Dane Brugler Updated Mock 02/01/16

[Rogerthat12]

lol, I'm sure the Browns are comfortable with that. I believe McCown was sacked 23 times in 292 attempts (almost a 13% clip) last season and had 4 INTs, and 9 fumbles (6 lost) compared to only 12 TDs in 8 games.

Meaning Wentz is on the field in two games or less.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Dane Brugler? lol.

 

[CATCH17]

Jack has all the tools, especially dynamic play making ability and elite athleticism.

He can cover, play the run and has flex, truly the type pf player Eberflus would love.

The question will be do the Cowboys have him in their top 5? I have no idea.

What I worry about is the actual production we will get from this guy.


Look at all of the Linebackers taken early each year. How many of them are ever worth it? Much less a top 5 pick.



IMO we need guys at pick 4 that either passes, protect the passer, or sack the passer.

A linebacker at 5 better be incredible.

 

[Rogerthat12]

What I worry about is the actual production we will get from this guy.


Look at all of the Linebackers taken early each year. How many of them are ever worth it? Much less a top 5 pick.



IMO we need guys at pick 4 that either passes, protect the passer, or sack the passer.

A linebacker at 5 better incredible.

I agree with these comments, many believe Jack is that guy.

I would like that QB personally but if they pass give me pass rush or an elite play maker regardless of position.

 

[tm1119]

What I worry about is the actual production we will get from this guy.


Look at all of the Linebackers taken early each year. How many of them are ever worth it? Much less a top 5 pick.



IMO we need guys at pick 4 that either passes, protect the passer, or sack the passer.

A linebacker at 5 better incredible.

In Brugler's scenario QB would be the only option for you then because the #1 OT and DE are already off of the board...if the scouting department has big concerns with Lynch and Goff are you still taking 1 over Jack just because it's the 4th pick?

 

[CATCH17]

In Brugler's scenario QB would be the only option for you then because the #1 OT and DE are already off of the board...if the scouting department has big concerns with Lynch and Goff are you still taking 1 over Jack just because it's the 4th pick?

If I cant get Wentz im trying like heck to get out of the pick.

I dont want Goff.



Keep in mind.. ITs Feb. 1st so I reserve the right to change my mind.

 

[Dodger12]

What I worry about is the actual production we will get from this guy.


Look at all of the Linebackers taken early each year. How many of them are ever worth it? Much less a top 5 pick.



IMO we need guys at pick 4 that either passes, protect the passer, or sack the passer.

A linebacker at 5 better be incredible.

Totally agree Catch. And folks should also realize that we've drafted 12 linebackers since 2009 (counting Randy Gregory as OLB coming out of college)......12. And that doesn't include free agents. Using another pick on a LB when we have such pressing needs at the most important position on the filed in a year when we have the fortunate misfortune to pick top 5 and can get one of the top QB's coming out of college is insane. But that's just me.

 

[VACowboy]

The Giants are in a good spot in this draft to nab a good pass rusher too, like Spence or Lawson as well. Won't be happy if they get either of them or Elliott. I would much rather them take an offensive lineman.

If I'm picking for NY, I'm taking a punter at #10.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

I would be EXTREMELY worried if our scouting department cannot decide which QB they really want and have this cop out of "they are all about the same and we'll take whoever comes to us.". To me that's bad scouting. I want my scouts have conviction to stand up on the table pounding for his (their) guy to be picked.
If they rate all three equal.... to me that mean none of they are special at all. Might as well not pick up....

If our scouts feel that none are special or the guy we one is picked then I rather trade back slightly (if we can find a dancing partner) and pick up Spence to shore up our DL. And maybe consider trading back into round 1 for Elliiott if he's within reach.

I just don't agree with that. Each player has pro's and each one has Con's and they all carry risk. I think it is reasonable that 10 people can watch film of all 3 and each come away with a different favorite for different reasons. For example, I think Goff is the best polished QB in the Draft and if I needed a starter from Day 1, he would be my pick hands down. But we are in a unique spot, a high pick without the need for a day one starter but we do need a future QB, I like Wentz for that. but there are others that I think will be studs in the nfl if allowed to develop, such as Lynch and Hogan. So I am not scared to miss Wentz if that should happen.

 

[AmishCowboy]

I'm torn over what to do

 

[btcutter]

What if you have some scouts banging on the table for Wentz and others banging on the table for Goff? That does not mean neither are special...could mean both are pretty darn good QBs.

Two players can be graded similarly at the same position. And I darn sure don't want JJ to get hoodwinked into giving up too much to move up to 1 or 2.

No different than any other debate. Who can present a better argument for "their guy". And the GM (scary with JJ) ultimately has to make the call. This happens all the time.

I don't like the passive idea of "they are all about the same with each it's pro/cons....and will taken whomever falls to us". I rather have...."They maybe close BUT I want this guy because he has this or that trait that I can work with...."

 

[StarMan2112]

I would rather trade back in this scenario and pick up Goff or Lynch. After our pick, there are no other qB hungry teams until 13 and the eagles pick.

Yeah let's trade down and let another QB-needy team trade ahead of us and take our guy. If you truly believe in a guy as your next franchise QB, you take him and don't get cute.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Thank you cle. Please do it. Then in a few years we can look back and relish how we dodged a bullet.

perhaps, but more likely Jack making a play now and them on a bad team, still searching for their franchise QB........

 

[texbumthelife]

Totally agree Catch. And folks should also realize that we've drafted 12 linebackers since 2009 (counting Randy Gregory as OLB coming out of college)......12. And that doesn't include free agents. Using another pick on a LB when we have such pressing needs at the most important position on the filed in a year when we have the fortunate misfortune to pick top 5 and can get one of the top QB's coming out of college is insane. But that's just me.

I appreciate your opinion and get what you're saying, but this mindset terrifies me. If they grade the QB's as BPA then of course you take him. Reaching for one just because we are in the top five and people are suddenly worried about Romo's health, is an absolute mistake.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Totally agree Catch. And folks should also realize that we've drafted 12 linebackers since 2009 (counting Randy Gregory as OLB coming out of college)......12. And that doesn't include free agents. Using another pick on a LB when we have such pressing needs at the most important position on the filed in a year when we have the fortunate misfortune to pick top 5 and can get one of the top QB's coming out of college is insane. But that's just me.

I agree with this, although counting Gregory as a DE, he and Lawrence were recent 2nd round selections. I guess if Tunsil is there at 4 you have to take him. IMO opinion you don't keep throwing draft picks at the same position every year. You will wind up with a team full of LBS or corners. If the QB is not the top rated player, but is the 2nd or 3rd rated player on your board, you have to take him above other positions provided they are pretty closely rated.

 

[Alexander]

I like Goff. I like Wentz. Give me either and I am not complaining.

 

[texbumthelife]

Totally agree Catch. And folks should also realize that we've drafted 12 linebackers since 2009 (counting Randy Gregory as OLB coming out of college)......12. And that doesn't include free agents. Using another pick on a LB when we have such pressing needs at the most important position on the filed in a year when we have the fortunate misfortune to pick top 5 and can get one of the top QB's coming out of college is insane. But that's just me.

First of all, how many of those linebackers are still on the team? How many were drafted with the idea they'd actually be starters? Furthermore, that is six years of drafts. That's two linebackers a year for a position where you need four-five on your active roster. That number isn't really all that significant.

You've also got to realize and remember that Dallas has recently targeted linebackers in the first round and missed out with Shazier and Barr. You're also talking about a team most likely losing its starting middle linebacker and no proven strong side guy on the roster.

How many times has Cleveland tried to solve their quarterback problem by throwing high round draft choices at it? Does that mean they shouldn't go after one this year?

 

[Dodger12]

I appreciate your opinion and get what you're saying, but this mindset terrifies me. If they grade the QB's as BPA then of course you take him. Reaching for one just because we are in the top five and people are suddenly worried about Romo's health, is an absolute mistake.

If you have a QB rated as the 7th player on your board but an OL is rated higher, do you take the OL? On the flip side, we had Manziel fairly well rated on our board last year and passed. I'm not sure we wouldn't have passed on him if he didn't have any issues. But if I'm going to pick someone a spot or two higher, then QB is the position I would do that with. I mean, we did it (arguably) with Fred and even Hitchens. Why not the most important position on the field?

 

[texbumthelife]

If you have a QB rated as the 7th player on your board but an OL is rated higher, do you take the OL? On the flip side, we had Manziel fairly well rated on our board last year and passed. I'm not sure we wouldn't have passed on him if he didn't have any issues. But if I'm going to pick someone a spot or two higher, then QB is the position I would do that with. I mean, we did it (arguably) with Fred and even Hitchens. Why not the most important position on the field?

I wouldn't call a player rated 7th a reach at #4, not in this draft at least, if that answers your question. I would have no problem taking Tunsil if he falls though.

 

[Dodger12]

First of all, how many of those linebackers are still on the team? How many were drafted with the idea they'd actually be starters? Furthermore, that is six years of drafts. That's two linebackers a year for a position where you need four-five on your active roster. That number isn't really all that significant.

You've also got to realize and remember that Dallas has recently targeted linebackers in the first round and missed out with Shazier and Barr. You're also talking about a team most likely losing its starting middle linebacker and no proven strong side guy on the roster.

How many times has Cleveland tried to solve their quarterback problem by throwing high round draft choices at it? Does that mean they shouldn't go after one this year?

The number is significant in the sense that we don't even sniff the QB position in any round. In addition, you've spent high picks for Lee and Carter.

In any event, to answer your question specifically, if I'm Cleavland, I pick QB every year until I got it right. The position is just that important. All other positions are meaningless unless you find a QB.