Update on Jaylon Smith

[abenjami]

3 hours ago, Mythos27 said:

But the only reason they'd do this is because they don't have a QB and they don't grow on trees. If you have no idea when or how your QBOTF is going to arrive, why should you not draft and impact RB that can prevent you from at least being a laughing stock until you find that QB? You don't just go from bottom-feeder to contender and if a legit RB can help you at least become relevant why not use him up until you can find that golden goose?

This is Jeff Fisher thinking.  Only looking ahead to next week's opponent instead of having a long term game plan.

You have a much better chance of finding the golden egg if you are a laughing stock than if you are mediocre.

Make me a laughing stock and give me a few top 3 draft picks.  I'll get my QB much faster than being 8-8 and picking around #15 year after year.

Not to mention, by the time the QB is found and groomed, the stud RB will be washed up.

[IsntLifeFunny]

10 hours ago, scine09 said:

No this issue with the Rams and Gurley is they clearly want to build their offense around him.  You can't win doing that IMO.

That's Fisher's MO.

That's an entirely different argument than saying they're a bad pick. What the team does with them is their prerogative. 

[scine09]

2 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

That's an entirely different argument than saying they're a bad pick. What the team does with them is their prerogative. 

Fair enough.  I think though that when someone uses a pick that high on a rb they try to force the team to build around him.  If you look at it a different way, there are very few coaches and gms who would even take a rb that high.  The ones who do probably do it to make the guy a center piece.

[IsntLifeFunny]

2 hours ago, scine09 said:

Fair enough.  I think though that when someone uses a pick that high on a rb they try to force the team to build around him.  If you look at it a different way, there are very few coaches and gms who would even take a rb that high.  The ones who do probably do it to make the guy a center piece.

I agree with you there, but a lot of teams would love to take heat off their QB by having a top five back. If you think a guy is going to produce at a level no one around him will then he isn't a bad pick. If you plan on featuring him in a way that takes away from the ability of developing the rest of your offense then it isn't a good pick. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but you're right to note that oftentimes they are because the strategy behind picking them in the first place. 

[scine09]

20 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

I agree with you there, but a lot of teams would love to take heat off their QB by having a top five back. If you think a guy is going to produce at a level no one around him will then he isn't a bad pick. If you plan on featuring him in a way that takes away from the ability of developing the rest of your offense then it isn't a good pick. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but you're right to note that oftentimes they are because the strategy behind picking them in the first place. 

Why do you think Fisher drafted Gurley?

[IsntLifeFunny]

12 minutes ago, scine09 said:

Why do you think Fisher drafted Gurley?

 

33 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

but you're right to note that oftentimes they are because the strategy behind picking them in the first place. 

 

[Mythos27]

18 hours ago, abenjami said:

This is Jeff Fisher thinking.  Only looking ahead to next week's opponent instead of having a long term game plan.

You have a much better chance of finding the golden egg if you are a laughing stock than if you are mediocre.

Make me a laughing stock and give me a few top 3 draft picks.  I'll get my QB much faster than being 8-8 and picking around #15 year after year.

Not to mention, by the time the QB is found and groomed, the stud RB will be washed up.

I've seen the Browns burn through so many high picks looking for the golden goose that I'm not sure being terrible is the only way to find your guy. The stud RB is a guy you draft in an effort to at least stay competitive while you find that elite signal caller not someone you take in place of an elite QB. Last season's QB class was utterly bereft of depth.Once Mariota and Winston were off the board, Gurley made the most sense as one of the best offensive weapons in the draft. They were a team that had a defense you can win with, all the good QBs were gone, and they draft the offensive rookie of the year for an offense that had no play-makers I don't see how that's a bad move. 

[abenjami]

48 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

I've seen the Browns burn through so many high picks looking for the golden goose that I'm not sure being terrible is the only way to find your guy. The stud RB is a guy you draft in an effort to at least stay competitive while you find that elite signal caller not someone you take in place of an elite QB. Last season's QB class was utterly bereft of depth.Once Mariota and Winston were off the board, Gurley made the most sense as one of the best offensive weapons in the draft. They were a team that had a defense you can win with, all the good QBs were gone, and they draft the offensive rookie of the year for an offense that had no play-makers I don't see how that's a bad move. 

What picks are you talking about?  Other than Tim Couch a really long time ago, the Browns have been doing exactly what I said is NOT the best way. They've been using late first round picks on QB's with huge question marks (Manziel, Weeden, Quinn) instead of picking near the top. 

I didn't say being terrible is the ONLY way to find the golden egg. Just that it gives you the best chance to find it.