I really like Ward but I don't know about using a top 5 pick on a 5-10 CB.
If the Browns don't like any of the QBs and the Broncos want to move up...it makes good sense to move back from 1 to 5 and get future assets. If QBs go 1-2-3 then at 4 and 5 the Browns could land Chubb and Barkley - arguably the top 2 talents in the draft.
IMO Buffalo still is too far back to trade with. Browns need either a QB and an elite prospect or 2 elite prospects with their top 2 picks. and going back to 12 doesn't allow for that.
depends on how long the list is of elite coaches. My list is 3 deep. Saban. Urban. Dabo.
about tree fiddy
no need for RB in the top couple of rounds with the Hyde signing. no real need for Fitz at this point either.
the Browns need credibility and competency at the QB position first and foremost. Taylor brings that even if he isn't a pro bowl guy. this team needs to start winning some games, and by adding Tyrod as well as these other moves to bring in real NFL-level talent into the roster...it's a welcome sight to this Browns fan. QB of the future...he isn't that. and that's why they have picks 1 and/or 4...
good QB still relatively young hits the open market in a QB needy league awash in cap space? makes sense to me. Rodgers is worth $40M/year at least on the open market. of course that kind of number makes it more difficult to win as it eats up a ton cap space. Vikings are going for it.
yes it should take something more like the Jets 2nd rounder and their 1st round pick next year to move up from 5 to 1. if not more.
some people will talk about the Iowa game in this way until the end of time. and it's already annoying. but I agree with you. it's an outlier and should be treated as such.
Hopefully 1 and 4 can yield a QB and Chubb. Save the RBs and safeties for later on the down the road. top 5 picks need to be used on who you evaluate as the best players at the most coveted positions in the game. QB. pass rushing DE. OT. lockdown CB. I lean toward taking Allen, sitting him for an entire year as Taylor gets this team back to just winning some stinkin games, and then let him ride after the redshirt season. All the guys have flaws and faults...so take the guy that checks every single physical box and coach him up.
if the first two picks go that way...that opens things up for best available DB/RB/OL with the 2nd round selections.
tried to edit the post but ran out of time.
On Ramsey...you left out the conclusion...'Press cover corner with disruptive length to fluster receivers and the makeup speed/leaping ability to stymie downfield attacks'
On Fitz...'Fitzpatrick has experience as a slot cornerback, but will likely be targeted as a "do-everything" safety who can be deployed as a sub-package linebacker, a blitzer or in the slot against big receivers and move tight ends.'
Look...as I have said repeatedly this is more personal preference. I prefer elite prospects at the most coveted positions when the team I root for picks in the top 5 (happens frequently). The league every year releases the franchise tag numbers for players by position. QB - $23M. DE - $17M. CB - $15M. S - $11M. So, at 4, if the choice is between Bradley Chubb and Fitz...I say it's Chubb all day as he's an elite prospect at one of the most coveted positions in the league. If Fitz was considered a lockdown outside corner, then that's fine, take him in the top 5 all day. but that's not what he's considered to be by most people who follow this stuff. Not that what he does doesn't have value. not that he isn't a very good prospect. and yes the Browns need good players anywhere and everywhere. Just wouldn't be a fan of the pick at 4.
and never mentioned as a nickelcorner
if he's an elite outside corner then he there wouldn't be talk of him moving around or playing a number of different spots or his best position being nickelcorner. He'd be put at CB1, lock down dudes and that'd be the end of it. but that clearly isn't the talk surrounding him or what his game film is showing people. Again, this isn't me saying he isn't a very good prospect. not at all. but using a top 5 pick on a guy that isn't seen as a lockdown CB1? that's not my personal preference.
Gilbert was mentioned earlier. I hated that pick. Loved moving back from 4 and passing on Watkins because you don't take WRs that high IMO...but hated the selection of Gilbert. That year the top corners were generally bunched together with similar grades. So of course the Browns overdraft one when the same value at the position was available later on. not to mention he played in the B12. and of course 7 of the next 9 guys immediately picked after him have made pro bowls (Barr, Lewan, Beckham, Donald!!!, Shazier, Martin, Mosely). Browns gonna Browns. hope (again) this new guy in charge is different.
agree completely here. Darnold was having the Joe Germanine vs FSU experience and he still made a number of incredible throws in spots only his guy could get. down the field as well. I'm fine if the Browns take him.
Plays with some hip tightness that limits lateral agility in coverage
May not have pure cover talent to play full-time cornerback
I'm not saying he isn't a very good prospect. but we're talking about using a top 5 pick on a guy who the article you linked 2nd says has his best position at nickelcorner - the first time a guy would be taken that high for that position.
IMO you use top 5 picks at the best players at the premium positions. QB. LT. DE. lockdown CB. Fitz doesn't fit the bill for me (not that it matters) at #4 overall. and he isn't that crazy elite enough (like Barkley seems to be at RB) to overdraft the player for the position he plays.
I like competition as well. but competition isn't naming 6 starters at WR, nearly double digit team captains and allowing starters coming back to be handed their jobs without open, true competition (like QB in the spring last year). but I digress.
As for this year's team. the more real competition, the better. will make for a hungry team across the board.
I'm not seeing what everyone else is seeing with Fitzpatrick. and that's ok. I'd rather they go Barkley/Chubb (if they can) if they aren't taking a QB.
not sure about overrated, but I do share some of the same concerns you have about his style. he's so gifted with the ability to make people miss that it has made him less physical than I think the typical every down NFL back usually is - or generally needs to be. The size is there to be that kind of guy, though so maybe he can adapt his game when getting to the league.
As for the Browns taking him at 1, I'm not in love with the move but at the same time it's a roster that need scoreboard-changing talent and Barkley fits that need perfectly. When the other choices are a guy like Allen that has all the physical tools at QB but iffy on-field performance, Darnold who makes a lot of mistakes and Chubb who plays DE and they just took at DE at No. 1 overall...then Barkley may just be the pick because the Browns are 100% guaranteed of getting one of the other 3 I mentioned at #4 if they choose to go that way. But there's little doubt that Barkley still would be there at #4 should the Browns pass on him.
appreciate the effort. while I agree with the final conclusion of the jury still being out on Davis (though others clearly have their minds made up already). I do think the overall numbers indicate the defense, and LB play, was significantly better after Iowa.
I think your numbers indicate the improvement in the LB play that I noticed. Even if Ramesh got loose like one time overall the goal was handle Fumi...and the entire defense did just that. Add in holding Michigan's guys under their normal useage numbers (they were at like 25% for that game by my math) and the improvement was there. even if it isn't clear by the raw numbers.
Where it is more clear, IMO, is after that debacle in iowa, OSU help opponents to 2.23 yards per carry - a number that best the season number for nation leader Alabama by a long way (2.72). This was against teams that averaged 4.45 yards per carry. And this was in a stretch that included Sparty, Michigan, Wisconsin and USC...teams that generally make the run game a large part of their identities (even if Sparty's run game was around national average in 2017. OSU's run D was at 2.96 ypc for the whole season - a very good number that's among the very best in the nation - but also shows how strong that 2.23 number really was late in the year.
Getting guys in their most comfortable positions and changing the personnel really paid off late IMO. Unfortunate that Booker couldn't have been a part of it but the unit was pretty clearly better without him from what I can tell.
you left out Sparty (less than 200 yards of total offense...OSU without Baker and Booker in that one)
Illinois is garbage...not gonna bother.
Michigan...held Gentry and McKeon under their season averages per catch attempt. Hill at FB did get that annoying one catch for 10 yards.
Wisconsin...5 for 45 yards for Fumagali was very impressive but ya they let Ramesh out for 2 good gains.
USC...their TEs did nothing terribly noteworthy.
and in all these games the run defense was borderline magnificent.
So, disagree if you have to. I get that Davis is going to get crapped on because for a large chunk of the year his group was underperforming and frankly...a problem. but to me the evidence shows that the problem was largely fixed after Iowa. and after the personnel changes.
Davis apparently figured out how to coach after the Iowa (team) debacle...as the LBs were very good after that point.
wonder what changed after that drubbing?