Dane Brugler Updated Mock 02/01/16

[waving monkey]

I don't get all these people saying the Browns need someone who can start now. They have another QB under contract for 2016 and could very easily sign another veteran. They're definitely not in win now mode. They could draft and stash Wentz just as easily as we could. They simply wouldn't be as good in the meantime as we would be.

Everybody has a back up QB that doesn't mean his much. I could see the reasoning for Goff in
Cleveland's situation.

 

[AzorAhai]

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.

If you don't want to keep throwing picks at the same position (groups, because thats what every position besides QB is), why would you take yet another OL in the 1st Rd? You can't talk about the number of picks spent on LBs or CBs and say no more, but approve of another OL. If anything after spending 3 1st Rd picks there the last 5 seasons, that would be worse than drafting another LB or CB by that thinking.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

If you don't want to keep throwing picks at the same position (groups, because thats what every position besides QB is), why would you take yet another OL in the 1st Rd? You can't talk about the number of picks spent on LBs or CBs and say no more, but approve of another OL. If anything after spending 3 1st Rd picks there the last 5 seasons, that would be worse than drafting another LB or CB by that thinking.

I agree, I was referring to taking a DE or LB because BPA, in that case if the OL is the BPA you take him. It wouldn't make sense. BPA doesn't always work, was my point.

 

[Bizwah]

Every year people throw around "trade down" on this board like its a foregone conclusion that you're going to trade down and get value. It's not about addressing worries. Do that in free agency. It's about getting the best player in the draft at #4 and making a strength even stronger.

I agree. People act as if trading down is simply a matter of telling teams below you that it's happening. I'm reminded of Michael Scott from The Office declaring bankruptcy by simply yelling, "I declare bankruptcy!"

If we wind up taking a player we'll hear, "We should have traded down!"

I'm not opposed to us trading down. I want us to do what's best for the team. Trading down simply to acquire more picks is dumb. If your player is there, take him.

 

[Rogerthat12]

But no one knew Urlacher was going to be Urlacher nor Ray Lewis be Ray Lewis. It's the draft.

Honestly if we are not taking QB and Spence checks out. I would SERIOUSLY consider Spence over Bosa.

I really love Spence, true edge rusher that is very explosive.

I fully expect him to continue to move up the board unless his interviews and/or behavior is problematic during the process.

 

[AzorAhai]

I agree, I was referring to taking a DE or LB because BPA, in that case if the OL is the BPA you take him. It wouldn't make sense. BPA doesn't always work, was my point.

My apologies. I agree in that case.

 

[Rogerthat12]

Interesting on Noah Spence, the Cowboys Break Staff, who were at the Senior Bowl, said Marinelli literally loves Spence!

 

[starfrombirth]

Agree. I like Goff a lot. Kid looks like he could be a top ten starter in this league.

No.. no he doesn't