No way the Rams moved to number 1 to take a QB from North Dakota st, its gonna be Golf 

 

Word was starting that the Browns wanted Golf, I can see the Browns trading back or going Tunsil or Ramsey 

---

<B><FONT color=cyan>Jags this is your year</FONT></B>

I think I would quit. Honestly.
 
A tackle when you already have 2 who can do the job and a RB when you already have Yeldon and Ivory? Please tell me you're joking.

if it goes 2 qb, then ramsey, mack, the BAP is Tunsil, you get a guaranteed pro bowler LT for many years, then draft Derrick Henry, who is way better than Yeldon and Ivory. Our offense will be unstoppable. Our defense is about avg, who knows Fowler can become a one man pass rushing beast. Chaammmmpiiiooonnnshhhhhiipppppp

---

First 2 picks going to be QBs, that leaves us with ramsey, jack, tunsil, bosa.

Caldwell, please pick Tunsil then Derrick henry in the 2nd round. Our explosive, powerful offense will carry our no pass rush defense to the promise land. Chhhammpppiiionnshiiipppp
[/quote


Heck no. Draft jack or Ramsey and then trade back up into 1st and get Spence or best available pass rusher.

---

I think I would quit. Honestly.

 

A tackle when you already have 2 who can do the job and a RB when you already have Yeldon and Ivory? Please tell me you're joking.

What two tackles do we have that can do the job?

 

Joeckel, who was abused against Houston?

 

Beachum, who is coming off of a torn ACL?

 

Parnell, a RT?

 

We DID give up over 50 sacks, didn't we?

 

Granted, not all of them are on the OL or the tackles specifically, but let's not pretend it's not a liability.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I think there can be little doubt that the Rams are after a QB.


But I wonder if this changes the Browns plans.


If they were dead set on one particular QB and the Rams take that player, then will they want to take the one they had less interest in? Or will they shift their focus altogether and go defense?


I'm not sure whether this helps us.


And if both QBs go in the top two then I think that kills any possibility of a trade down for us, exactly as it did last year. (although we probably wouldn't want one in that scenario)

---

Why would the Chargers take a FS over their biggest need (OL) with an elite player available? Makes no sense. Especially when LT is a premium position and FS is not.

Because they have a solid OL if their all healthy. They need help on the interior. They have a good young RT and Dunlap is good when he's healthy. It's far from certain that they are ready to move on from him. They need playmakers on defense just like us.

 

It'd be like "Why would we pass on Tunsil at 5 if he's there, our offensive line gave up a lot of sacks and we just have average play from our LT."

 

It can honesty go both ways. Beachum is far from a certainty to go back to his normal self and Joeckel is just average at best and we may not be picking up his option. If Beachum falls flat on his face, whose our LT next year?

---

What two tackles do we have that can do the job?

 

Joeckel, who was abused against Houston?

 

Beachum, who is coming off of a torn ACL?

 

Parnell, a RT?

 

We DID give up over 50 sacks, didn't we?

 

Granted, not all of them are on the OL or the tackles specifically, but let's not pretend it's not a liability.

Did Luke give up 50 sacks? And everyone gets abused by Houston.

 

I would much rather spend this draft on defense than OLine. We need pass rushers and defensive playmakers.

---

Did Luke give up 50 sacks? And everyone gets abused by Houston.

 

I would much rather spend this draft on defense than OLine. We need pass rushers and defensive playmakers.

I think everyone would much rather go defense than O-Line. But if Jack and Ramsey are gone, there definitely isn't a clear cut pick at 5.

---

1. Rams: Wentz

2. Browns: Goff

3. Chargers: Tunsil

4. Cowboys: Ramsey

5. Jags: Jack

This.  ^^^  But if Jerry Jones acts like Jerry Jones and takes RB E. Elliott, that leaves Caldwell with a choice of Ramsey or Jack for the Jags.

 

Wonder what he would do in that scenario?  My guess is Jack if he had them rated pretty equal, since we picked up Gipson.  

 

The Ravens love this scenario too, as Ramsey or Myles Jack fall to them.  Jack would be better for them since they signed Weddle.

---

Did Luke give up 50 sacks? And everyone gets abused by Houston.

 

I would much rather spend this draft on defense than OLine. We need pass rushers and defensive playmakers.

 

I think everyone would much rather go defense than O-Line. But if Jack and Ramsey are gone, there definitely isn't a clear cut pick at 5.

CDub expresses my view nicely here.

 

No, Joeckel himself didn't give up 50 sacks.  I made that clear in my post.

 

But face it.  This team isn't going to ascend to where we want without being able to beat Houston.  This team won't beat Houston without getting Watt, Mercilus and Co blocked.  This team won't get those guys blocked without upgrading the talent on the OL.

 

Beachum, if healthy, may help.

 

But if the stud defenders we have discussed somehow manage to be off the board when we pick at 5, I don't think Buckner helps us much.  Hargreaves might be overrated a little, and that's not even considering the rumors of failed drug tests (possible smoke designed to get him to drop).

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

This is from the browns board, making the case that Ramsey will be the pick for Cleveland at 2.

 

 

The evidence for Ramsey:

 

1) The Browns may have tipped their hand by letting Gip go and releasing Whitner here, especially at the time they did. I think the unusual timing of Whitner's release speaks to some recent decisions being made about the players currently on the roster or about what they intend to do in the draft.

 

2) They've got an aging cornerback in Tramon Williams backed up by a 'hard-sleeper' and probably bust in Justin Gilbert. Campbell and Poyer might have potential, but drafting Ramsey can address multiple needs depending on how your other talent in the defensive backfield pans out. 

 

3) This wouldn't just be a need pick, it's a widely-held opinion that he'd be the best player available at two. I have little doubt he'd score well on the analytics side of things being from FSU.

 

4) Hue is in love with RG3, apparently. He's been essentially been given a 1-year prove-it deal. While I really don't think RG3's signing will impact the draft strategy in any way, one could argue that the signing gives them the flexibility to take Ramsey at #2 and draft a QB later in the draft. 

 

 

As for a trade-down, I honestly don't think this is all that likely, but I can't discount it. The one thing I thing we should discount is Wentz at #2. I don't think it's going to happen.

 

 

These arguments make sense to me.  If the Rams take the Browns preferred QB target at 1 (assuming the Browns are even interested in one of the QBs that high after signing RGIII), Ramsey makes some sense at 2 in Cleveland.

 

If...

 

1. Rams QB

2. Cleveland-Ramsey

3. SD Tunsil or Buckner

4. Dal Bosa, Elliott, Jack

5. Jags-Jack, Bosa, ???

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Or the Browns trade away their pick and a team like the Eagles pick a QB at 2?

---

I don't think this changes anything for the Jags, QB's will go 1 and 2, Tunsil is a Charger, that leaves us still with 3 possibilities Jack, Bosa, Ramsey. 

---

I don't think this changes anything for the Jags, QB's will go 1 and 2, Tunsil is a Charger, that leaves us still with 3 possibilities Jack, Bosa, Ramsey.

I agree

---

I don't think this changes anything for the Jags, QB's will go 1 and 2, Tunsil is a Charger, that leaves us still with 3 possibilities Jack, Bosa, Ramsey.

I agree too - a team trading up to take a QB at 2 would be a good scenario for us.


It would probably kill any chance of a trade down from 5 (because the main interest in trading up is likely to be for the QBs) but we probably wouldn't want a trade if we could get one of the three you mention.

---