04-11-2017, 10:31 PM
Cleveland has not made up its mind at No. 1, per source. Split opinions. Some like Myles Garrett, some like Mitchell Trubisky. We will see.
— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) April 12, 2017
Pages: 1 2
04-11-2017, 10:31 PM
04-11-2017, 11:19 PM
Too bad they would feel compelled to move higher than 9 to get Mitch. If he is there at 9, and I think he is, the bengals phone start ringing
04-12-2017, 12:32 AM
(04-11-2017, 10:31 PM)PikesPeakUC Wrote: [ -> ]Cleveland has not made up its mind at No. 1, per source. Split opinions. Some like Myles Garrett, some like Mitchell Trubisky. We will see.
— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) April 12, 2017
I would think they could take Garrett first and still get Trubisky at 12. Can't see a bunch of teams lining up to take him before 12. Hell, Watson's better anyway and I even like Kaaya better than Trubisky.
No way is Trubisky worthy of the first pick. The only place he's worthy is in his own mind. That would truly be a Browns move to take him first. So, here's hoping they do it.
04-12-2017, 12:44 AM
Lol only the Browns...
04-12-2017, 12:48 AM
CBS mocked Browns taking Garrett and trading up to #6 to get Trubisky.
04-12-2017, 12:48 AM
14 of Garrett's 31 career sacks came in 4 games.
Rice, Nevada, Lousiana Monroe and Texas San Antonio.
With that kind of production against those powerhouses... Why question it.
Im hoping for a couple more Browns first round busts.
Rice, Nevada, Lousiana Monroe and Texas San Antonio.
With that kind of production against those powerhouses... Why question it.
Im hoping for a couple more Browns first round busts.
04-12-2017, 02:03 AM
Wonder if qbs go back to back 1 and 2 do we make a move to 3? I would for garrett.
04-12-2017, 06:11 AM
(04-12-2017, 02:03 AM)Jpoore Wrote: [ -> ]Wonder if qbs go back to back 1 and 2 do we make a move to 3? I would for garrett.
if garrett is there at #3 u would still have to pay overpay basically like 1st pick prob lol
04-12-2017, 08:22 AM
(04-12-2017, 12:48 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: [ -> ]14 of Garrett's 31 career sacks came in 4 games.
Rice, Nevada, Lousiana Monroe and Texas San Antonio.
With that kind of production against those powerhouses... Why question it.
Im hoping for a couple more Browns first round busts.
This, plus the other day he was scheduled to be on ESPN's "Mike and Mike", but Golic would be out and Booger McFarland was filling in. Because Booger had been critical of Garrett before with somewhat of a lack of physicality, Garrett declined being on the show.
Add in the "Dallas trade for me" and "I will spend 10 years making the Browns suffer if they don't take me #1" and this guy has the makings of a whiny D-bag.
If he struggles against SEC Tackles, how does he feel life in the NFL will be? More and more, I want the WR Ross and then the DE Willis.
04-12-2017, 08:30 AM
(04-12-2017, 12:48 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: [ -> ]14 of Garrett's 31 career sacks came in 4 games.
Rice, Nevada, Lousiana Monroe and Texas San Antonio.
With that kind of production against those powerhouses... Why question it.
Im hoping for a couple more Browns first round busts.
You can do this for basically any big time college DE. Stats are always skewed by the poor teams they play. If you watch though they are negatively skewed by the good teams double and triple teaming the stars. If you're only looking at DE's who have consistent sack totals all season against all types of teams, you will never find any to your liking
04-12-2017, 08:33 AM
(04-12-2017, 02:03 AM)Jpoore Wrote: [ -> ]Wonder if qbs go back to back 1 and 2 do we make a move to 3? I would for garrett.
It is a realistic possibility that the Browns actually trade out of #1 and some team like Chicago, the Texans, or someone makes a move for a QB.
I don't believe this analyst crap about none of the QBs coming out are first round talents. Remember Dalton's class? You had Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, and Christian Ponder all selected fairly early. Teams will fall in love with some of these guys and as soon as the first one goes (Trubisky, IMHO) then the others will likely go.
04-12-2017, 09:09 AM
(04-12-2017, 08:22 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: [ -> ]This, plus the other day he was scheduled to be on ESPN's "Mike and Mike", but Golic would be out and Booger McFarland was filling in. Because Booger had been critical of Garrett before with somewhat of a lack of physicality, Garrett declined being on the show.
Add in the "Dallas trade for me" and "I will spend 10 years making the Browns suffer if they don't take me #1" and this guy has the makings of a whiny D-bag.
If he struggles against SEC Tackles, how does he feel life in the NFL will be? More and more, I want the WR Ross and then the DE Willis.
If you read the ESPN the magazine interview, it is pretty easy to see why Garrett didn't go on Mike and Mike. From the article it really sounds like he is an introvert who is a bit socially awkward. I don't think he likes social confrontation, which I am fine with. The article talked about how he doesn't really go out or anything because he doesn't do well in group social settings. He really is an interesting guy, writes poetry and loves paleontology to name a few things.
Side note to those knocking his production, if you don't like Garrett because of his work out warrior look but lack of production against SEC teams then you should love Barnett who is the opposite right? I mean you can't have it both ways either you think production against SEC talent is more important or you think athletic ability is. Someone with both never exists really in any draft so you have to favor one over the other..
04-12-2017, 10:08 AM
Anyone in the Browns camp that actually thinks Trubisky is worth the #1 overall pick should be fired immediately. Talk about brain-dead.
04-12-2017, 10:45 AM
how is it even a question for them? geez
04-12-2017, 10:54 AM
(04-12-2017, 10:45 AM)rezolve11 Wrote: [ -> ]how is it even a question for them? geez
Some people around the league don't like Garrett, especially because he is kind of a different guy who has other interests. One day he could up and decide he is done with football, and some worry it could be early on. I'd take him, but it isn't crazy to have some reservations.
04-12-2017, 12:39 PM
(04-12-2017, 10:54 AM)Au165 Wrote: [ -> ]Some people around the league don't like Garrett, especially because he is kind of a different guy who has other interests. One day he could up and decide he is done with football, and some worry it could be early on. I'd take him, but it isn't crazy to have some reservations.
Considering Trubisky with the #1 is the crazy part.
04-12-2017, 12:44 PM
(04-12-2017, 12:39 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: [ -> ]Considering Trubisky with the #1 is the crazy part.
Maybe. Not sure they really are. I think they are trying to sell the trade down.
04-12-2017, 03:59 PM
Just another Browns thing. They will still end up taking Garrett.
04-13-2017, 08:17 AM
(04-12-2017, 09:09 AM)Au165 Wrote: [ -> ]If you read the ESPN the magazine interview, it is pretty easy to see why Garrett didn't go on Mike and Mike. From the article it really sounds like he is an introvert who is a bit socially awkward. I don't think he likes social confrontation, which I am fine with. The article talked about how he doesn't really go out or anything because he doesn't do well in group social settings. He really is an interesting guy, writes poetry and loves paleontology to name a few things.
Side note to those knocking his production, if you don't like Garrett because of his work out warrior look but lack of production against SEC teams then you should love Barnett who is the opposite right? I mean you can't have it both ways either you think production against SEC talent is more important or you think athletic ability is. Someone with both never exists really in any draft so you have to favor one over the other..
You are dealing a bit too much in absolutes. Who would I rather have? Garrett. Higher ceiling. Who got more production? Barnett. He just doesn't have the measurables of Garrett. He's not as "fast twitch". That doesn't mean I don't like him at all. He just has a different makeup. To say no one has production in the SEC and freakish athletic ability would be incorrect as I believe Jordan Willis has both...and a coach that called him "the epitome of our program".
04-13-2017, 09:15 AM
(04-13-2017, 08:17 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: [ -> ]You are dealing a bit too much in absolutes. Who would I rather have? Garrett. Higher ceiling. Who got more production? Barnett. He just doesn't have the measurables of Garrett. He's not as "fast twitch". That doesn't mean I don't like him at all. He just has a different makeup. To say no one has production in the SEC and freakish athletic ability would be incorrect as I believe Jordan Willis has both...and a coach that called him "the epitome of our program".
Except Willis doesn't play in the SEC, he plays in a pretty bad Big 12 conference.
Pages: 1 2