwartz pick. Thirty-one teams passed on Martin, so he evidently wasn't that much better than anyone on the board. It seems to me, too, that the draft--even when you're looking to fill a need--is a balance of talent and fit. You want the most talented guy you feel like you can work with. We need to remember that we've never met any of these guys. Well, most of us haven't met any of them, but it's not a good thing to hire a guy who's not going to fit in a company just because he's talented.

    A few other things on the Browns' draft:
    (1) re: Weeden, the dude can sling it. Eight man fronts will not be the problem. Weeden's problem is his age and how that may affect potential for further development, not arm strength or accuracy.
    (2) The receiver at #22 or #37 argument isn't cogent. After Blackmon and Wright, none of those players is an immediate starter in the NFL.
    (2a) I don't know how many times I need to say that Greg Little can be a #1. He's 6'3", 215, he had 60/700+/2 last year starting only half the games, and it was only the third year of his life playing WR. He's 22. He's going to get better.
    (2b) I really like Travis Benjamin's potential, and I think he can stretch a defense immediately.
    (3) Browns really added depth on both sides of the line, fixing the right side of the OL and building a solid DT rotation.

    My full thoughts on the Browns' draft are here (details on and logic behind individual picks themselves) and here (summary and discussion of the draft as a whole). I don't mind people burning the Browns' picks, but at least read a little more deeply into things than looking at need at WR, Jonathan Martin's early hype before getting killed by scouts, and a working hypothesis that no one was going to trade up and grab Brandon Weeden.

  6. #36
    6, are you happy with your receiving corp on the whole?



    fwiw, I think Little is best suited as a #2.

  7. #37
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    4,586
    Blog Entries
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by mkocs6 View Post
    Maybe Turk can shed a bit more light on this, but I'm really hesitant to beat the Browns up for the Schwartz pick. Thirty-one teams passed on Martin, so he evidently wasn't that much better than anyone on the board. It seems to me, too, that the draft--even when you're looking to fill a need--is a balance of talent and fit. You want the most talented guy you feel like you can work with. We need to remember that we've never met any of these guys. Well, most of us haven't met any of them, but it's not a good thing to hire a guy who's not going to fit in a company just because he's talented.

    A few other things on the Browns' draft:
    (1) re: Weeden, the dude can sling it. Eight man fronts will not be the problem. Weeden's problem is his age and how that may affect potential for further development, not arm strength or accuracy.
    (2) The receiver at #22 or #37 argument isn't cogent. After Blackmon and Wright, none of those players is an immediate starter in the NFL.
    (2a) I don't know how many times I need to say that Greg Little can be a #1. He's 6'3", 215, he had 60/700+/2 last year starting only half the games, and it was only the third year of his life playing WR. He's 22. He's going to get better.
    (2b) I really like Travis Benjamin's potential, and I think he can stretch a defense immediately.
    (3) Browns really added depth on both sides of the line, fixing the right side of the OL and building a solid DT rotation.

    My full thoughts on the Browns' draft are here (details on and logic behind individual picks themselves) and here (summary and discussion of the draft as a whole). I don't mind people burning the Browns' picks, but at least read a little more deeply into things than looking at need at WR, Jonathan Martin's early hype before getting killed by scouts, and a working hypothesis that no one was going to trade up and grab Brandon Weeden.
    This professional quality writing has got to go. You're making us look bad.

    Well, me, anyway. Have a drink or something before presenting reasoned arguments, wouldya?

  8. Quote Originally Posted by mkocs6 View Post
    Maybe Turk can shed a bit more light on this, but I'm really hesitant to beat the Browns up for the Schwartz pick. Thirty-one teams passed on Martin, so he evidently wasn't that much better than anyone on the board. It seems to me, too, that the draft--even when you're looking to fill a need--is a balance of talent and fit. You want the most talented guy you feel like you can work with. We need to remember that we've never met any of these guys. Well, most of us haven't met any of them, but it's not a good thing to hire a guy who's not going to fit in a company just because he's talented.

    A few other things on the Browns' draft:
    (1) re: Weeden, the dude can sling it. Eight man fronts will not be the problem. Weeden's problem is his age and how that may affect potential for further development, not arm strength or accuracy.
    (2) The receiver at #22 or #37 argument isn't cogent. After Blackmon and Wright, none of those players is an immediate starter in the NFL.
    (2a) I don't know how many times I need to say that Greg Little can be a #1. He's 6'3", 215, he had 60/700+/2 last year starting only half the games, and it was only the third year of his life playing WR. He's 22. He's going to get better.
    (2b) I really like Travis Benjamin's potential, and I think he can stretch a defense immediately.
    (3) Browns really added depth on both sides of the line, fixing the right side of the OL and building a solid DT rotation.

    My full thoughts on the Browns' draft are here (details on and logic behind individual picks themselves) and here (summary and discussion of the draft as a whole). I don't mind people burning the Browns' picks, but at least read a little more deeply into things than looking at need at WR, Jonathan Martin's early hype before getting killed by scouts, and a working hypothesis that no one was going to trade up and grab Brandon Weeden.
    I don't know anything about Schwartz, and very little about Martin so I can't compare the two. Obviously Cleveland liked Schwartz better, that's what makes the draft so intriguing, one teams vision might not be the next teams vision. I also like Weeden, your right ... dude can sling it! As far as the WR's go ... potential gets coaches fired if it stays potential too long. Soon, the WR position has to step up and become play makers. Hopefully for the Browns ... this is the year that happens.

  9. #39
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    3,869
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Bengals1181 View Post
    6, are you happy with your receiving corp on the whole?



    fwiw, I think Little is best suited as a #2.
    The short answer to your question is no. However, here is the argument I will make in favor of the Browns' decision. The only receiver who would have truly improved the Browns' corps that we had the ability or willingness to draft was Kendall Wright. They passed on Blackmon to take Richardson, Floyd was going to go in the teens, and Wright could potentially have been available at #22. Wright was a more appropriate choice for the Browns than Blackmon and Floyd because he would have brought a different set of skills (notice, I said set, not level) to the receiver corps. It didn't work out. The rest of the receivers, from Brian Quick to Stephen Hill to Mohamed Sanu, are projects who will not start until--at the earliest--the second half of this season. They have good physical skills, but they are not starters, and I don't think you can afford (if you are the Browns) to draft non-starters at #22 and #37. Here I am judging the offense as a unit. I think a powerful, consistent running game; a stronger, taller, more accurate quarterback; and a durable, competent right tackle will improve receiver player more than any one individual receiver we might have taken at #22 or #37. Unless I am wrong, I do not think Mohamed Massaquoi should be a Y-receiver really anywhere in the NFL (okay, maybe Jacksonville), but I do not think that the Browns were a Y-receiver away from being more competitive. The areas where drafted and where we improved, on the other hand, will have a much, much more significant impact on our offensive performance and our ability to win games.

    Going back to the set of skills argument, this is why I think Benjamin was an excellent choice in the 4th round. He gives us something different from what we already have, as a fast, explosive player to bust seams and keep safeties honest.

    We need to remember that there's a draft next season, and the season after that. The Browns will have first round picks, unless something drastic happens. It would be nice to use a higher pick on a receiver--it would also have been nice to use one on a defensive end, too--but you can't address every need in one draft. I think we took players at positions which are more important to winning football games than wide receiver is (especially since we're not talking about A.J. Green here).
    @kocsan

  10. #40
       
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    11,544
    Coming back to Cleveland's trade-up and selection of a running back. Last year:

    With the 28th overall pick in the NFL Draft, acquired via a surprising trade that sends their 2011 second round pick and their 2012 first round pick to the New England Patriots, the New Orleans Saints have selected running back and Heisman Trophy winner Mark Ingram from Alabama.
    In retrospect, anyone here think this was a good move? Or a bad move?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •