Week 6 Discussion

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I'm seeing a lot of, "Cleveland should have drafted Watson/Trubisky/Wentz/Goff/etc...etc."

And it's just such crap to compare situations in hindsight.

I agree. All those QB's had flaws. Wentz/Trubisky really only 1 year starting experience. Watson was iffy and nobody was that high on Goff. I remember half of the football community thinking Wentz would be a complete bust, but judging by the comments these days supposedly noone thought that at the time... curious isn't it? The Browns will draft a QB this year that is going to be a better prospect than all of those guys. The funny part to me is that clearly they are going for a long-term approach but are then thinking of ditching it like 1-2 years in? That would be insanely stupid.



A note from last nights game, Osweiler looked terrible. He was throwing softballs out there.


After years of looking like an idiot for touting Darkwa he shreds the best run D in the league. Go figure

[Valhalla]

After years of looking like an idiot for touting Darkwa he shreds the best run D in the league. Go figure

Did you just cut bait too?

[Lotto4Life]

Whether intentional or not, Cleveland is building a base so whoever they end up taking will have a chance to succeed. I'm not sure they thought Kizer would be there in the 2nd, and when he was they kind of had to take that chance.

[onetwothree]

I'm seeing a lot of, "Cleveland should have drafted Watson/Trubisky/Wentz/Goff/etc...etc."

It's more the smug attitude of their front office about why they passed on someone like Wentz that has people commenting on the Browns passing on him. How they said he wasn't a top 20 QB in the league. And then Watson revealing that Hue had texted him to be ready during the draft implying he was told they'd pick him.

I'm sure the Browns would've found a way to ruin whoever they drafted but when you tout your analytics and basically act like the smartest guy in the room and are still losing, people will pile on and point out every miss. And from the looks of it, this front office won't be around long enough to show whether or not they were right.

I think people are more forgiving when you take a shot at a QB and miss than when you trade away from those opportunities repeatedly because you believe you can do better and then those guys play well (or at least better than what you have). Long term, they have a ton of draft capital thanks to those moves but fans and analysts don't think that far ahead.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

After years of looking like an idiot for touting Darkwa he shreds the best run D in the league. Go figure

Did you just cut bait too?

Yepper

[saw061600]

After years of looking like an idiot for touting Darkwa he shreds the best run D in the league. Go figure

Did you just cut bait too?

Yepper

x3...blah

[Phaded]

What are the odds Demarco puts up 20 PPR points tonight...?

[JoshGordonsDealer]

After years of looking like an idiot for touting Darkwa he shreds the best run D in the league. Go figure

Did you just cut bait too?

I’m not saying Darkwa didn’t just have a breakout, but the new playcaller and O-line definitely impacted production in an unsustainable way. Once teams get film, we’ll see if the offense is for real.

[Valhalla]

Lots of hate on the Browns and their QB situation/passing on all these QBs...
I'd put some money on a bet (if it could be proven) that the Browns had every intention to draft both Myles Garrett AND Mitch Trubisky. They had the draft capital to trade up for Mitch. They just had no idea that the Bears were lurking, willing to pay the draft capital they did.
And IMO (I'm no scout), Trubisky is the best prospect of the last couple years. If the Browns and their moneyball crew landed him like I think they planned to, there would be a different tune. You can't always foresee everything. NO ONE, not even many in the Bears scouting, saw the Bears trading so much to get Trubisky.
Think about this: MAYBE the reason the Bears had to trade so much draft capital is because they had to outbid someone else that was known to be LOADED with draft capital, so they came in over the top right away. I don't blame the Browns draft approach for this occurrence. Not really foreseeable.
They are acquiring some talent. I'm willing to give them a bit of time to find the right QB. Maybe they'll have one fall into their laps this offseason.

[joedirte]

Has anyone noticed that MFL scored McCaffrey with 21.4 ppr points? In my yahoo league he got 22.4. Anyone know why this is the case?

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Has anyone noticed that MFL scored McCaffrey with 21.4 ppr points? In my yahoo league he got 22.4. Anyone know why this is the case?

Did he fumble at all

[joedirte]

Has anyone noticed that MFL scored McCaffrey with 21.4 ppr points? In my yahoo league he got 22.4. Anyone know why this is the case?

Did he fumble at all

Thank you. This has been driving me crazy. I was looking at rotoworld which only shows fumbles lost. He muffed a punt and recovered it.

[Plank]

the CLE-HOU was pretty painful to watch, felt bad for Hogan, he did not have a good day at all .. won't be surprised to see Kizer again, they have to know before the 2018 if he can be the guy ..

[ericanadian]

Lots of hate on the Browns and their QB situation/passing on all these QBs...
I'd put some money on a bet (if it could be proven) that the Browns had every intention to draft both Myles Garrett AND Mitch Trubisky. They had the draft capital to trade up for Mitch. They just had no idea that the Bears were lurking, willing to pay the draft capital they did.
And IMO (I'm no scout), Trubisky is the best prospect of the last couple years. If the Browns and their moneyball crew landed him like I think they planned to, there would be a different tune. You can't always foresee everything. NO ONE, not even many in the Bears scouting, saw the Bears trading so much to get Trubisky.
Think about this: MAYBE the reason the Bears had to trade so much draft capital is because they had to outbid someone else that was known to be LOADED with draft capital, so they came in over the top right away. I don't blame the Browns draft approach for this occurrence. Not really foreseeable.
They are acquiring some talent. I'm willing to give them a bit of time to find the right QB. Maybe they'll have one fall into their laps this offseason.

I think it's pretty clear that the Bears didn't have to pay so much to move up the one spot, but I could see them panicking if the Browns had asked them about moving up, thinking the Browns may just jump them.

With the Browns, they're not just a QB away, so I have no idea why people keep bringing the QBs they missed up. Houston had an elite defense, solid receivers and a decent running game. Philadelphia had a solid team across the board. Even Chicago had a decent o-line and some complementary pieces. I still don't see Goff as very good, though that system really gives him every opportunity, and they had everything they needed for an elite defense. Cleveland has Joe Thomas. That's pretty much it. I also think Kizer is fine. He needs to get more comfortable back there and improve his pocket awareness, but he's got garbage receiving and is playing desperate.

[ninotoreS]

I think I recall reading somewhere that this year Cleveland has the youngest roster in the history of the NFL. Would Watson be doing nearly as well in Cleveland as he is in Houston with O'Brien's budding Patriots-derived offense? No, obviously.

That said, while I still don't blame Cleveland for trading back from 1.1 or 1.2, using the 1.12 on Watson would've been a great balance of risk, reward, and cost. Kizer was fine as a 2nd round pick, good value there for the potential upside, but it was always obvious Kizer would severely struggle as a year one starter. He wasn't a Day 1 pick for a reason. Kizer in round 2 should've been the kind of pick a team makes with a decent veteran already in hand as the stop-gap starter, allowing Kizer a year or two to develop on the bench. Cleveland didn't have that, so they should've taken Watson after selecting Garrett.