View Poll Results: SHOULD

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • WR Tavon Austin

    2 7.41%
  • DL Star Lotulelei

    5 18.52%
  • DE/LB Dion Jordan

    9 33.33%
  • DE/LB Ziggy Ansah

    8 29.63%
  • DE/LB Barkevious Mingo

    0 0%
  • Other - specify - NOT TRADE DOWN!

    3 11.11%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    19,580

    #6 - Who SHOULD the Browns pick?

    1. Chiefs - Luke Joeckel, 27%

    2. Jags - Sharrif Floyd, 53% (vs. Geno Smith in run-off)

    3. Raiders - Geno Smith, 36%

    4. Eagles - Eric Fisher, 100% (vote ended early due to obvious/inevitable consensus)

    5. Lions - Dee Milliner, 63%

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    18,944
    Moving to a 3-4. They should take Ansah and take then go watch tape of how the 49ers brought along Aldon Smith.

    Personally I am not a fan of Jordan and that is why I say Ansah over him.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    59,048
    I don't think Jordan fits as a 3-4 OLB.

    He might be able to be Ahmad Brooks, who is a fine player in his own right. But Brooks isn't the kid of explosive OLB you want in a 3-4.
    Mac9, to the true warrior. the ultimate competitor and the most worth adversary any athlete has ever faced off against. He was an inspiration for both his on the field play, off the field contributions and his leadership. The world is now a worse place without him.

    "Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity" - Justice Antonin Scalia

    "Just because you're the lone voice in the wilderness, it doesn't mean you're wrong."
    - Ghandi

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    38,427
    If he can't play 3-4 OLB, what is he?

    I don't see why they'd go with a pass rusher though. They have Sheard and paid Kruger big, as well as Bryant on the DL. I voted Austin. I think Austin or Patterson will end up being the pick.
    "Governing doesnít disappear when government shrinks; instead corporations come to govern your life ó like HMOís, oil companies, drug companies, agribusiness, and so on, with accountability only to maximizing profit, not to public needs." - George Lakoff

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    31,550
    Dion Jordan makes sense given the defensive switch. But as noted they paid Kruger a lot of money.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    11,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Nastradamus View Post
    If he can't play 3-4 OLB, what is he?

    I don't see why they'd go with a pass rusher though. They have Sheard and paid Kruger big, as well as Bryant on the DL. I voted Austin. I think Austin or Patterson will end up being the pick.
    Can never have too many pass rushers . . . Move Kruger to DE on obvious passing downs and use Jordan as a specialist like Aldon Smith.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    18,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Nastradamus View Post
    I don't see why they'd go with a pass rusher though. They have Sheard and paid Kruger big, as well as Bryant on the DL. I voted Austin. I think Austin or Patterson will end up being the pick.
    Drafting a slot specialist who is almost certainly going to be too small to line up on the outside in a 2 WR set for a team with Trent Richardson in the fold would be such a wasted pick that high IMO. You just can't make a pick of a guy who will only play at most 60% of the offensive snaps with the 6th overall. Its like taking a punter in the 2nd round.

    ....and Krueger and Sheard have WAY too many questions about them (Sheard transitioning to new position and Krueger transitioning to actually playing all the time) to think that position is addressed adequately IMO.
    Last edited by ducky; 03-29-2013 at 04:14 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    30,181
    If the draft falls like this, I'm not sure who I want, much less who they should take. I said before the WRs could be the wild card if Smith & Millner are gone, but don't think either warrant going this high, especially with the WR depth in this class. There will almost certainly be at least one 2nd round talent there in the 3rd, and I think a TE is a much bigger need anyways.

    RG is huge need, so while I don't think it will/should happen, can't rule that out if a trade isn't possible. I'd much rather have Ansah than Jordan. Better prospect with better versatility.
    Last edited by Xulu Bak; 03-29-2013 at 05:31 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    36,735
    Patterson. Call it a reach, don't care, they need playmakers on offense and he is that. There isn't much of anything that can be called a reach this year.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    31,550
    Chance Warmack?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    30,181
    Quote Originally Posted by PsychoViking View Post
    Patterson. Call it a reach, don't care, they need playmakers on offense and he is that. There isn't much of anything that can be called a reach this year.
    Everyone needs play makers, you can never have enough, but I don't think the Browns need a #1 WR (Gordon) or a #2 WR (Little). I think they desperately need a QB, and Campbell does absolutely nothing to change that, but apparently, the front office disagrees. I think RG and TE are major needs as well. I think they need a go-to guy for key third downs, and in terms of a play maker, could really use an elusive YAC slot WR or receiving RB.

    In other words, I bon't think Patterson would make much sense, especially not for a team in the AFCN.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    36,735
    Patterson would give the offense much more credibility. With a limited QB he can turn simple passes into big plays, that is what he does. He is a bigger Harvin of sorts.

    Little doesn't do anything for me, very inconsistent and has stone hands.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Just south of Methland
    Posts
    20,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Xulu Bak View Post
    I think they need a go-to guy for key third downs, and in terms of a play maker, could really use an elusive YAC slot WR or receiving RB.

    In other words, I bon't think Patterson would make much sense, especially not for a team in the AFCN.
    Not for nothing, but Patterson's the best YAC guy in the draft, and I don't see why he couldn't be tremendously effective in the slot. He might not have his head screwed on straight enough to make a decent pro, but that's another story.
    That the world is explicable is miraculous, and so explanations need not be the undoing of miracles.

    We never learn anything, never in the world, and in spite of all the history books written. Thereís a regular warehouse of fine suggestions, and if weíre not better it isnít because there arenít plenty of marvelous and true ideas to draw on, but because our vanity weighs more than all of them put together.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    30,181
    Quote Originally Posted by karhu View Post
    Not for nothing, but Patterson's the best YAC guy in the draft, and I don't see why he couldn't be tremendously effective in the slot. He might not have his head screwed on straight enough to make a decent pro, but that's another story.
    I'm not saying he wouldn't be an upgrade, or fill a need, I just don't think you can justify using the 6th overall pick to fill that need with him. I especially don't like the idea of taking a WR that high considering the WR talent that should be there in the third, and possibly even the 4th.

    With only one pick in the first two rounds, I'd be very surprised to see them go WR, even in a trade down situation. Five WRs on the roster, all in their 2nd or 3rd year. If they take a WR, I think it has to be someone that could also replace Cribbs.
    Last edited by Xulu Bak; 03-29-2013 at 06:39 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Just south of Methland
    Posts
    20,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Xulu Bak View Post
    I'm not saying he wouldn't be an upgrade, or fill a need, I just don't think you can justify using the 6th overall pick to fill that need with him. I especially don't like the idea of taking a WR that high considering the WR talent that should be there in the third, and possibly even the 4th.

    With only one pick in the first two rounds, I'd be very surprised to see them go WR, even in a trade down situation. Five WRs on the roster, all in their 2nd or 3rd year. If they take a WR, I think it has to be someone that could also replace Cribbs.
    Right with you, yep. If they've got one or two solid starters in Gordon and Little, then those guys ought to make it easier for a lower-round slot guy to find his niche and develop. If they've got no solid starters by now at WR, a slot receiver isn't going to help them (and a guy like Patterson, who seems like a bit of a flake and whose resume makes him sound eerily like a faster, shiftier version of Little, might not be up to the added pressure).
    That the world is explicable is miraculous, and so explanations need not be the undoing of miracles.

    We never learn anything, never in the world, and in spite of all the history books written. Thereís a regular warehouse of fine suggestions, and if weíre not better it isnít because there arenít plenty of marvelous and true ideas to draw on, but because our vanity weighs more than all of them put together.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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






Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.