kam.
Mr. Blackmon
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 13,451
- Reaction score
- 1,577
I will be sitting on my new leather sofa in the Studio watching it on my new 50 Inch 3D LED TV. I'm more than ready for this shit, been waiting since November.
2012 NFL Draft Thread.
- Thread starter Mooche
- Start date
Nice setup. Were currently building our basement and we're doing a home theatre room. We're gonna get a LED 3D as well, but sadly won't be done for a month or two yet, so won't have it for the draft. :/ Still got our handy 55" LCD. Not too shabby.
Also, I go back every second week to Cousins tape, because you guys seem to hate him. I know he's not the perfect prospect, but watching him and Weeden back to back, there is no difference talent wise and they are equally inconsistant in areas.
Also, I go back every second week to Cousins tape, because you guys seem to hate him. I know he's not the perfect prospect, but watching him and Weeden back to back, there is no difference talent wise and they are equally inconsistant in areas.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Messages
- 36,768
- Reaction score
- 1,153
I don't think people hate Cousins at all, I just feel most view him as the #5 or #6 QB prospect.
I dont see Cousins having that special "star" quallity to him. I think he can be a very productive QB, like Andy Dalton was last year, but in no way a stud QB.
Obviously RBIII and Luck are the top 2 QBs in the class. So then you have Tannehill, Osweiler, Cousins, and Weeden.
In ranking them for who has the best potential for the future, it goes Tannehill, Osweiler, Cousins, Weeden.
In ranking them for who can have the best immediate impact, the list is almost flipped, being Weeden, Cousins, Tannehill, Osweiler.
The difference between Weeden and Cousins isn't huge, with Weeden being the better prospect IMO. If I had to choose one to be my QB for 8 years, I'd probably take Cousins. I'm not really an Osweiler fan either; he's way too raw. The way he'll be successful in the league would be through great coaching, and sit behind a good QB for those years. The only problem, which is similar to the situation with Mallett in New England, is that Osweiler's contract would run out before he's ready/when the other QB is still there. It'd be very hard for Osweiler to succeed.
In theory, Brock should have stayed at ASU, or even transfered if he didn't want to deal with the new system at ASU. It is clear that Osweiler cared more about his draft stock than his actual skills and performance, which is a shame because his potential is so high. It also shows a decent amount about him as a person as well
I dont see Cousins having that special "star" quallity to him. I think he can be a very productive QB, like Andy Dalton was last year, but in no way a stud QB.
Obviously RBIII and Luck are the top 2 QBs in the class. So then you have Tannehill, Osweiler, Cousins, and Weeden.
In ranking them for who has the best potential for the future, it goes Tannehill, Osweiler, Cousins, Weeden.
In ranking them for who can have the best immediate impact, the list is almost flipped, being Weeden, Cousins, Tannehill, Osweiler.
The difference between Weeden and Cousins isn't huge, with Weeden being the better prospect IMO. If I had to choose one to be my QB for 8 years, I'd probably take Cousins. I'm not really an Osweiler fan either; he's way too raw. The way he'll be successful in the league would be through great coaching, and sit behind a good QB for those years. The only problem, which is similar to the situation with Mallett in New England, is that Osweiler's contract would run out before he's ready/when the other QB is still there. It'd be very hard for Osweiler to succeed.
In theory, Brock should have stayed at ASU, or even transfered if he didn't want to deal with the new system at ASU. It is clear that Osweiler cared more about his draft stock than his actual skills and performance, which is a shame because his potential is so high. It also shows a decent amount about him as a person as well
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 27,130
- Reaction score
- 1,228
I don't think anyone hates Cousins. If I remember correctly, I even said he was criminally underrated back in December. At the time, he was. Most draft guys now have him in a reasonable range.
I just don't think most people are willing to consider him worthy of a first round pick.
QB rankings don't hold much weight this year either. The difference between the 4th QB and the 7th QB is almost non existent. You could maybe even throw the 3rd (Tannehill) into the mix... I still have yet to see what is vaulting him into the top 10.
I just don't think most people are willing to consider him worthy of a first round pick.
QB rankings don't hold much weight this year either. The difference between the 4th QB and the 7th QB is almost non existent. You could maybe even throw the 3rd (Tannehill) into the mix... I still have yet to see what is vaulting him into the top 10.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Messages
- 36,768
- Reaction score
- 1,153
Its purely potential that is putting him in there, which is just stupid. Every QB prospect has the potential to be great, its just most cant get to that potential.
I value RT as a 2nd rounder, and he is a top 12 pick in the draft.... its sad.
A guy who couldn't beat out Jerrod Johnson at QB is a Top 10 pick? lol
As for Weeden being more pro ready, to me, that's media BS. What, cause he's old he's ready? Everyone gets on Tannehill for having 19 starts, but Weeden only has 26 himself. Not to mention he played in a spread shotgun system, where he rarely faced pressure (and when he did, he was a lot worse). When the pocket closes in on him, he's a totally different QB. I don't see him being successful now or ever.
Osweiler, I used to like him, but it tuns out what I saw were his good games. He has some bad tape, which really shows his lack of arm (everyone assumes it's strong, just cause he's big), and I hate his throwing motion.
So to me, it's really between Cousins and Tannehill. I would take Cousins in the 35-50 range all day over Tannehill top 10. Either way I look at it, neither guy will be a Tom Brady or a Manning who can lead a team to the Bowl by themselves. They are a lot similar as players than people think as well, in fact very similar, other than Tannehill's athleticism. However Tannehill cannot throw a go route, and Cousins can. What Tannehill has physically, Cousins makes up for it somewhere else. They played in similar systems, both had inconsistant accuracy. For both sometimes it was amazing, other times bad. Same can be said about decision making. I'll admit Tannehill has better arm strength, but Cousins is sooo underrated in that aspect. He can make all the throws too. Then it comes down to intangibles. Love Cousins personality from interviews I've seen, where Tannehill rubs me the wrong way. Of couse I'm not justified to say this because I haven't met them, but we all know Cousins has great intangibles. I really don't see the top 5 QB potential in Tannehill everyone else sees. His ceiling IMO is a Carson Palmer. Neither should be 1st round QB's, and I can't stand how Tannehill is being overrated. He's a second rounder to me. They are 3a and 3b.
Osweiler, I used to like him, but it tuns out what I saw were his good games. He has some bad tape, which really shows his lack of arm (everyone assumes it's strong, just cause he's big), and I hate his throwing motion.
So to me, it's really between Cousins and Tannehill. I would take Cousins in the 35-50 range all day over Tannehill top 10. Either way I look at it, neither guy will be a Tom Brady or a Manning who can lead a team to the Bowl by themselves. They are a lot similar as players than people think as well, in fact very similar, other than Tannehill's athleticism. However Tannehill cannot throw a go route, and Cousins can. What Tannehill has physically, Cousins makes up for it somewhere else. They played in similar systems, both had inconsistant accuracy. For both sometimes it was amazing, other times bad. Same can be said about decision making. I'll admit Tannehill has better arm strength, but Cousins is sooo underrated in that aspect. He can make all the throws too. Then it comes down to intangibles. Love Cousins personality from interviews I've seen, where Tannehill rubs me the wrong way. Of couse I'm not justified to say this because I haven't met them, but we all know Cousins has great intangibles. I really don't see the top 5 QB potential in Tannehill everyone else sees. His ceiling IMO is a Carson Palmer. Neither should be 1st round QB's, and I can't stand how Tannehill is being overrated. He's a second rounder to me. They are 3a and 3b.
WHO-DEY-BENGALS_18
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 16,192
- Reaction score
- 296
Evan Massey @EMasseyReport I've got confirmation that if Brandon Weeden is available at pick #37, the #Browns will select him. Won't reach for him at #22. #NFLDraft
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 67,842
- Reaction score
- 2,208
There is a small chance he even makes it to 37.
WHO-DEY-BENGALS_18
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 16,192
- Reaction score
- 296
Sports journalist with some inside information, he claims so who knows.
He also said: Despite recent rumors, the
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 67,842
- Reaction score
- 2,208
Cosell has the Browns taking Trent and Randle. I can dig that.
But he also has Stephen Gilmore going #3 and Janoris Jenkins going #5, so yea..
But he also has Stephen Gilmore going #3 and Janoris Jenkins going #5, so yea..
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 18,978
- Reaction score
- 645
lmao that's idiotic.
Random notes on why the Browns likely won't take Tanny:
A&M and Bama had their pro days on the same day... GM and coach went to see Richardson, sent Childress to Tanny. Also haven't brought in Tanny for a private workout - something you assume a team would do before taking a "franchise QB" at #4.
Random notes on why the Browns likely won't take Tanny:
A&M and Bama had their pro days on the same day... GM and coach went to see Richardson, sent Childress to Tanny. Also haven't brought in Tanny for a private workout - something you assume a team would do before taking a "franchise QB" at #4.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Messages
- 36,768
- Reaction score
- 1,153
Cutler was projected to go higher than that I believe though, so they didn't think he'd be available maybe. I forget
kam.
Mr. Blackmon
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 13,451
- Reaction score
- 1,577
Jags didnt have a workout with Blaine Gabbert. IDT the Vikings had a workout with Ponder.
Why tip your hand? Especially when the team infront of you has said its more than open to trading back?
I think the Browns are interested in Tannehill more than what people think.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 67,842
- Reaction score
- 2,208
Not at 4. The only possible way they draft him is trading up to #7, and I still doubt that.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 25,700
- Reaction score
- 771
Lions get Kirkpatrick with the 23 pick and Jenkins with their 2nd round pick boom new secondary lol. Won't happen though
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Messages
- 36,768
- Reaction score
- 1,153
wont happen because I doubt you draft 2 CBs. Jenkins will be available at your pick though.
Cutler was actually a "reach" where they got him. I can't remember who, maybe it was Mayock, but someone said he'd be better than Young and Leinart, and praised the pick.