Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Peeker's draft Wrap

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Prosecutor » Mon Apr 30, 2012 7:19 am

http://www.theclevelandfan.com/cleveland-browns/1-browns-archive/9397-the-weekend-wrap

Very interesting read, particularly the criticism of management for using four draft picks, including a #4 overall, to fill a hole at RB they dug for themselves by letting Hillis walk.

No question Hillis had a monster year in 2010. Just like Braylon Edwards and Derek Anderson did in 2007 and William Green for half a season before that. But those were fundamentally flawed players for whom everything came together one time in their careers for a brief shining period, just like Ubaldo Jimenez benefitted from a perfect storm of pitching mechanics for a half-season in 2010 and never will again.

The Browns very well could have made a huge mistake in letting Hillis go. He wanted to stay. They could have signed him. That signing would have allowed them to sit tight at #4, draft Justin Blackmon, and still have those three picks later in the draft. Would we be better off with Richardson or with Hillis and Blackmon and the 4, 5, and 7 picks?

I don't know. But in defense of the Browns, Hillis was "crazier than a shithouse rat" as Peeker put it. Well, a little crazy. Who gets married on a Tuesday in the middle of the season?

My case against Hillis is that there are legitimate questions about his ability to stay healthy and productive. He missed a number of games last year with a hamstring problem. I believe he had the same issue in Denver. His style of running means he takes multiple hits on nearly every carry. How many times have we seen him take 2nd and 3rd shots while dragging the initial tackler? Those shots result in fumbles and a lot of pounding which will take its toll in injuries eventually.

Also, Hillis does not have the speed to run wide or to break off long runs. IMO, he caught defenses by surprise in 2010, much like DA did in '07. After his huge game against the Ravens, their players admitted they didn't know who he was. In the second Ravens' game they shut him down, just like teams shut DA down after they got some tape on him.

The Browns were well aware that if they did not re-sign Hillis they would have to use a valuable draft pick on a RB. They didn't even make him an offer, if I'm not mistaken. They had a chance to see this guy every day for two years and didn't want him back, even after he had the best season any Browns back has had STR. To label that decision as a mistake is premature, IMO.

If Hillis runs for 1,000 yards and has 500 yards in pass receptions in KC, then I guess we'll have to conclude the front office screwed up. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think KC plans to use Hillis in a part-time role. Jamal Charles is one hell of a running back. By the way, did Hillis get any other serious offers besides KC?

If Hillis has three very productive seasons in KC, Blackmon becomes the next Michael Irvin, and Weeden flames out, then this draft will be a bust of epic proportions. But for now I like that the Browns can call running plays from sideline to sideline instead of just between the tackles, and have a QB who can fire the ball downfield. I don't know if I could take another 200 checkdown season. Hopefully Weeden won't turn into the next Derek Anderson.
Prosecutor
Plutonian Outliers
 
Posts: 2870
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 11:59 am

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby comish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:14 am

Peeker is a good read as always...

I do take issue with the idea that they should have drafted a "better prospect" at OL instead of drafting Weeden and taking the OL guy next.

My understanding is that both Reif AND DeCastro were NOT right tackles, but Schwartz was or at least had been, and was possibly rated higher by H & H for their needs because of that....I don't want to be messing around trying to get guys to learn new positions with that high of a pick..plug him in and roll.

I fully admit my knowledge of offensive line play is limited at best. It is extremely irritating that the Steelers got him (Decastro) though.
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby justmebd » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:16 am

Any player the Steelers draft in the first few rounds is someone I have to think the Browns should have taken.

History speaks for itself on this subject.
User avatar
justmebd
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:27 pm
Location: Youngstown, OH
Favorite Player: Gary Gygax
Least Favorite Player: Heinz Field Occupant

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby jerryroche » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:00 am

The overriding impression that fans are getting is that Holmgren and Heckert believe they're the smartest guys in the room. They've hit on some nice choices that were considered unconventional at the time (Sheard, Taylor, Ward), but they've also missed badly on others (Marecic and Hardesty being the poster children).

With so many unconventional draft choices this year, their reputations are hanging in the balance. No worry for Holmgren, who can retire a wealthy man at any time. But Heckert is still young and has a lot to lose.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now, but I agree with Peeker: Their time to give us a winner is running out.
jerryroche
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Strongsville, Ohio
Favorite Player: Ol' No.32
Least Favorite Player: Black & gold

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:06 am

jerryroche wrote:The overriding impression that fans are getting is that Holmgren and Heckert believe they're the smartest guys in the room. They've hit on some nice choices that were considered unconventional at the time (Sheard, Taylor, Ward), but they've also missed badly on others (Marecic and Hardesty being the poster children).

With so many unconventional draft choices this year, their reputations are hanging in the balance. No worry for Holmgren, who can retire a wealthy man at any time. But Heckert is still young and has a lot to lose.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now, but I agree with Peeker: Their time to give us a winner is running out.


I agree with this, to a point. However, no one hits on all of their draft picks. The Steelers and Ravens have been incredible at it; Heckerts history in Philly was pretty sterling too, especially when you compare it against the Browns woeful history. For me, i'm not overly concerned that they wont be able to populate this team with talent; its whether Jammies gets anxious and cans them before they have the chance. I agree with Rich that the Weeden pick seemed forced....that someone on high said they were tired of dorking around with McCoy, and that they WILL draft a replacement. THATS the terrifying part.
Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.
User avatar
Gradysmanldy
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm
Favorite Player: Melts Parmageddon
Least Favorite Player: The East Coast media

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:38 am

Prosecutor wrote:http://www.theclevelandfan.com/cleveland-browns/1-browns-archive/9397-the-weekend-wrap

The Browns were well aware that if they did not re-sign Hillis they would have to use a valuable draft pick on a RB. They didn't even make him an offer, if I'm not mistaken. They had a chance to see this guy every day for two years and didn't want him back, even after he had the best season any Browns back has had STR. To label that decision as a mistake is premature, IMO.


Bottom line is the regime has given me no indication the screw up wasn't theirs as opposed to Hillis's.

He seemed content in 2010, no? He wasn't crazy at that point and if he was he was Delonte West Functionally Crazy.

Either way, you need a RB right? Whether Hillis left because he's Sybil or because H7H are just as fucked up, you need a RB.

But this regime, IMO, has run out of mulligans. They've made way too many mistakes for me to believe they suddenly have it right. And where I take issue with your post is the above paragraph in regard to spending a valuable draft pick on a RB. They could have traded down, traded back into first after taking Weeden, and still gotten a fine back. They could have waited to take Pead, Miller, etc.

There's no way they had to use the 4th pick, much less the 3rd that cost them 3 more picks to get better back there.

And I really wish people stopped comparing Richardson to some home run threat. He's faster than Hillis and better getting to the edges. He's not a burner. He's not running away if he turns a shoulder or gets the slightest seam.

Time will tell. Unlike most though, I can't wipe the board clean every single year and hope this is the day those guys are no longer messing shit up.

Appreciate the read...
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:03 am

I agree with alot of the overall ideas, but the details RE: Hillis and McCoy just seem far overblown to me.

I think we are going to find that Hillis' best season by far will be that 2010 season, and I just dont see the real bitch regarding the choice of drafting McCoy. McCoy was a bottom of the 3rd round QB pick. He is what you get when you draft 2nd/3rd tier QB prospects. I think he was drafted as a developmental guy, the kind a Holmgren led team would draft a half dozen of in a decade. He maybe surprised some people in the office with how he looked in limited action, enough to entice. But I just dont see the idea that he was some hole created by this regime. They tried to trade up for bradford and RG3, said they'd bring in a new QB every year Ideally. That hole has been there since 1999 and they never indicated they were settled on Colt.

Ultimately I agree with this regime wearing thin, and without mulligans going forward, but I just dont see it in the handling of hillis or drafting of McCoy. To me hiring Paddy and keeping Mangini for a year too long look like the most egrigous errors in hindsight. 1000x more detrimental to the franchise IMO.

Overall Heckert has done as well as you could ask the last two drafts. He could do a bit better and a bit worse from year to year and over time you would probably say he drafted well. Just take a look at the people that you think draft really well, when you look at the drafts over time, they do worse than you initially think.

But clearly with Weeden goes this regime, top to bottom. They will be fired in two years if he busts. The rest of that draft hardly matters a bit.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:03 am

Fuck Peyton Hillis.

Fuck that guy every which way. For every reason you can think of, fuck that guy.

That's all the effort I feel like giving to a Peyton Hillis discussion.

::doh::
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:13 am

JCoz wrote:To me hiring Paddy and keeping Mangini for a year too long look like the most egrigous errors in hindsight. 1000x more detrimental to the franchise IMO.


Agreed 100%. That transition is not only a huge aspect in which Holmgren should ultimately be judged by, but it is also arguably still as big a reason why we are stuck in the mud as a football team.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:15 am

JCoz wrote:McCoy was a bottom of the 3rd round QB pick. He is what you get when you draft 2nd/3rd tier QB prospects.


Exactly. That's why you don't do it unless you do it 6th-7th for developmental purposes.

And if people are going to get cramps over Hillis just change the name to Hardesty.

He cost far more and was a far bigger fuck-up.

But it all turned around Thursday. I'm sure they needed to spend four picks on a RB and that their intel was Weeden was gone at 23 to one of the teams that had already passed him up or didn't need him at all and were interested in a 29 yr old with no NFL experience to backup someone else.

There was one team in the league that wanted Weeden there. That team got him.

Although, I heard last week many times that Lane is the expert and isn't wrong. He said the Browns didn't have Weeden as 1st round material.

First time ever Lane's wrong or did they reach? Simple question really.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:24 am

I just think you are too focused on the draft. He was the thrid pick in that 3rd round. come on, that shit is moot.

There are no perfect drafting teams. all teams make those mistakes. Way too much time on the method of drafting Weeden. Ultimately either he hits and nobody ever gives a fuck that he was drafted too high (particularly if Swartz ends up better than Rieff), or he busts and these guys are fired for the mistake.

Like I said, bitch all you want about the draft, this really comes down to Mike keeping Mangini, and then hiring Paddy, then drafting Weeden.

We know he got the first one wrong. We think he got the second wrong. If he gets the third one wrong thats a strikeout.

All the Hillis, Colt, Hardesty, Weeden trade up cost and value stuff is white noise. Its just not that uncommon.

Did they get the pick right? Did they hire the wrong HC?

These are the only important questions now in my mind. You can continue to harp on the rest if it's what you think is really important.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:31 am

peeker643 wrote:And if people are going to get cramps over Hillis just change the name to Hardesty.

He cost far more and was a far bigger fuck-up.


Fuck them both.

They could've easily picked up a Cedric Benson (or some other schmoe) if they just wanted to fill the hole left by Hillis leaving/Hardesty sucking.

There's lots of mediocre residue floating around the league that would've been about as good as Hillis/Hardesty.

They wanted to put an elite guy in that position. Hillis/Hardesty were placeholders.

Now if people want to argue that having an elite RB is useless, that's fine. Don't buy it, but whatever.

But if you DO care about the RB position, keeping Hillis still doesn't fill that hole all the way up. He just makes the tire damage from hitting the pothole less.

You keep Hillis and feel like he's good enough for a little while so you can draft Blackmon is the same as keeping Mo Mass and feel like he's good enough for a little while so you can draft Richardson.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:33 am

Like I said, bitch all you want about the draft, this really comes down to Mike keeping Mangini, and then hiring Paddy, then drafting Weeden.


Yipes, poor Weeden, getting lumped in with those 2 mistakes.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby comish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:34 am

peeker643 wrote:
JCoz wrote:McCoy was a bottom of the 3rd round QB pick. He is what you get when you draft 2nd/3rd tier QB prospects.


But it all turned around Thursday. I'm sure they needed to spend four picks on a RB and that their intel was Weeden was gone at 23 to one of the teams that had already passed him up or didn't need him at all and were interested in a 29 yr old with no NFL experience to backup someone else.

There was one team in the league that wanted Weeden there. That team got him.

Although, I heard last week many times that Lane is the expert and isn't wrong. He said the Browns didn't have Weeden as 1st round material.

First time ever Lane's wrong or did they reach? Simple question really.



Again, it doesn't matter that they took him in the first round, it doesn't. They got the RT they were targetting next anyway. Unless you think Weeden would have been there with their 3rd round pick OR you just hate the idea of drafting Weeden period. Would you have been upset had they drafted Schwartz (22) and then Weeden at 37?
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:44 am

comish wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
JCoz wrote:McCoy was a bottom of the 3rd round QB pick. He is what you get when you draft 2nd/3rd tier QB prospects.


But it all turned around Thursday. I'm sure they needed to spend four picks on a RB and that their intel was Weeden was gone at 23 to one of the teams that had already passed him up or didn't need him at all and were interested in a 29 yr old with no NFL experience to backup someone else.

There was one team in the league that wanted Weeden there. That team got him.

Although, I heard last week many times that Lane is the expert and isn't wrong. He said the Browns didn't have Weeden as 1st round material.

First time ever Lane's wrong or did they reach? Simple question really.



Again, it doesn't matter that they took him in the first round, it doesn't. They got the RT they were targetting next anyway. Unless you think Weeden would have been there with their 3rd round pick OR you just hate the idea of drafting Weeden period. Would you have been upset had they drafted Schwartz (22) and then Weeden at 37?


Someone would have, since Todd McShay had Cordy Glenn rated higher.

So it must be the Browns and not Todd "Blaine Gabbert is the best QB in the draft" McShay who is the idiot.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:27 am

JCoz wrote:I just think you are too focused on the draft. He was the thrid pick in that 3rd round. come on, that shit is moot.



The point is that guys that are paid handsomely to make these selections would have been (and were) wrong about that guy they took regardless of the round.

A third round McCoy selection was an egregious error. A 6th round McCoy selection would have been slightly less egregious but still the wrong choice. Which ultimately forces your hand in this draft to reach for a QB you likely wouldn't have reached for otherwise.

That's my issue in general.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Fire Marshall Bill » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:32 am

Hikohadon wrote:Fuck Peyton Hillis.

Fuck that guy every which way. For every reason you can think of, fuck that guy.

That's all the effort I feel like giving to a Peyton Hillis discussion.

::doh::


Seriously

There wasn't one Browns fan alive that wasn't trashing his self-centered ass all of last season

Trent Richardson is the best Browns draft pic since the After Birth

The argument is complete and utter bullshit

Thee Fucking End.
Hope is a moment now long past
The Shadow of Death is the one I cast
Koo koo ka joob....I am the Walrus
User avatar
Fire Marshall Bill
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:00 pm
Favorite Player: Killer Bean
Least Favorite Player: Charcoal&Piss

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:41 am

peeker643 wrote:
JCoz wrote:I just think you are too focused on the draft. He was the thrid pick in that 3rd round. come on, that shit is moot.



The point is that guys that are paid handsomely to make these selections would have been (and were) wrong about that guy they took regardless of the round.

A third round McCoy selection was an egregious error. A 6th round McCoy selection would have been slightly less egregious but still the wrong choice. Which ultimately forces your hand in this draft to reach for a QB you likely wouldn't have reached for otherwise.

That's my issue in general.


So, if the Browns don't draft McCoy in the 3rd round of 2010 (or at all), they suddenly don't draft Weeden?

Because Seneca Wallace is tearing shit up for them?
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:43 am

I can see peeker's point in that this regime has created two of the bigger holes they had going into this draft. They weren't holes created from the inevitable good player's careers ending or not wanting to pay a high price to retain your own FA.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:57 am

FUDU wrote:I can see peeker's point in that this regime has created two of the bigger holes they had going into this draft. They weren't holes created from the inevitable good player's careers ending or not wanting to pay a high price to retain your own FA.


I think it is more accurate to say that those 2 positions were holes when they got here and they failed to address them adequately in their previous 2 years.

QB has been a hole since 1999, and even though we might've been fooled into thinking Hillis filled the RB hole due to his Derek Anderson Year, last year showed that he was not a permanent solution.

I'm having trouble thinking of ANY good players that were here in 2009 that Heckgren got rid of - thus "creating" a hole.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:04 pm

Fair enough, I think them not addressing those holes correctly puts them on the clock as being responsible for having those holes THIS year though.

So yeah, I get the attitude toward thinking this regime has suddenly "figured it out".

Heckert seems to have accumulated some players while he's been here, yet nothing to show for it.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:05 pm

peeker643 wrote:A third round McCoy selection was an egregious error. A 6th round McCoy selection would have been slightly less egregious but still the wrong choice. Which ultimately forces your hand in this draft to reach for a QB you likely wouldn't have reached for otherwise.

That's my issue in general.


Peek, if you are going to call missed 3rd round draft picks egregious errors, then your standards are too far out of whack to have a rational conversation about it.

Taking developmental QB Prospects in the bottom of the third round, just ain't that big a miss in the grand scheme of things. They didn't take the guy to be starting a couple months later, that's just the way it worked out.

I mean dont get me wrong, by and large taking any QB prospect outside the top couple prospects is generally a shit-canned pick, and a mistake that seems to be something done by alot of teams over time. Some people thought McCoy could be a 1st round draft pick and they thought they were getting good value and were fooled in that. And when the kid got a shot, I think a MAJORITY of people ended up either cautiously or overly optimistic regarding his future prospects as an NFL starting QB.

If you want to argue that NFL teams should never take 2nd tier and below QB prospects before the 6th round then fine, but to call it an "egregious" error considering that 3rd round picks in general have exponentially less potential to develop into stars at ANY position...is just harping on the wrong things IMO.

Like I said I agree these guys have fucked up plenty, but this soap box about Hardesty, Colt, and Hillis is just not where the meat is IMO.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby comish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:22 pm

FUDU wrote:
Heckert seems to have accumulated some players while he's been here, yet nothing to show for it.


Which may be even more of an indication as to how bad things were from a talent standpoint before Heckert got here.

Seems to me that he has had two decent drafts already leading into this one...there were some misses, but overall he has done pretty ok.
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:29 pm

FUDU wrote:Fair enough, I think them not addressing those holes correctly puts them on the clock as being responsible for having those holes THIS year though.

So yeah, I get the attitude toward thinking this regime has suddenly "figured it out".

Heckert seems to have accumulated some players while he's been here, yet nothing to show for it.


Agree with all of that.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:31 pm

I agree wholeheartedly with Peeker's take. Too many people are exulting in the fact that they filled QB/RB/RT, ignoring why and how they were done. Its as if the Hughes pick was made to make the other picks look better in comparison.
User avatar
CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07!
 
Posts: 1927
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: Brooklyn
Favorite Player: Troy Smith
Least Favorite Player: Braylon/Hughes/Pryor

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:33 pm

comish wrote:
FUDU wrote:
Heckert seems to have accumulated some players while he's been here, yet nothing to show for it.


Which may be even more of an indication as to how bad things were from a talent standpoint before Heckert got here.

Seems to me that he has had two decent drafts already leading into this one...there were some misses, but overall he has done pretty ok.


It would be interesting to see a position-by-position breakdown from where they were at the end of the 2009 season to where they are now. My guess is that they would be better at almost every position, just maybe not good enough or it took too long.

Probably too many question marks for a fair analysis (you assume Weeden will be better than DA/Quinn - it wouldn't take much - but we don't know for sure yet).
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:53 pm

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:I agree wholeheartedly with Peeker's take. Too many people are exulting in the fact that they filled QB/RB/RT, ignoring why and how they were done. Its as if the Hughes pick was made to make the other picks look better in comparison.


So, we acknowledge that RT, RB, and QB have been the most glaring weaknesses on the team for a decade. We also acknowledge that we didn't have the option of getting RG3 or Luck, on draft day.

So we got 3 picks at those positions that have high floors and very high ceilings, as prospects.

I get that we can bitch and complain about the decision making leading up to this draft re: those positions, but in the same breath are we distressed over the picks?
Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.
User avatar
Gradysmanldy
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm
Favorite Player: Melts Parmageddon
Least Favorite Player: The East Coast media

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:05 pm

JCoz wrote:
peeker643 wrote:A third round McCoy selection was an egregious error. A 6th round McCoy selection would have been slightly less egregious but still the wrong choice. Which ultimately forces your hand in this draft to reach for a QB you likely wouldn't have reached for otherwise.

That's my issue in general.


Peek, if you are going to call missed 3rd round draft picks egregious errors, then your standards are too far out of whack to have a rational conversation about it.

Taking developmental QB Prospects in the bottom of the third round, just ain't that big a miss in the grand scheme of things. They didn't take the guy to be starting a couple months later, that's just the way it worked out.

I mean dont get me wrong, by and large taking any QB prospect outside the top couple prospects is generally a shit-canned pick, and a mistake that seems to be something done by alot of teams over time. Some people thought McCoy could be a 1st round draft pick and they thought they were getting good value and were fooled in that. And when the kid got a shot, I think a MAJORITY of people ended up either cautiously or overly optimistic regarding his future prospects as an NFL starting QB.

If you want to argue that NFL teams should never take 2nd tier and below QB prospects before the 6th round then fine, but to call it an "egregious" error considering that 3rd round picks in general have exponentially less potential to develop into stars at ANY position...is just harping on the wrong things IMO.

Like I said I agree these guys have fucked up plenty, but this soap box about Hardesty, Colt, and Hillis is just not where the meat is IMO.


You keep getting to small on me.

It's not the choice himself, per se, it's when you keep doing stupid shit as a so called expert.

Colt was gonna be the weaker armed competitor to thrwo through winds and lead the offense. Hardesty was no longer going to be an an injury concern once he got to the NFL.

That's stupidity in action. They HAVE to know better JCoz. It's their job.

What in God's name has earned these guys the benefit of the doubt that they didn't get played to move up to #3 or that that they didn't reach for the QB?

Because I don't have a smoking gun or a recording saying as much?

Like I said, the guys they took are ours now.

I hope they're the right guys.

I'm glad y'all have undying faith and confidence. I obviously missed the day they earned it. I don't know if it was the coaching choice, the 4th round fullback, the 2nd round RB they moved up to take who had one good ACL, the TE they grabbed and who didn't hit the field, the 3rd round QB who helped turn Berea into Knots Landing or giving up four picks to move up a single spot/reaching for the guy closer to 30 than 27 because you didn't have him as 1st round talent.

That's fine. I know what town I'm in and I know what the post orgasmic draft feels like every single year.

You guys are right. It doesn't matter how many times you fuck things up if this year ya got it right. Giving away picks rarely bites ya in the ass and the Steelers picking up your trash immediately after you set it on the curb is almost always a good thing.

I find it funny they talk about process and y'all are lapping it up when the process is cancerous. I talk about the process and you guys start talking specific players.

If ya wanna talk about how they went about things then call back. If ya wanna talk about who they ended up with then call talk radio.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:24 pm

I'm not lapping anything up Peeker. I don't love this draft. I do love that its the pivot point for them. Thats my silver lining. They just signed on for the ride with this draft.

Se my recent posts in the trade up for J-rich thread, and you can see I'm not lapping up the process here.

But not for picking the wrong guys, or paying too much them. For the disfunction that is at the heart of it.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:26 pm

In yet another vain attempt at logic...

You don't assume that there was a trade partner. You don't assume there wasn't. Could there have been? Yes. Did they get fooled? Did they make a great move? No one knows. Stupid to assume either way.

Fact - they wanted Richardson and they got him.

There is certainly no doubt that they have made some poor choices in the draft past. Everyone does. They have also made some good ones.

Fucking wasting my breath... as long as the Browns continue to lose, every move they make is "the wrong one" and no one will be able to see anything other than the mistakes they've made.

PS - 28 is definitely closer to 27 than 30.

PSS - Fuck Hillis. ;-) ;) :wink:
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:34 pm

Hikohadon wrote:In yet another vain attempt at logic...

You don't assume that there was a trade partner. You don't assume there wasn't. Could there have been? Yes. Did they get fooled? Did they make a great move? No one knows. Stupid to assume either way.

Fact - they wanted Richardson and they got him.

There is certainly no doubt that they have made some poor choices in the draft past. Everyone does. They have also made some good ones.

Fucking wasting my breath... as long as the Browns continue to lose, every move they make is "the wrong one" and no one will be able to see anything other than the mistakes they've made.

PS - 28 is definitely closer to 27 than 30.

PSS - Fuck Hillis. ;-) ;) :wink:


He's closer to 29 than 28. That puts him closer to 30 than 27 Mr. Shurmur ;-) ;) :wink:

Everything's fine. I'm sure of it. Thursday they flipped the scripts 180* and started making the proper decisions.

100% guaranteed.

I do know for sure they can't be continuing to lose BECAUSE they keep making stupid moves.

So there's that.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:38 pm

comish wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
JCoz wrote:McCoy was a bottom of the 3rd round QB pick. He is what you get when you draft 2nd/3rd tier QB prospects.


But it all turned around Thursday. I'm sure they needed to spend four picks on a RB and that their intel was Weeden was gone at 23 to one of the teams that had already passed him up or didn't need him at all and were interested in a 29 yr old with no NFL experience to backup someone else.

There was one team in the league that wanted Weeden there. That team got him.

Although, I heard last week many times that Lane is the expert and isn't wrong. He said the Browns didn't have Weeden as 1st round material.

First time ever Lane's wrong or did they reach? Simple question really.



Again, it doesn't matter that they took him in the first round, it doesn't. They got the RT they were targetting next anyway. Unless you think Weeden would have been there with their 3rd round pick OR you just hate the idea of drafting Weeden period. Would you have been upset had they drafted Schwartz (22) and then Weeden at 37?


It doesn't Mike, you're right.

If they hit on these guys it will not matter that they they fucked up and panicked or anything else. We'll all be fine with it.

It's just that when you keep fucking up the groceries it's hard to have confidence the meal is going to be good. And they seem to get lost while they're in the goddamn store all the time or they're paying twice as much for eggs and not leaving any money for milk.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby comish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:57 pm

My original post on the matter called em out for the hoodwinking....inexcusable I agree, but in the end I still think they mostly got their guys and the team should improve.

The fact they didn't address the WR situation adequately is more due to the fact they had too many situations to address adequately than to their inadequacies of addressing situations.

Again, I feel that while Heckert has been involved they have done fairly well.....the Hardesty move aside
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:15 pm

comish wrote:The fact they didn't address the WR situation adequately is more due to the fact they had too many situations to address adequately than to their inadequacies of addressing situations.


And the issue I have is if they weren't so inadequate all the time they wouldn't have so many holes to fill that they can't do it. ;-) ;) :wink:

It's also made more difficult when you're trading additional picks to move up a spot and additional picks to take a RB with one ligament hoping the NFL is the place where he'll suddenly not be injury prone.

Or when you're using valuable resources to draft a less than physical FB to fill the spot of a cheap and far more capable FB.

Those aren't two isolated instances either.

It's easy to say they got the guys they wanted and justify it that way. I'd be far more comfortable if the Browns actually got guys other teams wanted instead of leaving them on the table. Because at the end of the day the Browns are the Browns precisely because they've gotten the guys they wanted.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby comish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:35 pm

peeker643 wrote:
comish wrote:The fact they didn't address the WR situation adequately is more due to the fact they had too many situations to address adequately than to their inadequacies of addressing situations.


And the issue I have is if they weren't so inadequate all the time they wouldn't have so many holes to fill that they can't do it. ;-) ;) :wink:
It's also made more difficult when you're trading additional picks to move up a spot and additional picks to take a RB with one ligament hoping the NFL is the place where he'll suddenly not be injury prone.

Or when you're using valuable resources to draft a less than physical FB to fill the spot of a cheap and far more capable FB.

Those aren't two isolated instances either.

It's easy to say they got the guys they wanted and justify it that way. I'd be far more comfortable if the Browns actually got guys other teams wanted instead of leaving them on the table. Because at the end of the day the Browns are the Browns precisely because they've gotten the guys they wanted.


Fair enough. I do think we have grabbed one or two guys that other teams covet over the last few years, but honestly after most drafts I feel like we are the guys that don't get the joke while everyone else is laughing.

I understand your point....letting Vickers walk in retrospect was epic fail at its finest
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:20 pm

peeker643 wrote:He's closer to 29 than 28. That puts him closer to 30 than 27 Mr. Shurmur ;-) ;) :wink:

Everything's fine. I'm sure of it. Thursday they flipped the scripts 180* and started making the proper decisions.


OK, you might need to either clarify your calculations or maybe take a 1st grade refresher course, since he's currently 28, will be all year. As he was 27 until 10/14/2011 and won't turn 30 until 10/14/2013, that means he's 199 days from 27 and 532 days from 30. In the Akron area, 199 < 532... well, I think you get the point.

Now if you want to say he's closer to his 30th birthday than his 27th birthday, that would work. It's almost equidistant, but technically true. But I'm sure it just sounded better the way you originally put it as it pertained to trying to make your point.

Is everything fine? No. I don't know who you think is blowing sunshine up your ass. I know that when people finally lose perspective they won't hear anything that isn't a total outright condemnation. Yes, the Browns probably made some mistakes in this draft, just like they do every draft, just like every team does in every draft.

If not enough of these players pan out, they will suck again and they will lose their jobs. If they do, then they've improved the team at essential positions.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4278
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby motherscratcher » Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:31 pm

comish wrote:I understand your point....letting Vickers walk in retrospect was epic fail at its finest


That was a head scratcher in real time. I never quite understood that decision, or if somebody ever explained it to me I've forgotten.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7731
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:47 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:He's closer to 29 than 28. That puts him closer to 30 than 27 Mr. Shurmur ;-) ;) :wink:

Everything's fine. I'm sure of it. Thursday they flipped the scripts 180* and started making the proper decisions.


OK, you might need to either clarify your calculations or maybe take a 1st grade refresher course, since he's currently 28, will be all year. As he was 27 until 10/14/2011 and won't turn 30 until 10/14/2013, that means he's 199 days from 27 and 532 days from 30. In the Akron area, 199 < 532... well, I think you get the point.

Now if you want to say he's closer to his 30th birthday than his 27th birthday, that would work. It's almost equidistant, but technically true. But I'm sure it just sounded better the way you originally put it as it pertained to trying to make your point.

Is everything fine? No. I don't know who you think is blowing sunshine up your ass. I know that when people finally lose perspective they won't hear anything that isn't a total outright condemnation. Yes, the Browns probably made some mistakes in this draft, just like they do every draft, just like every team does in every draft.

If not enough of these players pan out, they will suck again and they will lose their jobs. If they do, then they've improved the team at essential positions.


Its one of Peeks favorite rituals...to make up a seemingly gigantic segment of make believe fans who all in concert believe something he thinks is utterly ridiculous, so he can go on a soapbox about why they are idiots or hypocrites or whatnot... :thumb up:
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:26 pm

JCoz wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:He's closer to 29 than 28. That puts him closer to 30 than 27 Mr. Shurmur ;-) ;) :wink:

Everything's fine. I'm sure of it. Thursday they flipped the scripts 180* and started making the proper decisions.


OK, you might need to either clarify your calculations or maybe take a 1st grade refresher course, since he's currently 28, will be all year. As he was 27 until 10/14/2011 and won't turn 30 until 10/14/2013, that means he's 199 days from 27 and 532 days from 30. In the Akron area, 199 < 532... well, I think you get the point.

Now if you want to say he's closer to his 30th birthday than his 27th birthday, that would work. It's almost equidistant, but technically true. But I'm sure it just sounded better the way you originally put it as it pertained to trying to make your point.

Is everything fine? No. I don't know who you think is blowing sunshine up your ass. I know that when people finally lose perspective they won't hear anything that isn't a total outright condemnation. Yes, the Browns probably made some mistakes in this draft, just like they do every draft, just like every team does in every draft.

If not enough of these players pan out, they will suck again and they will lose their jobs. If they do, then they've improved the team at essential positions.


Its one of Peeks favorite rituals...to make up a seemingly gigantic segment of make believe fans who all in concert believe something he thinks is utterly ridiculous, so he can go on a soapbox about why they are idiots or hypocrites or whatnot... :thumb up:


Awesome. A perenially, 'everyone is picking on us' butt-hurt Buckeye fan telling me I'm making shit up :lmfao: :lmfao:

You can get a beautiful flat screen that's better than than what you have from Rent a Center or by paying 22% on a credit card.

You phuckwads keep telling me how sweet your TV is. :thumb up:

I'm telling you you paid waaaaaay too much this season in part becuse you fucked up your budget last season. And it's the same people controlling the checkbook and the purchasing today.

I will say this though, JCoz. You're heading down a road you can't navigate without hurt feelings. And it's because you're either not listening or not interested in what I'm trying to say.

Nowhere near as much to do with the who as with the how and the why.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:48 pm

I'm all good here Peeks. Im fairly well adjusted your shtick at this point. I neither think that "everyone" is picking on the buckeyes nor do I think that the process in the berea brain trust is on point. So "all us phuckwads" only serves to comically illustrate the point I just made regarding your MO when it comes to your tirades/lectures. Just like was admitted to today, holmgren seems to be giving the browns a big ole taste of his GM skills and it's far from my opinion that that is a good thing.

Hope he's right, that's -probably- best case scenario, second best is that he wrong on an epic scale so that it flushes this regime out quickly. It is what it is at this point. It's def not what I would have done.

But please, carry on, maybe if you bitch and whine enough they will fire them all before the season starts, you think? Or maybe we can get a fan-driven do over?
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:56 pm

JCoz wrote:I'm all good here Peeks. Im fairly well adjusted your shtick at this point. I neither think that "everyone" is picking on the buckeyes nor do I think that the process in the berea brain trust is on point. So "all us phuckwads" only serves to comically illustrate the point I just made regarding your MO when it comes to your tirades/lectures. Just like was admitted to today, holmgren seems to be giving the browns a big ole taste of his GM skills and it's far from my opinion that that is a good thing.

Hope he's right, that's -probably- best case scenario, second best is that he wrong on an epic scale so that it flushes this regime out quickly. It is what it is at this point. It's def not what I would have done.

But please, carry on, maybe if you bitch and whine enough they will fire them all before the season starts, you think? Or maybe we can get a fan-driven do over?


I didn't say "all you phuckwads". I said "you phuckwads". That's two. You and Hiko. ;-) ;) :wink:

See, the problem is you either can't read or you not bright enough to comprehend the words you are able to sound out.

Nah... I'm fucking with ya JCoz. The real issue is your name ends in a vowel and your race car goes immediately to red rather than actually consider what was said. :cheers:

You think that would work? Me bitching and all? I'm thinking we should try it. Because believing every draft is the one that turns it around (not 'you' per se, but 'you' as in all others) sucking down their goo and asking for another batch for the last 13 years hasn't worked out real well.

For us anyway. They've gotten filthy rich for their "efforts".
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:59 pm

lol. "Shtick".

If only it was.

Really funny article though. Good read like always.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:08 pm

It has in the past, not for a while though....

I hear what you are saying loud and clear but you are ear marking your proposal with a bunch of stuff I can't get on board with, not that you give or should give two shits about that, lol.

No matter what it's done. They overpaid at at least one spot. Holmgren looks to have forced a pick of huge importance on Heckert that he may have not wanted anything to do with. Mike Holmgren is a proven shitty GM. Paddy is a Patsy.

The fuck can I do besides hope they hit the lottery or lost their life savings on Weeden?

:cheers: :partyers:
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:10 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:lol. "Shtick".

If only it was.

Really funny article though. Good read like always.


I believe most of it. More than half and less than all. But the kernel of belief is the basis and we go from there.

You try writing about the same fucking miserable teams and the same miserable people running them week after week.

Plus it sometimes gets the 25 people who come here talking.

I said in the article they're better. They are. I honestly believe that. But they messed up and gave up enough ammo that they're nowhere near the level of better they could have been.

Now go fuck yourself.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:11 pm

That's how you respond to a compliment?

Uncouth Irish..........
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:13 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:That's how you respond to a compliment?

Uncouth Irish..........


If you're done fucking yourself, thank you for the compliment.

Now you can get back to fucking yourself.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:24 pm

That's better.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:26 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:That's better.


Felt like I WAS being a wee bit rude back there.

Felt like I more than made up for it with the apology.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:28 pm

Absolutely.

Maybe a bit vulgar, but who am I to judge?
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Peeker's draft Wrap

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:36 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Absolutely.

Maybe a bit vulgar, but who am I to judge?


I'm eating venison smokies and venison and cheddar smokies while talking sports here. Doesn't get much more manly than that. I bet FUDU and mscratcher are eating salads w/walnuts and raisins in them and picking out needlepoint patterns right now.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Next

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests