Browns WILL 1000% take Barkley at 1, it's a lock

[Indeee]

1 hour ago, IndyScribe said:

Barkley won't help them make the playoffs. If any one of those QBs can be a franchise QB, they'd have made a mistake. If the Browns believe Darnold/Rosen can become a franchise QB, then they'll take them. You may think neither one warrants a first pick, but GMs and history will disagree.

This may not be a popular assessment, however I believe the Browns offensively are more talented than people will seem to think.

 

If the Browns can sign a QB in FA such as McCarron, Keenum or McCown and draft Barkley and ? Rookie QB at four, it does possibly make them a lot better. Yes, I know winning one game would make them better...Ha!! but you know what I mean.

 

FA veteran QB, Barkley, Johnson, Coleman, Gordon, The TE I can't spell and potentially resigning Pryor and offensively the Browns would be substantially better while allowing whatever QB to develop and if by chance that rook comes along faster than expected, even better. I might go even as far as to say that they could push the Ravens and Bengals and jockey for 2nd in division behind the Steelers.

[Indeee]

Bump

[BOTT]

On 2/28/2018 at 10:30 PM, dgambill said:

The right staff makes a huge difference for a qb. Look at so many that under the a different coach and system really flourished. Foles, Keemun, A Smith, Goff, Palmer etc. The right situation is critical for qbs. The wrong one can break them.

Nobody was talking up drew Brees as a hof'er before he met Sean Payton either.  Just imagine if Matt Ryan had Kyle Shannahan as his OC for a decade.....

[DaveA1102]

On ‎01‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 1:15 PM, Indeee said:

I have basically taken some heat over the past day since I have posted this, and we shall see come draft night, however I stand by my post/assertion.

 

I get where everyone seems to think that the Browns "MUST" take a QB at 1 overall but I'm telling you that neither one of the top 3 ( Rosen, Darnold, or Allen ) warrants that pick. Not one of these guys is head and shoulders above the rest and I would almost wager that when it came to the Browns, they might even think Mayfield is in the same class too. So again, because of this factor Barkley is a no brainer selection for a team.

 

Cleveland hasn't had a dominant running back for 53 years ( Jim Brown ). The only other RB worth mentioning for the Browns was Leroy Kelly and I guess none of you know who that is as that was over 45 years ago.

 

Barkley will be the pick. Cleveland finally stops being stupid and takes the BEST player in the draft, then grabs a QB at 4.

 

I don't think many on here are saying that they would be shocked if Barkley went number 1, but for you to title your thread that it is "1000%" and "a lock" is more than a little naïve.

 

He has the talent to go number 1 and has put up a strong combine performance, but no way it is locked at this stage especially, as others have mentioned, with the propensity for teams to pick early on QB's.

 

I, for one, hopes he goes #1 or #2 as it takes the decision out of our hands and means we can focus on getting Chubb, whether that is just straight at #3 or trading back and hopefully still picking him up at #5 or #6 with some extra draft capital.

[Indeee]

1 hour ago, DaveA1102 said:

 

I don't think many on here are saying that they would be shocked if Barkley went number 1, but for you to title your thread that it is "1000%" and "a lock" is more than a little naïve.

 

He has the talent to go number 1 and has put up a strong combine performance, but no way it is locked at this stage especially, as others have mentioned, with the propensity for teams to pick early on QB's.

 

I, for one, hopes he goes #1 or #2 as it takes the decision out of our hands and means we can focus on getting Chubb, whether that is just straight at #3 or trading back and hopefully still picking him up at #5 or #6 with some extra draft capital.

My friend, I titled it as I did based on how I explained it. What I find hard to believe is that NO ONE in media, draft experts, fans on this forum, even my personal friends think this is plausible and as I explained it, it is so plausible it's funny. I have been saying this way before I posted it here and way before the combine took place. Makes too much sense not to be a lock. I'm going to keep bumping this all the way through the draft time and if I'm wrong I will take my lumps but if I'm right I'm gonna make it known to all these who doubted me on here and called me nuts

[Indeee]

Excerpt from Article written by Michael Smith TODAY March 5th, PFT

 

 However, the Browns also have the fourth overall pick. If they think there are three franchise quarterbacks this year — if they think Josh Allen, Josh Rosen and Sam Darnold are all about equal — they could take Barkley first and still ensure themselves a top quarterback at No. 4.

 

Sound familiar??? Hmmmm??? Seems like this is what my original post stated. 

[Swan Ronson]

'If they think'. 'they could'

 

Yeah, that sounds like a lock for sure.

[DaveA1102]

29 minutes ago, Indeee said:

My friend, I titled it as I did based on how I explained it. What I find hard to believe is that NO ONE in media, draft experts, fans on this forum, even my personal friends think this is plausible and as I explained it, it is so plausible it's funny. I have been saying this way before I posted it here and way before the combine took place. Makes too much sense not to be a lock. I'm going to keep bumping this all the way through the draft time and if I'm wrong I will take my lumps but if I'm right I'm gonna make it known to all these who doubted me on here and called me nuts

 

You are not going to get any trophies for predicting Barkley goes first, he is a talented dude.......but it is not a lock!

 

There are plenty of people on here who think it is "plausible", including myself.  At the moment, I am not sure it even falls into the "probable" bracket, but I would agree to disagree with you if that was your opinion.

 

You have created a rod for your own back here buddy.  If he goes number one, you can gloat, but people will still tell you it was not a lock at this stage.  If he does not go number 1, you may well be widely ridiculed.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Nobody has even brought this up once but what if we traded up? . Yeah I know, it would be dumb right/improbable right? but if Ballard really wanted Barkley what if he traded our #3 and 4th Round pick to the Browns for their #1 so we make sure we get Barkley and we still would even have our 2nd and 3rd Round picks anyway where we could Draft Good Defense. Browns would do that IMO because they still would pick 3rd and get a QB + still pick 4th too. With all of these silly scenario's being thrown out - I just threw out one that is silly.

[TheMarine]

The only way I see Barkley going #1 is if they (Browns) have QB1 and QB2, and they dont feel like the Colts are going to trade out of the #3 spot. But, if they do go Barkley #1, I do think we can certainly drop back. Cleveland wont take Chubb #4, nor will the Jets or Broncos.

 

TBH, Id like it if the Browns DID take Barkley #1 overall. It would open us up for more talent (draft picks) and still get our guy

[IndyScribe]

On 3/1/2018 at 11:03 AM, Indeee said:

This may not be a popular assessment, however I believe the Browns offensively are more talented than people will seem to think.

 

If the Browns can sign a QB in FA such as McCarron, Keenum or McCown and draft Barkley and ? Rookie QB at four, it does possibly make them a lot better. Yes, I know winning one game would make them better...Ha!! but you know what I mean.

 

FA veteran QB, Barkley, Johnson, Coleman, Gordon, The TE I can't spell and potentially resigning Pryor and offensively the Browns would be substantially better while allowing whatever QB to develop and if by chance that rook comes along faster than expected, even better. I might go even as far as to say that they could push the Ravens and Bengals and jockey for 2nd in division behind the Steelers.

I think their defense isn't too bad. Their offense needs work. The O-Line is decent, although Joe Thomas is getting up there in age. They have no good WRs(maybe Coleman?), and Crowell isn't exactly a good RB. If they were to take Barkley and someone like Mayfield, that offense would get a lot better.

[Luca_Colts]

Guys, It's the Cleveland Browns!! They'll probably do something non sense!!

[Dr. T]

I think it is very plausible for Cleveland to pick Barkley #1 and the Browns and Colts may already have a gentleman's agreement that we will swap our #3 for their #4 (plus at least one extra early round pick). The wild card is the Giants. Will NYG pick a QB, Chubb or trade back to a QB-hungry team? Regardless, if the Colts and Browns have an agreement in place, Cleveland gets the most talented player in this draft (Barkley) plus no worse than the second best quarterback. And we get Chubb or trade back further for even more picks.

[WoolMagnet]

On 2/27/2018 at 8:13 AM, Indeee said:

Guys/Girls

 

Look this is a guaranteed no brainer that I'm shocked no one is seeing here. Regardless of what Mayock, Kiper, McShay all say, the Browns will NOT take a QB at 1, it will be Barkley and here's why.

 

There are 3 Qb's that are the "top" prospects this year. Rosen, Darnold, and Allen. Mayfield is the 4th. Anyway, IMO going on a few things I have read so far and that I agree with, the Browns view these three guys virtually the same. All have different skill sets however none really separate themselves from one another as clear cut favorites so....

 

Browns take best player at 1 which is Barkley.

 

That means Giants would trade out 2nd overall pick or take a QB. Lets say Giants trade with Jets. Jets take Rosen. Or if Giants take Rosen, That leaves Darnold and Allen. 

 

Colts trade pick 3 or take Chubb. Lets say Colts trade with Bills. Bills take Darnold. That leaves Allen or lets say Colts stay put and take Chubb that leaves Allen and Darnold.

 

Browns on clock at 4, either pick from 2 still available or take whoever is left.

 

Browns get RB and QB. End of story. Based on where the Browns sit in the draft there is no way the Browns don't come away with both positional players of need and Dorsey knows this.

 

My point is there is NO WAY this scenario doesn't play out this way except the name of the QB the Browns might get.

 

Makes NO sense for the Browns to take a QB at one and every so called pundit should know that.

 

Barkley will be a Brown 1000% Lock!!

 

 

While you are at it, Any chance you can give me next Saturday's winning lottery numbers  Nostradamus?

[WoolMagnet]

On 2/27/2018 at 8:34 AM, stitches said:

This is NOT how one drafts a QB. "Oh, well... we are going to take whoever is left". Teams target specific QBs and rarely love 3-4 prospects at the same level... and even if that's the case they still have preferences. The only way to guarantee they will get the one they prefer is to draft him no. 1... 

The Browns would (in the past).

now that Dorsey is there, things will go better i think.

[Farns01]

I would be concerned about the Browns drafting Chubbs.  Think of having Chubbs and Garrett as DE’s.  Then pick up a QB at Four.  The Giants will go for Barkley and the Colts will try and trade back.

[CopenhagenColt]

1 hour ago, Farns01 said:

I would be concerned about the Browns drafting Chubbs.  Think of having Chubbs and Garrett as DE’s.  Then pick up a QB at Four.  The Giants will go for Barkley and the Colts will try and trade back.

Precisely.

[Indeee]

So Now it seems Vegas is getting in on the act putting Barkley at +170 as the overwhelming pick to go first overall to the Browns. 

 

Like I said before, 1000% Lock

[DaveA1102]

On ‎05‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 10:39 PM, Farns01 said:

I would be concerned about the Browns drafting Chubbs.  Think of having Chubbs and Garrett as DE’s.  Then pick up a QB at Four.  The Giants will go for Barkley and the Colts will try and trade back.

 

This guy....?

 

 

[krunk]

On ‎3‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 10:03 AM, Indeee said:

This may not be a popular assessment, however I believe the Browns offensively are more talented than people will seem to think.

 

If the Browns can sign a QB in FA such as McCarron, Keenum or McCown and draft Barkley and ? Rookie QB at four, it does possibly make them a lot better. Yes, I know winning one game would make them better...Ha!! but you know what I mean.

 

FA veteran QB, Barkley, Johnson, Coleman, Gordon, The TE I can't spell and potentially resigning Pryor and offensively the Browns would be substantially better while allowing whatever QB to develop and if by chance that rook comes along faster than expected, even better. I might go even as far as to say that they could push the Ravens and Bengals and jockey for 2nd in division behind the Steelers.

I dont know about guarantee but I will say I did see an article somewhere that said the Browns prefer to get a veteran QB and let the drafted QB sit behind him. This is something I could believe after watching their young QB really struggle last year. I could somewhat see your scenario play out. Although it makes more sense to grab the QB when you have complete control over the process. We dont know if the Browns actually do view all the QBs equally. And Dorsey said even before the season was over with that securing a Franchise QB was the #1 priority. I dont think AJ Mccarron is going to be that. And it doesn't appear Kirk Cousins will be a Brown.

[IndyScribe]

On 3/5/2018 at 8:17 AM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Nobody has even brought this up once but what if we traded up? . Yeah I know, it would be dumb right/improbable right? but if Ballard really wanted Barkley what if he traded our #3 and 4th Round pick to the Browns for their #1 so we make sure we get Barkley and we still would even have our 2nd and 3rd Round picks anyway where we could Draft Good Defense. Browns would do that IMO because they still would pick 3rd and get a QB + still pick 4th too. With all of these silly scenario's being thrown out - I just threw out one that is silly.

Would a RB really be worth trading up for? Maybe if the Colts were contenders but they're not. They need those draft picks and a trade up in the first isn't really worth it.

[IndyScribe]

On 3/5/2018 at 5:39 PM, Farns01 said:

I would be concerned about the Browns drafting Chubbs.  Think of having Chubbs and Garrett as DE’s.  Then pick up a QB at Four.  The Giants will go for Barkley and the Colts will try and trade back.

At #1? I highly doubt it. They're more likely to go Barkley and then QB/Chubb.

[DaveA1102]

33 minutes ago, Indeee said:

So Now it seems Vegas is getting in on the act putting Barkley at +170 as the overwhelming pick to go first overall to the Browns. 

 

Like I said before, 1000% Lock

 

If it was a Lock, they wouldn't be taking bets any more.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, IndyScribe said:

Would a RB really be worth trading up for? Maybe if the Colts were contenders but they're not. They need those draft picks and a trade up in the first isn't really worth it.

It wouldn't but Barkley is the best RB I have seen since AP coming out in 2007, JMO.

[IndyScribe]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It wouldn't but Barkley is the best RB I have seen since AP coming out in 2007, JMO.

I agree with you but I can't fathom the Colts trading up when they have a ton of needs. It's better to trade down and stockpile picks than trade up for Barkley. Also, using #1 on a RB is pretty questionable.

[krunk]

I think the Giants are going to do exactly what their GM hinted at. He said Nelson was one of the two best players in this draft. I think they will pick up Norwell in FA and then draft Nelson at #2. Totally solidifying the interior of the OL. You do that and it also goes a long way towards fixing all the Run game problems they had as well.

[2006Coltsbestever]

50 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

I agree with you but I can't fathom the Colts trading up when they have a ton of needs. It's better to trade down and stockpile picks than trade up for Barkley. Also, using #1 on a RB is pretty questionable.

I agree.

[aaron11]

1 hour ago, Indeee said:

So Now it seems Vegas is getting in on the act putting Barkley at +170

not overwhelming odds by any means.

 

when its really a lock, the favorite will have a minus number and everyone else will have positive 

[lollygagger8]

[IndyScribe]

1 hour ago, lollygagger8 said:

Pretty much. Draft is pretty much a crapshoot. 

[il vecchio]

Browns WILL 1000% take Barkley at 1?? Nope. You're off by more than an order of magnitude.

 

I'd say maybe 40% chance.  Reason is that QB is so key to a team's success, that they are unlikely to gamble that their 3rd choice in QB is good enough, in the likely event that QBs go at 2 and 3, if the Browns take Barkley at 1.

 

[Finball]

Dorsey is Browns GM. He was Chiefs GM last year.

 

Chiefs used late 3rd round pick on RB. That RB had the most rushing yards in the league. They traded two 1st rounders and a 3rd for a QB with a plan to have him sit for an year.

 

The current version of Browns haven't had a franchise QB and they've passed on numerous ones, including the past two drafts.

 

It's far, far from lock that they are taking RB with the #1 pick.

[Indeee]

5 hours ago, Finball said:

Dorsey is Browns GM. He was Chiefs GM last year.

 

Chiefs used late 3rd round pick on RB. That RB had the most rushing yards in the league. They traded two 1st rounders and a 3rd for a QB with a plan to have him sit for an year.

 

The current version of Browns haven't had a franchise QB and they've passed on numerous ones, including the past two drafts.

 

It's far, far from lock that they are taking RB with the #1 pick.

Todays actions by Browns cements my assessment that I started before the combine took place. Barkley to browns 1000% percent LOCK

[LockeDown]

14 hours ago, krunk said:

I think the Giants are going to do exactly what their GM hinted at. He said Nelson was one of the two best players in this draft. I think they will pick up Norwell in FA and then draft Nelson at #2. Totally solidifying the interior of the OL. You do that and it also goes a long way towards fixing all the Run game problems they had as well.

Didn't they get that lineman from the Rams?  I can't see them getting all 3.  I wish we could though.

[boo2202]

14 hours ago, krunk said:

I think the Giants are going to do exactly what their GM hinted at. He said Nelson was one of the two best players in this draft. I think they will pick up Norwell in FA and then draft Nelson at #2. Totally solidifying the interior of the OL. You do that and it also goes a long way towards fixing all the Run game problems they had as well.

But picking a guard in the top 5 is stupid

[krunk]

8 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

But picking a guard in the top 5 is stupid

only to a fan. That guard is very highly ranked in just about every mock and all the analysts. No one will call them stupid for picking him. The Giants GM made a comment that Nelson was one of the two best players in the entire draft. He could b blowing smoke but I doubt it with all the giants OL probs.

[stitches]

On 3/5/2018 at 2:45 PM, Indeee said:

Excerpt from Article written by Michael Smith TODAY March 5th, PFT

 

 However, the Browns also have the fourth overall pick. If they think there are three franchise quarterbacks this year — if they think Josh Allen, Josh Rosen and Sam Darnold are all about equal — they could take Barkley first and still ensure themselves a top quarterback at No. 4.

 

Sound familiar??? Hmmmm??? Seems like this is what my original post stated. 

This is horrible reasoning. Those QBs are so different I have no idea how the Browns wouldn't have a favorite among them even if they thought all of them can be franchise QBs. No team should be thinking "oh well... even third best QB would do... as long as we get that running back at 1"... This is just so bad... 

[Four2itus]

Todays sports fan......post 347 times that something they feel strongly about.

 

Get it wrong.

 

Apologize once for being wrong. 

 

We're even. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Actually Adam Schefter said that the Browns trading for Taylor will have no affect on their Draft. He is more of an insurance policy and can be a good backup. I bet the Browns still take a QB #1.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 hours ago, stitches said:

This is horrible reasoning. Those QBs are so different I have no idea how the Browns wouldn't have a favorite among them even if they thought all of them can be franchise QBs. No team should be thinking "oh well... even third best QB would do... as long as we get that running back at 1"... This is just so bad... 

I agree if they like 1 better than the others they wont risk passing on him because the Giants may take the QB they like to get groomed by Eli. We could also trade our 3rd to a QB needy team. The Browns would look bad not taking a QB at #1 if those things occur considering they blew their chance to get Wentz.