NFL Forum :: - The Next "A.D."

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

The Next "A.D."
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Tampa Bay Buccaneers

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

indifference

Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 1333

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:52 am Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

First off, I do not believe every bit of speculation as if it is fact. Im just using it as part of a constructive argument. And Shermar did say he likes Tannehill. Have you ever heard of a smoke screen? So I cant take what Shermer said as fact, which I didnt, but you can take what Holmgren said as fact? Hmm..

Shurmur just said he was "equally impressed" with Tannehill regarding the INTERVIEW he had with him. He never said he was impressed by him on the field etc....Therefore, I don't buy the smoke screen one bit.

Lil' Shorty wrote:

I understand your point about the running game though. First, just because a player went to Alabama does not mean he will be drafted by Holmgren. That would be horrible management. You have no point there. However, it is very possible Richardson is drafted by the Browns because they love to run the ball.

Being from Alabama wasn't the point. My point was, he took a RB high in 2000 and that back lead his team to the Super Bowl. The fact that he had success with his ground and pound philosophy with NO ideal RB back to run his operation cements Richardson as the perfect fit. Read those last sentences again so I don't have to re-explain my point to you.

Lil' Shorty wrote:

The Richardson / Blackmon / Tannehill debate for the Browns pick is much like our vey own Richardson / Claiborne debate. It is a debate and we, no matter how much we think we know, know anything about who will be picked. Its a debate and thats about as far as we can go. Someone will be right and someone will be wrong. Simple as that.

Its not though. You take a HC impressed by a combine interview and assume, oh, he must like him, seriously?! Confused

Its really down to Blackmon and Richardson and ultimately it'll go down to Richardson based on Holmgren's last success with his former team.

indifference

Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 1333

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:56 am Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Like I said, no one truly knows what will happen but this makes a heck of a lot of sense. After Blackmon and Richardson there are significant drop offs. A QB can not function without a WR, seriously. I dont care how much you love to run the ball. If you dont have a WR that makes defenses respect the pass, then they will always put 8 in the box and find a way to shut down the run. Please, someone, tell me that the Steelers and Ravens wont stop Richardson. These teams are monsters in run D and a little worse in pass. Blackmon would make teams only keep 7 in the box and allow one of the other 3 RBs to do more work than Richardson would do with everyone focusing on him.

Plus, McCoy will continue to suck without a good WR and it doesnt matter how good your RB is if your QB sucks. Who touches the ball every play?

So if the Browns decide to take a WR at #22 or in the 2nd round, that WR won't keep teams out the box? We just automatically assume, every WR that comes out besides Blackmon is a non-factor now, huh? Laughing

And please for the millionth time, stop acting like Blackmon is as sure thing as Richardson. Its NOT even close!! Blackmon is Crabtree like as a prospect and you see how he's doing in SF.

The twisted logic is comical.

deuces22wild

Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 5807

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:10 am Post subject:

indifference wrote:

How's a friendly wager? If he goes #4 I won't post here till 2013. And if he doesn't I'll see you next year.

Damn, what happend to sig bets, a year long ban.
_________________

RoeKG

Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 4010
Location: PA

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:29 am Post subject:

dbtb135 wrote:

RoeKG wrote:

The Steelers have been a passing team for the past few years and the Ravens are pretty balanced. Also have no idea what you're talking about with "going back" to being a running team... anyway, I wouldn't call either a running team.

They have. But were they not a run-first team up until the last few with success? Are they not admittedly going back to that philosophy now, with the new OC hire?

The Ravens were a run-first team for years. Last year they were split, but before that, it was all about their running game. Heck, their fans were still begging for Rice to get more touches this past season.

RoeKG wrote:

If he comes here he comes to a team with a solid OL (which CLE has) a solid QB (which CLE does not have) and some receiving threats (which CLE definitely doesn't have).

The receivers were never an argument with the pro-Richardson clan before VJ signed. A lot of them said that him coming here would draw coverage away from our lackluster WR corps and make them better. And even without, they argued that he would be a big time addition in his own right, and make an impact by himself. Help the QB too. There was no mention of him being dependent on the pieces around him. It was even argued that he'd make the line better, when Faine was still in the picture and Nicks wasn't. There was no fear of not having the pieces around him, it was all about how he'd make those pieces better and how he was a guy you couldn't pass on. Now someone else might take him, and all of a sudden it depends on what's around him and you can pass on him?

It's pretty cut and dry, RK. Either you buy the hype on Richardson and believe he is as much of a can't-miss, instant game-changer as he is made out to be, or he isn't. It's not dependent on whether he is there or not how good you think he is. If he is, they'd be kinda crazy to pass on him with a gaping hole at RB and a prospect like Richardson (to you, or others). Right?

RoeKG wrote:

It has much less to do with TR than it does with the team make up. Here he's the missing piece, whereas in Cleveland he's the only piece. They don't have anyone to take the attention away from him, including a QB.

We were missing all sorts of pieces on offense before. People wanted K2 out. Faine was still in play at center. We had no legitimate #1 WR. LG was a big hole. We had a QB, a RG, a LT and past that a bunch of other pieces that people didn't have a ton of faith in. Now Zuttah is all but locked in as the starter at C, LG is manned by the best in the game, VJ makes our WR corps much more reputable at the top.

But the thing is, nobody gave two craps about those holes as it pertained to Richardson. And you know it. They thought he was this safe, elite prospect and we'd be fools not to take him. He'd immediately improve the offense and be the focal point. He wouldn't immediately improve Cleveland's offense? Give them a top talent at a position that is more bone-dry of talent than the one we were going to put him at? I'm not buying it for a second.

Without free agency I'd still take our QB and WRs over Cleveland's any day. That's the difference.

I don't think the Browns take Tannehill or anything, I do think they'll take TR, all I'm saying is I don't think TR is going to vastly improve their team like he would for us, crazy FA or no. They still have practically no receiving threat and McCoy can be a serviceable stopgap until they get a real franchise QB. I don't think they'll really be a threat as a team until they get a QB and TR does not get them closer to that goal.
_________________

dbtb135

Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 3832

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:11 pm Post subject:

youngbuc20 wrote:

Blackmon to the Browns would do way more for them then TRich. If they get Blackmon it helps the whole offense.

If they got Blackmon, that would help the running game? Lulz. Richardson has a bigger impact on opening up the passing game than Blackmon would opening up the running game. And Richardson is a better prospect at his position than Blackmon is at his. Pass protection is also easier when you have a productive running game. Remember when Colt McCoy got killed by the Steelers last year? So what exactly were you saying about being better for the offense again? Laughing

youngbuc20 wrote:

It gives Colt a big time target to pair with Little. It will help McCoy and the offense as a whole and they are in position to get a good back in the second for ex. Miller, Martin, or Wilson.

The WR class is deeper than the RB class. They'd have great options at their second 1st rounder or their 2nd rounder, where as an RB would be a reach at their second 1st. The talent level of Hill/Randle/Wright/Jeffrey/Sanu is higher. Which is why more of them are slated to go in the 1st.

So the back later thing is really a bad point as it pertains to getting both early. Anyone would tell you the WR class is better and deeper past the top 10.

youngbuc20 wrote:

If they take Richardson defenses will just stack the box and make colt beat them through the air which most likley wont happen.

So stacking the box and playing the run wouldn't help Colt McCoy, but more attention paid to the passing game would? Do you realize what you're saying? Stacking the box means more vanilla coverages. That wouldn't help a passer be successful at all! Wink

dbtb135

Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 3832

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:15 pm Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Come on dude... Read my whole post. This part should answer your question.

Lil Shorty, you need to read MY post. The Phins wouldn't trade with the Browns. The ONLY reason you'd be projecting a trade is for them to secure Tannehill, right? But if the Browns weren't sold on him and wanted to move out and let him go elsewhere, they aren't that interested in him. So why would Miami need to move up if the Browns aren't? To leapfrog us and the Rams, who have franchise QBs? Think

Lil' Shorty

Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 2499
Location: NC...surrounded by lame Panther fans.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:27 pm Post subject:

deuces22wild wrote:

indifference wrote:

How's a friendly wager? If he goes #4 I won't post here till 2013. And if he doesn't I'll see you next year.

Damn, what happend to sig bets, a year long ban.

Idk man. I think he must have some unexpressed negative feelings toward me. Laughing

_________________

dbtb135

Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 3832

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:33 pm Post subject:

RoeKG wrote:

Without free agency I'd still take our QB and WRs over Cleveland's any day. That's the difference.

That's balogna though, RK. Nobody was saying "would Trent be successful here even with our WRs being a plainly average group last year?" No. Our WRs in comparison to the Browns make no difference. There was a ton of questions about our WR corps, and it wasn't even a subject that we scratched the surface on. It was all "Take Trent, he's can't miss, he's the BPA, he's a game-changer, you can't pass on an elite talent like him, he'll change the whole offense." The pieces around him were irrelevant. He was viewed as a game-changer at a position that we needed a game-changer at, and he was viewed by a lot as the best prospect past the top 3. Maybe even including the top 3. How is any of that different for the Browns? He's still the same talent level, still perceived as this game-changer elite prospect. His TALENT LEVEL was 99% of the reason everybody wanted (wants) him here. Why wouldn't that be the same to them? He was never a guy who people said would be a game-changer WITH the caveat of him having a good offense around him. That seems like a new thing that people added once Cleveland came into play.....

Crazy, ain't it?

RoeKG wrote:

I don't think the Browns take Tannehill or anything, I do think they'll take TR, all I'm saying is I don't think TR is going to vastly improve their team like he would for us, crazy FA or no.

But the only thing we have on them is a QB. If they take a WR high, they've got a solid talent group with no #1 established yet. And coming out of last year, that's exactly where we were.

RoeKG wrote:

They still have practically no receiving threat

Our leading WR going into the off-season:

M. Williams: 16 games, 65 rec, 771 yards, 11.9 Y/C, 3 TDs.
vs.
G. Little: 16 games, 61 rec, 709 yards, 11.6 Y/C, 2 TDs.

Now granted, Williams was coming off a 1,000 yard rookie year. But Little was a rookie, and produced similar #s in a similar bad offense.

RoeKG wrote:

and McCoy can be a serviceable stopgap until they get a real franchise QB. I don't think they'll really be a threat as a team until they get a QB and TR does not get them closer to that goal.

The QB class next year is 10x better than risking a high pick on Tannehill. And they can't exactly abstain from drafting until they get a shot at an actually good QB prospect. So take Richardson, like you're saying, and wait on a QB. They have to get better, and wouldn't Richardson be the best player at 4 to accomplish that?

Lil' Shorty

Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 2499
Location: NC...surrounded by lame Panther fans.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:34 pm Post subject:

dbtb135 wrote:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Come on dude... Read my whole post. This part should answer your question.

The only spot I think the Dolphins would be worried about would be the Jaguars at 7. A team who likes Tannehill could trade with them and leap frog the Dolphins. Sorry. Probably didnt make that clear. Will it happen, who knows. I could just see them being kinda shaky about that spot if they really want Tannehill and therefore willing to trade up with the Browns.

Indifference,

I think its pretty obvious where you stand and where I stand. Quite honestly you are very closed minded and are almost guaranteeing that Richardson will be picked by the Browns. Myself on the other hand see it possible for them to take either Blackmon or Tannehill as well. My only point is that no one can say for certain and while you can make a good point for RB, as I have already stated, you just dont know for sure. No one does, so stop acting like you know it all. You dont. Smh..
_________________

dbtb135

Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 3832

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:44 pm Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

If you dont have a WR that makes defenses respect the pass, then they will always put 8 in the box and find a way to shut down the run.

Again, someone explain to me how pulling a safety into the box hurts a QB's chances of success in the passing game. If they take Blackmon and try to become a pass-first team, wouldn't teams pin their ears back in the front and play coverage with safeties back? If you're worried about the Steelers/Ravens run D, what about Suggs/Ngata/Woodley/Harrison rushing the passer? Blackmon isn't exactly the quickest WR in getting open...

Also, ranks:

Run D:
Ravens (2nd)
Steelers (8th)

Pass D:
Steelers (1st)
Ravens (4th)

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Please, someone, tell me that the Steelers and Ravens wont stop Richardson. These teams are monsters in run D and a little worse in pass.

So you're saying don't try to beat them with Trent Richardson, because it won't happen. But you've got a better shot with Colt McCoy? You must not be too high on Richardson....

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Blackmon would make teams only keep 7 in the box and allow one of the other 3 RBs to do more work than Richardson would do with everyone focusing on him.

So you'd rather have a lesser talented back with a passing game than a more talented back with no passing game? Like a BJGE with a Tom Brady than a Maurice Jones-Drew with a Blaine Gabbert?

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Plus, McCoy will continue to suck without a good WR and it doesnt matter how good your RB is if your QB sucks.

So you don't like the WR class past Blackmon? I think it's one of the strengths of the whole draft, personally.

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Who touches the ball every play?

Blackmon?

dbtb135

Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 3832

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:47 pm Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

I could buy that, but you don't usually see preemptive blocks in the top 10. I mean, when we did it for Free it was later in the draft and cost nothing. If Miami did that, I'd imagine they'd pay a somewhat premium pick. Maybe a 3rd, more likely a 2nd.

Lil' Shorty

Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 2499
Location: NC...surrounded by lame Panther fans.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 3:29 pm Post subject:

dbtb135 wrote:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Fair enough. Idk but thats what I was thinking.

To your post above this one.. ^

Lesser talented back and better QB is a pretty good option. Just look at your example. Brady and Law Firm are pretty nasty with the Patriots and Gabbert and Jones-Drew are.. the Jaguars. Blount is not as all around as Law Firm so he is not an equal comparison. We still need a Richardson. Could do wonders for the offense. (Just incase thats where you were going with that.)

I think Blackmon is clearly the best and a #1 and the others are good #2s. I too think this is a deep WR draft but the Browns have good #2s and need a true #1. Thats why, if they dont want Tannehill, they should think about Blackmon. McCoy needs someone that can get open regularly or he will never succeed.

"Who touches the ball every play?" That comment was in regard to saying Tannehill would have a big impact on the Browns offense.
_________________

indifference

Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 1333

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 4:13 pm Post subject:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

I think its pretty obvious where you stand and where I stand. Quite honestly you are very closed minded and are almost guaranteeing that Richardson will be picked by the Browns. Myself on the other hand see it possible for them to take either Blackmon or Tannehill as well. My only point is that no one can say for certain and while you can make a good point for RB, as I have already stated, you just dont know for sure. No one does, so stop acting like you know it all. You dont. Smh..

So your conceding because this guy interviewed with the Browns well, he is a legit option? Seriously?!? That's why your in the minority in that thinking that he is a legit option at #4(go ask the Browns fans). I can see Blackmon because of the much more body of work he composed in college, but Tannehill? Its a joke. I see its possible for Blackmon but not for Tannehill because their lousy coach thought this mediocre QB interviewed well at the NFL combine. Come on.

RoeKG

Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 4010
Location: PA

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:44 pm Post subject:

dbtb135 wrote:

RoeKG wrote:

Without free agency I'd still take our QB and WRs over Cleveland's any day. That's the difference.

RoeKG wrote:

I don't think the Browns take Tannehill or anything, I do think they'll take TR, all I'm saying is I don't think TR is going to vastly improve their team like he would for us, crazy FA or no.

But the only thing we have on them is a QB. If they take a WR high, they've got a solid talent group with no #1 established yet. And coming out of last year, that's exactly where we were.

RoeKG wrote:

They still have practically no receiving threat

RoeKG wrote:

and McCoy can be a serviceable stopgap until they get a real franchise QB. I don't think they'll really be a threat as a team until they get a QB and TR does not get them closer to that goal.

Yes, taking TR would be the best way for them to get better which is why I think they do it. It won't make them good, but it'll make them better. For our offense, TR would make them good pre-FA, and I think it makes them great post-FA.

I hope he falls to us due to some blunder by the Browns.
_________________

Lil' Shorty

Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 2499
Location: NC...surrounded by lame Panther fans.

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 12:07 am Post subject:

indifference wrote:

Lil' Shorty wrote:

Didnt really follow what you just said on Tannehill, but whatever. Dont really care.

As far as Browns fans are concerned, its a pretty even split on if they want Blackmon or Richardson. Just like its an even split on our board on whether we want Richardson or Claiborne.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=483855
_________________

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Tampa Bay Buccaneers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14  Next

Page 13 of 14

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum