NFL Combine

[furls]

Anyone got any word on how the workouts are going? Who is impressing and who is not?

Mike

[bostondog]

The combine is interesting, but I'm really not a fan of it to be honest with you or the workout warrior mentality it seems to create. A player's college work should influence his selection to a far greater degree than his leaping and running ability at the combine. Just IMHO...

[pup]

No doubt Boston. But it keeps people talk NFL so it is here to stay and be a major contributor to teams not being able to rebuild.

[furls]

I think there are some definite pluses from the combine. It gives the coaches a chance to see what a guys athleticism really is. If you play for say the Mountain West, well then you may seem much faster than you are because your speed is great relative to your competition. The same works conversely, if you are a burner and you play in a conference full of them, well then your 4.4 forty may only seem like a 4.5-4.6.

From what I hear, what the coaches put the most stock in are the personal interviews more than anything else. While game tape and a good 40 might get you the interview, it is the interview that gets you the draft nod.

Mike

[yargs7]

I watched the linemen and some rb's on the NFL Network's live coverage. A few that stood out...Nick Mangold has probably worked his way into the first round. D'Brickashaw Ferguson from UVA is a lock for the top 10, very impressive physical specimen and equally impressive person. Also, Rb Maurice Drew of UCLA had strong numbers as well as Joseph Addai from LSU. Jay Cutler, the QB from Vandy was impressive as well.

[swerb]

FYI, Brent Sobleski (Sobo) is working on a couple combine wrap up pieces for the front page. Also an updated mock.

Looking forward to reading them.

[BruceK]

I think I've switched to the NFL Network three times this week during the combines, and each time I manage to either see or hear Butch Davis.

Not wanting to trigger an episode of PTBDS (Post Traumatic Butch Davis Syndrome) I immediately switched the channel.

[pup]

Any chance the Browns select Michael Huff with their pick? A big hitting, ball hawking safety. If they can sign Witherspoon at LB, the NT from the Ravens, and possibly trade for Abraham, does this make the secondary a place to build? Some people like our backfield, some do not. Their stats were ok, but that is mostly because people run the ball so much against us. Could Huff fit into an Ed Reed or long haired samoan role in our defense?

[furls]

With so many holes on the team, if the Browns draft Huff, I will be convinced that once again we are being subjected to Accorsi/Davis drafting and summarily give up on the Browns until Savage and or Romeo are fired in the coming years.

[pup]

Why is that? If other areas are adressed in FA, isn't safety a concern mentioned?

[Steve Buffum]

Why is that? If other areas are adressed in FA, isn't safety a concern mentioned?

I can't speak for Furls, but I consider it an issue of prioritization. There is more overall performance to be gained by going from Putrid to Good at NT (or ILB or RDE) than going from Mediocre to Good at S. Huff would be excellent at tackling ball carriers ... nine yards downfield. No thanks.

[pup]

But if we upgrade those areas through FA, isn't Huff alot better than what we have?

And the good S's don't make tackles 9 yards downfield. That is only what we are used to hear.

[Steve Buffum]

But if we upgrade those areas through FA, isn't Huff alot better than what we have?

No. (You may note my Location.)

[pup]

OK. That is all together a different spin. Overrated huh? I really thought he was the best defender on the field against the Buckeyes, but that is really the only time I saw him play. I will definitely take your word for and await the Lawson/Greenway selection and be happy.

[furls]

can't speak for Furls, but I consider it an issue of prioritization. There is more overall performance to be gained by going from Putrid to Good at NT (or ILB or RDE) than going from Mediocre to Good at S. Huff would be excellent at tackling ball carriers ... nine yards downfield. No thanks.

EXACTLY

But if we upgrade those areas through FA, isn't Huff alot better than what we have?

And the good S's don't make tackles 9 yards downfield. That is only what we are used to hear

No, good safeties on good teams do make tackles nine yards down the field because the teams front seven is good enough that the safeties are actually in pass coverage. Can you imagine a Brown's team that can stop the run with seven? Oh my god, can you imagine the corners playing with deep help over the top from a safety?

Dont get me wrong, Huff is a terrific young player and will make some team very happy. Unfortunately the Browns have to many dire needs and safety is not one of them. Also, I would be surprised to see Huff at 12, I think he will go between 7-10.

Basically, I dont think we can fix our front seven through free agency alone and I hate it when NFL teams get ADD (attention defecit disorder). They say things like, "this year we really need to address the offensive line" and then subsequently draft a running back, wide receiver, and linebacker in the first three rounds. Then as a side note pick up an aging has guy who used to be above average (three years ago) to play left tackle and resign the rest of the line.

The Browns NEED TO COMMIT to improving the front seven above all things using all available assets (if there is time they could use some upgrades on the O-Line too). Safeties, corners, RBs, receivers, and QBs are sexy picks, but usually it is the front seven and the Oline that makes the difference. Drafting Huff this year would be doing that lad a disservice. With our current front seven he would have no chance to be a good safety. A secondary is only as good as the front seven allows it to be. If the front seven cannot pressure the QB (Browns fit here) the safeties and corners are screwed. If the front seven cannot stop the run, the safeties are screwed (Browns fit here also).

[swerb]

I'd freak out if the Browns drafted Huff, for many of the same reasons already mentioned.

We've taken two of the top safeties off the board the last two years with the selections of Sean Jones and Brodney Pool, who have done little to impress me. Each of the last two years there were a handful of safeties taken later in the draft that have had more of an impact. Granted, injuries to Jones and Pool have contributed.

Personally, I don't like young guys at safety. I like experienced, smart guys.

Not saying Huff is stupid. Crocker is an incredibly intelligent player, which helps atone a bit for some physical liabilities. I'm fine with Crocker. I want to go get a vet SS, and let Pool, Jones, and the others duke it out for the 3rd safety spot.

Browns are far too thin in the front seven on D to even consider Huff IMO.

[SOBO]

Now the question is.....will you freak out if we draft DeAngelo Williams after just resigning Rueben?

[Steve Buffum]

Now the question is.....will you freak out if we draft DeAngelo Williams after just resigning Rueben?

Shoot, Williams in the second round would be a great value. I'd be all for that.

(That's what you meant, right? Because taking Beverly D'Angelo at 12 for a team with the holes the Browns have would be absurd.)

[SOBO]

(That's what you meant, right? Because taking Beverly D'Angelo at 12 for a team with the holes the Browns have would be absurd.)

So you don't see RB as a need at all then? INteresting.

[furls]

So you don't see RB as a need at all then? INteresting.

RB's are a dime a dozen.

The Browns have gaping holes upfront on defense, until they are resolved they have no business doing otherwise. They need to draft one of the following at 12:

Mario Williams (yeah right, he'll be long gone)
Haloti Ngata
Brodrick Bunkley

I think they could potentially trade back to 20-22 if the deal is good and still get either Tamba Hali or Mathias Kiwanuka, but I really prefer the tackles.

They could also go for a LB, I REALLY LIKE Manny Lawson in the second round and this year is an EXCEPTIONAL year for LBs. In the second round either Sims, Ryans, Lawson, or Carpenter should be available and any one of those guys could be an impact player next year.

[Steve Buffum]

So you don't see RB as a need at all then? INteresting.

At all? Sure. I don't see one position on this team that couldn't be upgraded. Not one.

But a pick at 12 better not be to provide "quality depth."

(I also agree with Furls about the fungibility of RBs.)