• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2014 NFL (Well, Browns, so, sorta "NFL") Draft Thread

They thought there was a chance he wouldn't be available at #26. They thought there was a (strong?) possibility of another team trading with Philly, KC, Cincy, or SD to jump up and get him ahead of the Browns.

Vikes tried to land Manziel at No. 22

Minnesota nearly had itself an even bigger headline. [The Vikings] failed to trade back into the first round to draft quarterback Johnny Manziel, but were able to jump back up to nab Louisville's Teddy Bridgewater. NFL Media's Albert Breer reported Thursday that the Vikings tried to trade with the Philadelphia Eagles at No. 22 to draft Manziel, but the Cleveland Browns made a better offer. The Vikings rated the Texas A&M signal-caller as the top quarterback on their board, according to team sources. It could be a failed trade that makes Vikings fans wince with every Fran Tarkenton-esque play Johnny Football makes in Cleveland. "I was just able to establish relationships with Rick Spielman, the GM, coach (Norv) Turner, the offensive coordinator, and Scott (Turner), the quarterbacks coach," Bridgewater told NFL Media's Deion Sanders. "So I felt very comfortable."

Entire article: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap20...draft-teddy-bridgewater-after-missing-manziel
 
Upvote 0
Todd McShay ‏@McShay13 21m
4th straight yr with record number underclassmen declaring for draft. It's a problem for college football and it's not good for NFL either
For those agents/media members selling "2nd contract" to these young men, what say you to the 36 of 98 underclassmen not drafted?
...and FYI: 44% of 194 underclassmen that declared early from last 3 drafts were not on NFL rosters at end of 2013 season.


aka
STAY IN SCHOOL
 
Upvote 0
In addition to Connor Shaw and Cromwell from Alabama State here are the WRs signed or linked to the Browns
The Browns drafted no wide receivers, but are being linked to at least four undrafted free-agent wideouts. They are: San Jose State’s Chandler Jones, Florida State’s Kenny Shaw, Ball State’s Willie Snead IV and Vanderbilt’s Jonathan Krause. Oklahoma State tight end Blake Jackson also has been connected to the Browns.http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/05/south_carolina_quarterback_con.html#incart_m-rpt-1
 
Upvote 0
1. Maybe the reports are false or misleading.

2. Maybe the Browns realize that a proven way to win in the NFL is a strong running game and defense, with solid quarterback play.

Seattle won the Super Bowl with the #26 passing attack, the #4 rushing attack, #1 scoring defense, and #1 yardage defense

San Francisco went 12-4 and lost in the NFC Title Game with the #30 passing attack, the #3 rushing attack, #3 scoring defense, #5 yardage defense

Carolina went 12-4 and made the playoffs with the #29 passing attack, the #11 rushing attack, the #2 scoring defense, and the #2 yardage defense

Unless you have a Brady or a Manning or a Rogers or a Brees, your best way to win is to build up the running game and the defense and to have an efficient QB

Here's a stat for you: In 2013, Josh Gordon had more receiving yards (1,646) and touchdowns (9) than the entire wide receiving corps for the San Francisco 49'ers (1,627 yards, 8 TD's). And those stupid 49'ers drafted another running back (Carlos Hyde) in the second round, and no wide receivers through round three.

EDIT: And by the way, the 49'ers leading receiver was 33-year old Anquan Boldin who probably runs a 40-yard dash somewhere in the 5.0 range. So don't tell me that you need superstar wide receivers to win in the NFL.

Overall, you seem like someone who learned football from a video game. Maybe you should pay more attention to what happens on the field.


1- maybe they are, but so far they don't appear very misleading
2- Yeah because having no WR really has worked wonders for us in years past lol. We never have a WR worth a crap and ironically we sucked still. The NFL is a passing league now thru and thru.
3- Seattle won bc they had an out of this world one of the best D's in a long long time. Seattle also has a stud RB, something we MAY or MAY NOT have now as we wait and see. That doesn't mean that their passing was terrible, they didn't utilize it that much because they didn't need to do so. We don't have a Marshawn Lynch...

Here is a fact for you, Seattle and San Fran are not in the AFC North... they don't have the same kinda teams, they aren't even in the AFC. Comparing what they had to do to be successful with us is silly. Denver made it to the SB with one of the best passing attacks ever, and how ironic that all of a sudden their RB's played a ton better last year since they actually had a passing game to open it up.

Overall you seem like someone who knows less than they think. Look at all the Superbowl winners since 2000, a large majority of those teams had a good passing game. New England 3 times, Colts with Manning, NO Saints, GB, NYG had good passing with Eli, even Big Ben got his last one done largely with a good passing game. All a lot better than ours will be without Gordon if he misses. Nobody is saying we should expect to have as great as passing game as these guys, but the days of RB winning SB's is over.

Trying to make your point is one thing, but your arrogant "I'm superior to you listen here" attitude is pathetic my man. I know plenty about football. Nobody is asking for us to be the best passing team in the league, but last time I checked our RB now Ben Tate has never been a #1 guy, has a tendency to get dinged up, so it's perfectly reasonable to want a nice passing game so we don't have to depend soley on him.... your highness!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
1- maybe they are, but so far they don't appear very misleading
2- Yeah because having no WR really has worked wonders for us in years past lol. We never have a WR worth a crap and ironically we sucked still. The NFL is a passing league now thru and thru.
3- Seattle won bc they had an out of this world one of the best D's in a long long time. Seattle also has a stud RB, something we MAY or MAY NOT have now as we wait and see. That doesn't mean that their passing was terrible, they didn't utilize it that much because they didn't need to do so. We don't have a Marshawn Lynch...

Here is a fact for you, Seattle and San Fran are not in the AFC North... they don't have the same kinda teams, they aren't even in the AFC. Comparing what they had to do to be successful with us is silly. Denver made it to the SB with one of the best passing attacks ever, and how ironic that all of a sudden their RB's played a ton better last year since they actually had a passing game to open it up.

Overall you seem like someone who knows less than they think. Look at all the Superbowl winners since 2000, a large majority of those teams had a good passing game. New England 3 times, Colts with Manning, NO Saints, GB, NYG had good passing with Eli, even Big Ben got his last one done largely with a good passing game. All a lot better than ours will be without Gordon if he misses. Nobody is saying we should expect to have as great as passing game as these guys, but the days of RB winning SB's is over.

Trying to make your point is one thing, but your arrogant "I'm superior to you listen here" attitude is pathetic my man. I know plenty about football. Nobody is asking for us to be the best passing team in the league, but last time I checked our RB now Ben Tate has never been a #1 guy, has a tendency to get dinged up, so it's perfectly reasonable to want a nice passing game so we don't have to depend soley on him.... your highness!

San Francisco and Seattle aren't in the AFC North?!?!? Wow! Learn something new every day :roll1:

Further research would show you that both Harbaugh and Carroll are in the Bill Walsh coaching tree - Bill Walsh invented the West Coast offense but he also predicated it on a good running game and strong defense.

:ban:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
San Francisco and Seattle aren't in the AFC North?!?!? Wow! Learn something new every day :roll1:

Further research would show you that both Harbaugh and Carroll are in the Bill Walsh coaching tree - Bill Walsh invented the West Coast offense but he also predicated it on a good running game and strong defense.

:ban:

Did I say I don't want the Browns to have a good D or running game? If you think this team will compete with a WR core of Nate Burleson, Andrew Hawkins, and Greg Little, then you are on some good drugs my friend.:hoke:
 
Upvote 0
In addition to Connor Shaw and Cromwell from Alabama State here are the WRs signed or linked to the Browns
The Browns drafted no wide receivers, but are being linked to at least four undrafted free-agent wideouts. They are: San Jose State’s Chandler Jones, Florida State’s Kenny Shaw, Ball State’s Willie Snead IV and Vanderbilt’s Jonathan Krause. Oklahoma State tight end Blake Jackson also has been connected to the Browns.http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/05/south_carolina_quarterback_con.html#incart_m-rpt-1

An early prediction.

Watching this kid play over the past few years, I predict that Willie Snead will not only make this years roster, but will be a big time contributor.

One can only hope.

Peace
 
Upvote 0
2- Yeah because having no WR really has worked wonders for us in years past lol. We never have a WR worth a crap and ironically we sucked still. The NFL is a passing league now thru and thru.

And how many times over and over again have we seen WR's come out of nowhere playing along side elite QB's? Let's not act like the entire show is on the WR's themselves.

Denver made it to the SB with one of the best passing attacks ever, and how ironic that all of a sudden their RB's played a ton better last year since they actually had a passing game to open it up.

How'd that end up working out for Denver? I forgot... Vice Versa having a strong running game means the defenses has to dedicate that extra defender in the box opening the lanes for TE's and even average wide receivers.
If you're going to argue that an elite passing game opens up running lanes, then the opposite must be true for elite running games opening up the pass.

Overall you seem like someone who knows less than they think.

He's been pretty spot on thus far.

Look at all the Superbowl winners since 2000

Are we including the 2000 Ravens? I'd like to throw in the 02 Bucks and 07 Giants as teams without good passing attacks.

a large majority of those teams had a good passing game. New England 3 times

New England got it done on the back of Dillon, an elite defense and some good decisions by Brady. In fact when the Pats put their scheme exclusively in Brady's hands they fell short both times.

, Colts with Manning, NO Saints, GB,

Indy beat Rex Grossman - all Peyton had to do was not turn the ball over as much as sexy Rexy.

NYG had good passing with Eli

The second time around they did - but still got it done on the back of an elite defense.

Big Ben got his last one done largely with a good passing game.

You're fucking with me, right? The first time was only because of his defense and the zebra's. The second time, if it wasn't for one of the greatest defensive plays ever, it's highly unlikely the Steelers pick up their 6th.

but the days of RB winning SB's is over.

Simply false.
 
Upvote 0
Did I say I don't want the Browns to have a good D or running game? If you think this team will compete with a WR core of Nate Burleson, Andrew Hawkins, and Greg Little, then you are on some good drugs my friend.:hoke:

:slappy:

You need some reading comprehension courses or something. Although I'm sure if you were a 49ers fan you'd want Harbaugh fired for not winning a Super Bowl yet too :ban:
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top