A New Dawn: How the 2021 Cleveland Browns Find Themselves Contending for a Super Bowl

 

There's something appealing about waking up early to an end-of-summer morning. The weather is fairly cool although getting increasingly warmer but the frosty chill serves as a reminder that a jacket is still probably needed. It feels like it's going to be a great day. As a Browns fan, that's the feeling that I get going into the 2021 season. 

I haven't been this excited about the Cleveland Browns for a long time. For the first time in my adult lifetime, we have a real chance to make it to the super bowl. A real chance. Not just a strong hope or maybe a delusional conviction. Don't be afraid to think this or say this statement out loud: the Cleveland Browns are currently super bowl contenders. 

After defeating the Steelers in their own stadium and nearly pulling off an upset against the super bowl-bound Chiefs during the 2020 playoffs, the Browns found themselves with a lot less questions going into the off-season. We didn't need to worry about a QB for the first time since...I can't even remember. Despite the lack of needs, we were still able to pick up some valuable pieces especially on the defensive side of the ball. Due to our success the previous year, we picked 26th in the draft. As nice as it is to have a top 10 pick, it feels so much better to pick near the end of the draft. 

My purposes for writing this article are (1) to get my thoughts out and clarify what it is I believe and (2) to demonstrate to others that the Cleveland Browns are a legitimate team worthy of all the recognition that they receive this year. Whether or not the team turns that potential into results remains to be seen, but the ingredients are all there to make a gourmet meal. 

In the eyes of the national media, the Browns are all over the map. Most feel that the Browns are a playoff team but others think they could win it all. Some think that this team is the 'same old Browns' and don't really have a shot at doing much in the playoffs if they even make it there. ESPN's power index has the Browns as the 4th-best team in the AFC, 5th overall. 

The Chiefs are the clear favorite in the AFC, and while most don't think the Browns are close, I want to explain why they are by going through each positional group. These are based on the 53-man roster projections by ESPN writer Jake Trotter.

Specialists: Chase McLaughlin, Jamie Gillan, Charley Hughlett

Cody Parkey was our kicker last year, but he's currently on IR. I don't have a ton of confidence in our specialists, but hopefully they won't be needed all that often. The Browns went from having a staple kicker in Phil Dawson for so many years and a lack of talent everywhere else to the exact opposite now. I'll take that. This unit may be slightly below average but as long as field goals are being made, it shouldn't have a large detrimental impact. [C-]

Safeties: John Johnson III, Grant Delpit, Ronnie Harrison Jr., Richard LeCounte III, and Sheldrick Redwine

This group has struggled with injuries, but barring those, this is a solid group. Johnson was the defensive QB for the Rams defense last year, one of the best in the league. He's an elite defensive player. Delpit is coming off an injury and so is Harrison. LeCounte has done well but is inexperienced. With Johnson solidifying the free safety spot, the Browns can rotate in the others for the strong safety spot until they find someone that can be the guy. With one elite safety and some other good ones to rotate in, this positional group is a good to really good unit. [B+]

Cornerbacks: Denzel Ward, Greg Newsome II, Troy Hill, Greedy Williams, A.J. Green (not THAT A.J. Green,) and M.J. Stewart.

Most analysts will point to this group having been the weak spot for the Browns. The truth is that they weren't bad; they just had some major injuries to players like Ward and Williams and didn't have the depth that they currently do. I didn't like the Denzel Ward pick in 2018, not because he wasn't talented or I didn't like him, but with Bradley Chubb and Quenton Nelson there, I thought they would have made better picks. They probably would have been, but they did select Ward and he's an exceptional corner. Pro football focus ranked him the #8 CB going into the season. Troy Hill is one of the best slot corners and played a big role for the Rams last year alongside Johnson. Newsome is quickly becoming a starting-caliber corner given his progression. He's received a lot of praise from the veterans around him. Williams was a top pick last year but suffered an injury that kept him sidelined. He's got good size for a CB, so the long-term battle with him and Newsome will be a good one. With Ward and Hill being very good to elite corners as well as Newsome and Williams being good albeit young, this is a good to really good CB unit. [B]

Linebackers: Anthony Walker, Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah, Sione Takitaki, Elijah Lee, Mack Wilson, Jacob Phillips

This might be the actual weak spot on the team even though it's not weak. Walker is a newcomer but has leadership traits that will help develop the younger players around him. These young players such as Owusu-Koramoah (JOK,) Takitaki, and Wilson. A lot of how the LBs will perform rests on the development of these three players in particular. Lee is a good rotational player and Phillips will likely miss major time due to an injury. With a great D-line and secondary, the LBs just need to perform adequately. This positional unit is fairly average but could evolve into a good unit if the younger players can develop quickly. [C]

Defensive Linemen: Myles Garrett, Andrew Billings, Malik Jackson, Jadeveon Clowney, Takkarist McKinley, Jordan Elliott, Tommy Togiai, Malik McDowell, and Porter Gustin. 

This will be the strength of the Browns defense both figuratively and literally. The first five on this list are locks while the last four are probables. Garrett is arguably the best D-lineman in the NFL. Clowney hasn't gotten to play with someone of Garrett's caliber, which means teams won't be able to double-team him AND Garrett without bringing in an exceptional blocking TE, something that most teams don't have. The Browns will run either a 4-3 or 4-2-5 defense, but in both cases, they'll have four men up front. Clowney is likely to have a breakout season as most teams will focus double-teams on Garrett. This isn't even including Jackson and Billings who are nine and five-year veterans, respectively. Malik Jackson was, at one point, considered the best interior defensive lineman in the NFL. He's not at that level anymore, but even if he's close to that, he'll make some big plays this year. This is a scary group of players to go up against. McKinley is a very talented rotational player who can make plays. Elliott is young but has a lot of potential, especially with great veterans to mentor him. With Garrett and (arguably) Clowney being elite players and Jackson, Billings, and McKinley being good to very good, this defensive unit is really good to great. [A-]

Offensive Linemen: Jedrick Wills Jr., Joel Bitonio, JC Tretter, Wyatt Teller, Jack Conklin, Chris Hubbard, Nick Harris, James Hudson III, Michael Dunn

This was pro football focus' top-rated offensive line last year. It has one pro bowler and three all-pro members. Wills, Bitonio, Tretter, Teller, and Conklin will all return as having formed the #1 pass-blocking offense and #2 run-blocking offense. Hubbard and Hudson can both rotate from the tackle to guard positions. Bitonio is arguably the #1 guard in the NFL (Nelson is the other consideration) while all of these starting linemen are great to elite. [A+]

Tight Ends: Austin Hooper, David Njoku, Harrison Bryant

Stefanski loves to use multiple TEs in his schemes, which he did over 50% of the time last year. Hooper was a top-rated TE when in Atlanta and suffered some injuries last year. However, with Njoku and Bryant being reliable receivers as well as decent blockers, the Browns' TE group is top five. It may be #5 after the Buccaneers, Colts, Patriots, and Eagles, but it's still arguably a top five group. [B+]

Wide Receivers: Odell Beckham Jr., Jarvis Landry, Rashard Higgins, Donovan Peoples-Jones, Anthony Schwartz

I would also include KhaDeral Hodge in here. OBJ is returning from injury, and is one of the league's best WRs when healthy. They keyword "when" is important. The Browns also added Schwartz who is a track star needing to develop into a WR. I have thought of Landry as elite ever since he was in Miami. He's a leaders in the locker room and he consistently steps up to make big plays. He can even make long TD throws to OBJ if necessary. Higgins and Peoples-Jones have built a good rapport with Mayfield which is great. Higgins is a great route runner and can make difficult catches. Peoples-Jones showed off his blazing speed at the end of last year and in training camp this year. With him opposite OBJ, that will be a lot of speed for defensive secondaries to handle. And to think that Schwartz is actually faster than both of those guys, we won't be lacking for speed with this unit. The chemistry between OBJ and Mayfield needs to improve for this group to reach its potential so we'll see how that goes. As a unit, there are two elite WRs in OBJ and Landry and two good to very good receivers in Higgins and Peoples-Jones. [A-]

Running Backs: Nick Chubb, Kareem Hunt, Demetric Felton, D'Ernest Johnson, Andy Janovich

Everyone knows that Chubb and Hunt, both #1 RBs on most NFL teams individually, are the best RB duo in the NFL. Period. Maybe of all time, I don't know. Hunt was considered one of the best RBs with Kansas City and Chubb is atop the RB charts of some experts, but usually no lower than 6th. Hunt is from Cleveland, which makes it even more awesome! This RB group is easily #1 in the NFL, but the surprising emergence of Felton being as versatile as he is means the Browns may or may not get to keep Johnson depending on how their roster plays out. Janovich is technically a fullback and provides great blocking for Chubb and Hunt. Two elite RBs, a very good FB, and two very good RBs gives the Browns an edge at RB over every team. [A+]

Quarterbacks: Baker Mayfield, Case Keenum

I would also include Kyle Lauletta in here as he had a very good training camp and preseason. He'll likely end up on the practice squad if he stays with the Browns. Case Keenum is one of the best backups in the NFL and a decent starter. He was already in Stefanski's system while they both were in Minnesota. 

The real question here is Baker Mayfield. For everyone saying it's obvious that he's great, you're wrong because it's not obvious. For everyone saying he's obviously a bust and we need to get rid of him, you're wrong because that's not obvious, either. Baker is somewhere in the middle of the pack when it comes to starting QBs. He's in a gray area which is why it's so difficult to pinpoint exactly how good he is. He's usually ranked somewhere in the 12-18 range. He finished strong at the end of last year, but he hasn't been consistent which opponents will use against him. He has also had a ton of head coaches and offensive coordinators which supporters will strongly point out. 

He did a good job last year, and I just want to make sure that he can play more at that level (especially when OBJ comes back) than at a low level such as a couple of years ago. Baker has an A+ O-line, an A+ RB unit, an A- WR unit, and a B+ TE unit. I would also argue that he has an A- head coach. He has the pieces around him to make him great, let's see what he does with them. [B]

Head Coach/GM: Kevin Stefanski, Andrew Berry

It's been a while since we've had a good coach for the Browns. I would argue that Mike Pettine fell into the 'good' category. Stefanski isn't just good, he's really good and could soon become great. He's the adult in the room, he's serious, and he works hard. He is respected by the players and can manage egos. Despite the coaching carousel that the Browns have had over the past ten years, I'm glad we did it because we ultimately ended up with a potentially great coach in Stefanski. Andrew Berry has made a ton of great decisions for the Browns personnel. He also drafted well this past year as Newsome and JOK have a chance to start or play significant minutes. Look for more great things from the front office. [A-]

Obviously these grades will fluctuate throughout the year based on injuries, development, trades, acquisitions, cuts, and poor performances. But as they stand, these grades are pretty good. We have A-, B, A+. A-. B+, A+, A-. C, B, B+, and C-. That would make five As and four Bs with only two Cs, and one of those Cs is special teams. That's a GPA of 3.27 on a report card in which no teams have As across the board, and most great teams would fall into the 3.0 - 3.5 range. So the Browns are right there.

No matter who is on our team, as long as they put on a Browns uniform and helmet, I will always be rooting for them to succeed. Largely due to good off-season pickups, smart draft choices, Baker Mayfield's current contract, and a little bit of luck, the Browns have a great team this season. Our window may not stay open long, so let's take advantage while we can!

Believe, Cleveland. This year, we can believe. 

The Current State of Cleveland Browns Football

Another tough start to the year for Browns fans. It's hard for me to comprehend how one team could be this bad, year after year, with seemingly no end in sight.

The Cleveland Indians have just won their 102nd game of the season. We only have to go back to day one this year to trace back 102 victories. For the Browns? We have to go back to 1994. Granted, the Browns didn't have a team from 1996-1998, so that's probably (maybe) where it would have been had the Browns still been in Cleveland. Bill Belichick was our coach at the time.

This year, we are 0-4. This has been a bad 0-4, too. The Browns have yet to take the lead over a team. We haven't held a lead! In FOUR games! I get that we have a rookie QB, I get it. Basically every Browns QB is a "rookie" QB because it's usually their first year starting for the Browns. We also haven't lost to the best teams. The Steelers are mediocre, and while we nearly beat them, this is a team that lost to an atrocious Bears team. We then lost to the Ravens whose only victories came against the previously 0-3 Bengals and 0-4 Browns. After that, we lost to a Colts team who didn't have Andrew Luck as their QB. They only have one win on the year: against Cleveland. And we just lost to the 0-3 Bengals making them 1-3.

I hope all those Browns fans who were so excited at the Browns 4-0 preseason record are starting to realize that preseason records mean nothing. The Lions who went 0-16 in 2008 had a perfect 4-0 preseason record. They actually seemed a lot like Browns fans seemed like in games 1 and 2 of this year. The previous year, 2007, the Patriots went a perfect 16-0 in the regular season. They only won two preseason games.

I had people tell me, "well but they look really good out there" and "the players are really starting to come together." The reason the Browns won all four games is because we were trying to figure out who our STARTERS were while most other teams are trying to figure out their second and third strings. THAT is why preseason victories mean nothing. Don't get me wrong, there are things that you can learn about your team in the preseason, but none of those things are based on the number of wins. If people understand that the playoffs are different from the regular season, how is it so hard to realize that the regular season is a different beast than the preseason? If you're reading this and you get excited about preseason victories, please stop. They mean absolutely nothing. See 2007 Patriots, 2008 Lions, and possibly 2017 Browns for evidences.

To me, the hardest thing to see is when Browns players go elsewhere and really succeed. Why couldn't they do that in Cleveland? There's Josh McCown who's leading the Jets this year and find themselves in second place in the division. Terelle Pryor, now with Washington, who is their go-to receiver. Joe Haden, our best corner in a long time and the guy we could put on AJ Green, went to the Steelers and is doing well. Alex Mack is now the best O-lineman on the Falcons who made the super bowl last year. He was our SECOND-best O-lineman in Cleveland!

This tells me that the Browns really do have talent on their roster. Joe Thomas is the best O-lineman in the game. Kenny Britt is a good receiver. Isaiah Crowell is a good running back. Josh Gordon is a different story all by himself, but he could be the best receiver in the game. We had Joe Haden up until this year, perennial pro-bowler. Even if we didn't have talent, we've had access to top five and top ten picks over the last decade. We've had multiple first-round picks, and we spend them on guys like Johnny Manziel. We've had four, five, and six pro-bowl player selections in recent years. No, the Browns woes aren't about not having talent. They're about coaching and they're about the QB.

I don't know about Hue Jackson. I was excited to see him, and I think no matter his record he needs at least the rest of this season plus two more before we even think about firing him. This is less about Hue Jackson and more of a sign to great coaches around the league that the Browns have stopped their conveyor belt of coaching hires and firings. If Jackson doesn't cut it, fine. But other coaches will need to know that they have more than one or two years to develop an NFL team in Cleveland.

Jackson may end up being the guy. I'm losing hope, but I want to see how he commands his team and the respect the players pay to him. If he can control the locker room, he's definitely a coach worth keeping. He has a tough job working with the moneyballers upstairs.

Now the QB position. The Browns are a great example, it doesn't matter how many good, really good, or great players you have on your roster. If you don't have a franchise QB, you won't be winning very many games. We've had the most instability for the longest amount of time, so it's no wonder that we can't get out of the basement of our division, much less compete in the conference or for a super bowl. Until we get our franchise guy, we won't be winning anything.

So, Deshone Kizer. I liked the pick initially because of where we got him. I didn't think we'd be starting him this year much less this early in the season. We have a rookie QB and as fans we need to be patient with him. Similar to the coaching stability, we need to give Kizer the reigns for at least two years (although I'd like to see three) unless we truly realize that he's not the guy. If we pick up a Sam Darnold or a top QB out of college, we need to sit him a year and bring in a veteran guy to teach him. Let's not throw him in there. If after year two Kizer isn't the guy, we can then bring in our college prospect who now has a year of NFL learning under his belt.

It's too early to tell if Kizer is our guy. Maybe by week 14 we'll have a better idea. By the midway point next season, we'll probably know if he is or isn't the guy. If he's continually learning and improving on things he's trying to improve on, I think we should stick with him a third year.

While Kizer is a big guy with a big arm and can make throws downfield, his judgement is still in question. I thought he lost some games at Notre Dame late in the game. I personally prefer smart QB's, ones who show good judgement rather than athletic ability. I think those guys make it in the NFL. I think a lot of athletic guys who rely on their athletic prowess don't turn out. Look at some Ohio State guys: Terelle Pryor, Cardale Jones, Troy Smith. Vince Young is on the list, Michael Vick didn't pan out, Cam Newton, Colin Kaepernick, and then there's uber-athletic Tim Tebow. Some guys can do both but they don't look to run as much as they run to pass. These are Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Andrew Luck, Drew Brees, and Deshaun Watson is looking like the real deal. While that second group may not be as athletic as the first, they show better judgement and decision-making on the field. Up through his first four games in the NFL, Kizer hasn't shown that. We'll see if he can learn how to do that, especially since Hue Jackson is known around the league as a good QB coach.

Prediction: the Browns probably won't win more than 3 games. They let two very winnable games slip through their fingers in the Luck-less Colts and the Bengals. It hasn't gotten any easier to be a Browns fan. That being said,

GO BROWNS!!

Between Lake Erie and a Hard Place

New management, new coaches, and unfortunately it seems like the same ol' Browns. How can that be?! I was convinced not to use that phrase BECAUSE all of these choices were coming from different GM's and coaches. Since 1999, there have been eight coaches for the Browns which averages about to be about two years for each. Here they are:

1. Chris Palmer
2. Butch Davis
3. Romeo Crennel
4. Eric Mangini
5. Pat Shurmer
6. Rob Chudzinski
7. Mike Pettine
8. Hue Jackson

I wonder how many years Jackson will get. If the over-under is 3 1/2, I'll take the under. I'm not as familiar with Palmer or Davis, so I'll start with Crennel. He was an okay coach, He's a Bill Parcells and Bill Belichick disciple, so he comes from a great place. But most of Belichick's assistants haven't worked out as head coaches and Crennel is no different. I was okay with his firing.

Mangini is the smartest coach on this list. He's also a Parcells/Belichick understudy. He didn't have a lot of success in Cleveland or in New York (Jets) but he knew the game fairly well. I was okay with his firing.

With all of the QB's being taken by the Browns, it made sense to go and get a QB whisperer. Shurmer had done that with Donovan McNabb, so the move to grab him when they did made sense. The Browns had drafted Colt McCoy in the 3rd round and thought he could do some great things. Shurmer never really had success as a head coach anywhere he went and is now not even a coordinator. I was okay with his firing.

Then came a new owner and another new coach in Rob Chudzinski. I didn't love the move when it happened, it felt like the Browns missed out on all the big names that off-season and had to pick from the scraps left over. Chud was out after a year and while he didn't do much with the team, you could easily argue he didn't have the time to do it. Looking back on him, the Panthers offense got better with Cam at the helm when he left than when he was there. I was okay with his firing.

After Chud, the Browns took Mike Pettine. I thought this was going to be their long-term guy. Pettine was a defensive-minded coach under the tutelage of Rex Ryan. I think Rex is a horrible head coach and fantastic defensive coordinator. Pettine seemed to be better than Rex and had a lot of success. He went 7-4 one year while the Bengals and Ravens did the same. After his initial season when his defense had a top five ranking, the defense started to slip a lot. As a defensive-minded coach, you should be good on that side of the ball at the very least. I thought they should keep Pettine anyway because he did have some success and had to deal with the whole Manziel debacle. If Manziel hadn't been there, I think Hoyer would have performed better than he did. But Hoyer's concern was a potential franchise QB waiting to step in as soon as Hoyer didn't do well. He was right.

Ultimately I don't think Pettine would have been the best choice for the franchise, so I was okay with his firing with the condition that the next guy they picked would be a long-term guy. At this point, if we fired the next coach, no good coaches will want to come to Cleveland.

I do think Jackson could be the best hire we've made. I think he has the team's respect which is important. He's brought along Josh Gordon so far. The issue with Jackson is going to be the Moneyball management. They are going to be in charge of personnel decisions which to this point they've gotten a big huge F. I'm pretty sure they would've taken Manziel if they could have as well, and I don't want anyone in charge of the Browns who would've done that. Same goes for Haslam: stay out of personnel decisions! Even Jerry Jones has learned this, which explains why the Cowboys didn't even want him. The Browns have to keep Jackson, and it might be a good long-term decision as well.

Over-matched: The 2016 Big Ten Bowl Season

Wow, the Big Ten has its hands full this bowl season. I believe they're the best conference this year for the first time in a long time. However, they're bowl record won't reflect it; it's gonna be bad. They didn't get the best break with matchups this year. Here they are:

• Ohio State vs. Clemson
• Michigan vs. FSU
• Penn State vs. USC
• Wisconsin vs. Western Michigan
• Iowa vs. Florida
• Nebraska vs. Tennessee
• Indiana vs. Utah
• Northwestern vs. Pitt
• Minnesota vs. Washington State
• Maryland vs. Boston College

Ten teams, ten games. Out of these ten games, only two have the Big Ten teams favored (Wisconsin and Michigan) with most people split on Ohio State/Clemson. Unfortunately I don't think they win more than 2 or 3 games.

Ohio State vs. Clemson. As an OSU fan, of course I believe that they'll win. They're both equally matched and it could go either way. I think the talent slightly favors Clemson but the coaching favors OSU. It'll be a fun game to watch.

Michigan vs. FSU. This is game I feel most confident about. Michigan is out to prove that they belong in the playoff, and after that controversial loss to the Buckeyes, they're gonna have a huge chip on their shoulder. As an Ohio State fan, I hope they lose, no matter the consequence of conference perception. I think they'll win handily though, despite it being basically a home game for FSU.

Penn State vs. USC. This game is the weirdest-looking game from an outsiders perspective. If the Big Ten is the best conference, then the conference champion Nittany Lions should easily win, right? Wrong. USC is the best second-half team in college football, and many thought they deserved a spot in the playoff. Obviously they didn't, but they're really really talented. Penn State is probably upset at missing the playoffs especially after beating OSU, but they won't be able to compete with USC in this one. And this one is a real home for USC.

Wisconsin vs. Western Michigan. This is the other game I believe the Big Ten will win. Don't get me wrong, Western Michigan would match-up really well against most Big Ten teams. But Wisconsin's front line is way too strong for their D-line. Their athleticism isn't quite on par with Penn State, so WMU won't expose Wisconsin's secondary like the Nittany Lions did. Expect Wisconsin to push them around a lot, especially in the second half if the score is still close.

Iowa vs. Florida. This game could go either way. I think this game will depend on Florida more than Iowa. Florida has more talent and will probably win, and the new coaching staff will have their team pumped up, but if the team starts to get apathetic, then Iowa could pull off some big plays and win it the game.

Nebraska vs. Tennessee. Here is where all the games start to get lop-sided. Because the Big Ten have so many teams in so many big games, the more mediocre teams will play teams that are ranked slightly higher. Nebraska isn't as good as Tennessee, despite the Vols disappointing season. The Cornhuskers will have to keep up with Tennessee's speed and athleticism. Also, this game is played in Nashville. How come all Big Ten teams play away games this year? Some even play against teams in which the game will be held in the very stadium they play in!

Indiana vs. Utah. Utah is better than their record indicates, and their offense is better than Indiana's defense. Utah's D and Indiana's O are fairly even, although I'd give the edge to Utah because they have more NFL players on that side of the ball. Utah's run game will prove too much for Indiana. To be fair, Utah is arguably the Pac-12's third or fourth best team while Indiana is the Big Ten's sixth or seventh best team. This difference really is the theme of this years' bowl games.

Northwestern vs. Pitt. Pitt is such an underrated team. They've beaten both Clemson and Penn State. They've also lost four games, so they can be up and down. But overall, Pitt is as talented as any team in the country minus about ten. Since Northwestern isn't anywhere near the top ten, Pitt has a huge edge on talent. They could still play down to their competition, but I think Pitt will turn it up in the fourth quarter and blow out Northwestern.

Minnesota vs. Washington State. Washington State nearly pulled off the upset of Washington State, which would've made the playoff hierarchy even worse. WSU has an explosive offense and a solid defense. Minnesota's defense is slightly better than their offense, but both have a long way to go. WSU may not blow them out, but they'll handle Minnesota soundly.

Maryland vs. Boston College. This game will feature two teams who just aren't very good. Maryland may pull this one out, but Boston College will probably have a play or two go their way and end up with the win.

Good luck to all Big Ten teams! If I had my way, we'd go 9-1 with a Michigan loss! To the best conference in college football this year!! and GO BUCKEYES!!

1. ucla upsets stanford
2. ole miss upsets georgia
3. south florida upsets florida state
4. michigan state over wisconsin
5. florida upsets tennessee

College Football 2016 - Week 3

1. Ohio State over Oklahoma on the road
2. Florida State over Louisville on the road
3. Ole Miss upsets Alabama
4. Notre Dame upsets Michigan State
5. Stanford crushes USC

College Football 2016 - Week 1

Welcome back to another year of college football! I neglected to make picks last year, but I'm picking it back up for this season. Up until now I've tried only picking upsets, but this time I'm going to just make picks.


What We Learned (Off-Season)

LSU is happy to get on the football field with everything that's happened this summer of it. They should be a pretty strong contender this season, especially with Alabama taking a step back from what they had last year.

Tennessee is looking like a really good team. In fact, a lot of experts have them winning the SEC. I don't know if I'm going to go that far. I want to see what they look like after week 6 before they play Alabama in what could be an SEC championship week preview.

Notre Dame isn't as good as advertised. They're highly ranked and will probably jump in the rankings if they can get by Texas, which I think they will. But after that, they have a tough schedule: Michigan State, Duke, Stanford, Miami, Virginia Tech, and finishing at USC. The good thing for Notre Dame is they get all but one of these teams at home, but it's still not going to be as easy.

Baylor football will go back to being Baylor football. With the loss of their coach, key players, and continuity, they will continue to fall back to the bottom of the Big 12. This is good news for teams like Texas and Oklahoma, who would have probably kept losing recruits to Art Briles if he was still there.

Staying in the Big 12, they will look to get back to 12 teams in their conference. I think Houston is almost a certainty at this point, despite not being interesting the last time they looked at adding other schools. BYU has a fighting chance, but ultimately I think they'll be passed up for Cincinnati or Memphis. The conference commissioner has interviews 20 schools with only 2 spots up for grabs.

The Big Ten will come down to one of three teams from the east (Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State) or Iowa from the West. Iowa has a lax schedule, playing basically only Michigan. The Big Ten West is getting worse every year while the Big Ten East has been getting significantly better. If Penn State and just one of the remaining three teams of Indiana, Maryland, and Rutgers can continue rebuilding, the division will rank up there with the SEC West and Pac-12 South.

The Pac-12 is being thought of as the conference who will be left out of the playoff this year. With each year, a preseason big is being as to which conference will be left out. The first season were the controversial Baylor and TCU denials. The Big 12 was the only conference without a championship game (and what I would argue was why they were left out, the only one without ONE conference champion) and last season the Pac-12 was left out. Stanford showed it shouldn't be overlooked as it dismantled Iowa (wasn't hard to do) 45-16 in the Rose Bowl. Unless Stanford can remain undefeated or make it through with one loss, they may be left out looking in on the playoff again.

Oregon continues to get worse. Shocker since that's what they've done since Chip Kelly left.

USC has a lot of talent this year, but they always have a lot of talent and haven't been truly relevant since Pete Carroll. I think they have a good coach, but he's trying to change the culture there which will take some time. Because of this, they won't do very well at the beginning of the year but will start to turn it around towards the end. They start out the year getting crushed by Alabama, losing to Utah and Stanford and possibly Utah State. But then around the Arizona State or Cal game, they'll figure it out and end up beating UCLA (or losing close) and beating Notre Dame. My guess would be that USC beating UCLA at the end of the year won't get them into the Pac-12 title game, but it could allow Utah to slip in.

After blowing out USC and Western Kentucky, Bama will have some tough games the rest of the year. Because Bama has had the sustained success for years in the SEC, a lot of teams are gunning for them. They'll play at Ole Miss their 3rd game who has had a lot of success against them. I'd guess Bama loses that game. The rest of their schedule has some tough games: at Tennessee, Texas A&M, at LSU, Mississippi State, and their rival, Auburn. They'll have a bye week before the LSU game, but I'm going to take LSU in that one. Bama could have 2 or 3 losses this season easy, especially since they're not as good as they usually are.


My Big 5 Picks

1. Ohio State over Bowling Green by at least 55.
2. Bama rolls USC big time.
3. Notre Dame squeeks by Texas on the road.
4. Clemson over Auburn on the road.
5. LSU over Wisconsin on the road.

My Conference Champions Picks

• SEC - LSU over Georgia
• Big Ten - Ohio State over Iowa
• Pac-12 - Stanford over Utah
• ACC - Clemson over Pittsburgh
• Big 12 - Oklahoma

Let the games begin, finally!!

GOAT: Jordan or James?

The other day, I went to McDonalds with my two year-old girl to get some breakfast. While placing our order, the cashier saw my 2016 NBA Champs Cleveland Cavaliers hat and decided he needed to comment on it. "Jordan will always be the best, LeBron didn't win six finals though," he argued. "LeBron ain't gonna win it this year though with KD goin to Golden State," he added. I just reassured him that Golden State does have a really good team this year and that we'll see what happens.

I have some friends and family members who have felt that LeBron is better than Michael Jordan. The debate will rage on and unfortunately (or fortunately) will never be able to proven, but it's fun to talk about. Jordan has always been the best player for me, with LeBron in second, Magic third, and then a slew of great players that I'd have to really sit down and think about. So I've never agreed with my friends/family that LeBron is a better player than MJ, and a part of me hurt since LeBron is from my neck of the woods.

After what James did this year, I think you can now make the argument.

The picture above is one I found on Facebook. It was most likely created by a Cavalier fan who strongly feels that LeBron has surpassed Jordan. I'm not going to say if I think LeBron is better now than MJ, but I will attempt to make a good argument for it.

Let's start with that picture. By age 31, it looks as if LeBron has done a lot more than MJ. This picture doesn't show that LeBron is better; it's skewed. LeBron went straight to the NBA out of high school while MJ played three years in college. He was a big part of why UNC won a national championship in his freshman year, so MJ really won four titles by the time he was 31, not just three.

Then we come to league MVP. I think this award has become absurd. Stephen Curry won UNANIMOUS MVP last season. He's not even the MVP on his own team. He folded in the finals. The award this year proved to be a joke. MJ was never unanimous MVP, neither was Magic, Bird, or LeBron. Steph Curry isn't on the same planet as those guys.

The 13 seasons compare to 9 for MJ is the difference between Jordans' three years in college and one year or retirement in which he was starting to master another sport. Yes, he was horrible his first season, but you try switching sports at age 30 after not having played for 12+ years. It was incredible that he had the success that he did. He was also starting to get the hang of it and do well. So if you add on an extra four seasons for MJ to equal LeBrons, that gives MJ three more titles. Edge MJ.

Jordan was known as the most clutch player and changed the way we view our NBA superstars today. If you're the superstar and you don't take the last shot, you're heavily criticized. Jordan was the first guy to start doing this. Then it spread to everyone else: Iverson, Kobe, LeBron. Superstars are now judged by that aspect of being clutch...do you take the last shot, and make it? LeBron is actually more clutch than MJ if you look at certain stats, but Jordan wasn't in the era of twitter where every passed-up opportunity and missed shot is instantaneously under a microscope all over the world. I don't know who I'd rather have the ball at the end of the game...but whoever you choose, there shouldn't be a ton of disparity.

So since most of these things still lean Jordan, why does LeBron now have an argument for the GOAT status?

LeBron has now done some things that the other greats never could. That calls into question their greatness...how come LeBron could do it and MJ, Magic, and Bird couldn't?

First off, the finals appearances...LeBron has seven now (4 in Miami, 3 in Cleveland) but out of those seven, should've only made it to 5 or 6. The fact that he took his team to the finals during some of those years should be a positive, not a negative. That first Cavaliers run in 2007 really showed how good LeBron was. His #2 guy was Larry Hughes. Are you kidding me? I remember at the time hating the sports writers who would comment that this was one of the worst NBA Finals teams. Turns out it was. The Cavs shouldn't have beaten the teams that they did to make it there. I would argue that last season, when Love got hurt in the first series and Kyrie was banged up for the entire playoffs and out in the finals, was also a year that LeBron shouldn't have made it and shouldn't have won. He was up 2-1 in the finals last year!

So MJ winning all six of his finals may not be as impressive as LeBron winning 3 of 7 considering the teams he took to the finals.

Then there's the "down 3-1 comeback" that James just did. That was also against the team who is statistically the greatest regular season team ever. Nobody has ever done that. Ever.

James has also won NBA championships on two different teams, also something that Magic, Bird, and Michael never did. Different coaches, different players, different systems. Not an easy thing to do.

LeBron has always been the guy to rebound and pass as well as score. Jordan didn't have to rebound...he had Dennis Rodman and Horace Grant. He never had to take on an opposing team's best player, especially one bigger than him...he had Scottie Pippen for that. He never had to be the guy to create the offense and set up other guys,,,he had Ron Harper, John Paxson, and Scottie Pippen for that. LeBron does it all, and he's never injured. James makes players around him better. He's also never had a player as great as Scottie Pippen or Dennis Rodman. Rodman will go down as the best rebounding forward in NBA history. Pippen is a top 50 player of all time, a member of the Dream Team. LeBron has had Dwayne Wade out of his prime, Chris Bosh out of his prime, Kyrie Irving before his prime, and Kevin Love in his prime. Don't get me wrong, they're great players. But who would you take on your all-time team? Scottie Pippen or Kevin Love? Jordan also had arguably the greatest coach in NBA history in Phil Jackson. LeBron has had rookies or flame-outs.

So has LeBron just surpassed MJ? Not everyone was in agreement when I thought it was clear that LeBron had taken the torch from Kobe. Maybe in some people's eyes, Jordan will always be the best, no matter what a future NBA player does in his career. One thing is clear...MJ hasn't ever been challenged as the GOAT until now. Let the discussion begin!

Most "Valuable" Player

The NBA's Most Valuable Player award has had some push-back from people who feel as I do: it doesn't mean the same thing as "best player." To be fair, I'm all in favor of changing it to it's rightful syntax. I'd go with the "Player of the Year" award as they do in college football. I'd even give that award to Steph Curry this year, just so everyone knows I'm not anti-Curry. He's a tremendous player. But when we talk about a player being most valuable, that doesn't limit the award to statistics and clutch shots.

I recently made a list of players who I feel are more deserving of the MVP award:

• LeBron James
• Damian Lillard
• Chris Paul
• Kyle Lowry
• Paul George
• Dwayne Wade
• Jimmy Butler
• James Harden
• Anthony Davis

Then I also included a list of players who are in the conversation with Steph for MVP. These players include:

• Kevin Durant
• Russell Westbrook
• Andre Drummond
• Draymond Green
• Dirk Nowitzki

If just one of these players below were put above Curry, which I think you could make arguments for, then Steph Curry isn't even in the top ten of MVP voting. But he's flashy, he shoots the 3-ball better than anybody, and he's well-liked in the court of public opinion. That's why he was unanimously voted MVP this year.

I get it, but Curry isn't as valuable to his team as people think. He's a great 3-point shooter, right? In the Portland series, his team set a playoff-record number for most 3's....WITHOUT HIM! His team is going to win the first two rounds of the playoffs, basically WITHOUT HIM! In the WEST! Chris Paul, whose on my list, went down and the Clippers didn't win another game. LeBron was out six games this year as part of his new annual-rest program. The Cavs went 1-5.

If you took any of these players off their teams, most of them wouldn't even make the playoffs. The Pelicans without Davis would be worse than the Lakers. Indiana would be rebuilding without Paul George, especially now that their coach has been fired. If you took Curry off of the Warriors, they're still a playoff team, probably top five in the West. They're beating Houston and Portland without him. They're setting 3-point shooting records without him. The fact is Draymond Green and Klay Thompson are both really good players, and they have a really deep team. Iguodala used to be "the" guy for Philly before they decided to tank it. Livingston was a highly-touted recruit, who I'm sad about because the Cavs used to have him. The Warriors are loaded. If Steph was replaced by Damian Lillard, Vegas drops them a point...that's it, which in basketball isn't very much. An NBA scout verified that the sentiment around the league is that the Warriors could replace Steph with a not-so-great version and still be the best team in the league. Those aren't my opinions, those are the words of an active NBA scout.

If you can take Steph off the Warriors and they barely miss a beat, if at all, then that means he's not extremely valuable to them. Again, take LeBron off the Cavs? They may not be a playoff team in the EAST! Every year, even when he went to Miami and I wouldn't have voluntarily admitted this, LeBron is the MVP. As long as he's still in his prime, which he's going to be leaving any minute now, he's the MVP every year. It's not even close.

This brings me to my next point. Being the most valuable player actually has more to do with the nominees' teammates than it does that player himself. For Curry, his team is fine without him. He has great teammates. LeBron's team wouldn't be fine. In fact, when LeBron went to Miami, the Cavs went from 60 wins to 19 wins. Granted, there were some injuries, but that's quite a fall. Kyrie and most of the Cavs couldn't even make the playoffs in the EAST until LeBron came back. Even when Jordan, the greatest player of all time, left the Bulls, they went from 57 to 55 wins. Jordan had a solid team when he left. Chris Paul's team goes from a top 4 team in the West to possibly not even a playoff team. Damian Lillard is keeping the Blazers alive almost by himself.

Does that mean you get punished a little by having a great team? Not necessarily, but you can't get the bonus points of LeBron leading a Cavs team to the finals in 2007 with Larry Hughes as his best teammate. Peyton Manning carried the Colts for years, including to multiple super bowls, and when he left they won two games. Two! That's an MVP. Same with Andrew Luck. The Colts WERE a two-win team when they drafted him and he's taken them to the playoffs one step further every year. He's an MVP. In the 2014 World Series, Madison Bumgarner basically won three of the four games for the Giants, including the pivotal 7th game. He's an MVP and on a great team.

So most valuable player has more to do with your team, circumstances, and the MVP-nominees contribution than it does just based on that players accomplishments. Steph deserves most outstanding player or player of the year, but he's far from deserving the MVP award.

The 2016 Cleveland Browns NFL Draft Recap

It's a new era for the Cleveland Browns...again...for the 3rd time in 5 years. Browns fans aren't happy when they hear the word "rebuilding." However, with the new administration, it may be the last rebuild for a while. These guys are definitely doing things their way, and we'll see if that leads to a championship-level team.

I don't think anyone really knows what such a full-blown move to analytics is going to look like, especially in a year or two when that's combined with how those analytics translate on the field and especially in Cleveland. I do know that these are smart guys, both Sashi Brown and Paul DePodesta, and they have access to not only more information, but better information. So I will give them the benefit of the doubt most of the time, even if the media or unpopular opinion says otherwise.

All that being said, here's how the 2016 NFL draft shook out for Cleveland (I won't go through all the trades, there were too many). The grades given after each player reflect the pick as a whole, not just the player:


Round 1, Pick 15: Corey Coleman, WR Baylor

I don't like this pick. It has nothing to do with Coleman as a player, it has to do with the situation the Browns were in. They had the #2 pick in the draft, then #8, then #15. They could've done a lot with this pick. Instead, they picked a WR.

First, I don't thnk that RG3 is going to be our franchise QB. He may become "a" franchise QB but I don't think he will be the Browns guy. Since we don't have one on our roster, I think they should've taken Carson Wentz. Then they moved down twice, and I thought they should've taken Paxton Lynch. The Broncos learned that the 49ers wanted Lynch, so they gave up picks to get him. When smart people do things, pay attention. Elway is arguably the league's best GM and he wanted Lynch. The Browns should've taken their franchise QB right here.

So that's the first thing. The Browns should've taken a franchise QB since they had two chances to get one and especially given RG3's history with injuries. That doesn't show up in analytics. I think Sashi Brown is smart to get great value out of his picks, which he did this year. There's just one huge exception to that rule: quarterback. Do whatever you have to in order to get that guy. Ask the Colts that question. Without Andrew Luck, the Colts are a 3-win team. We had a shot at two, we took zero.

The second problem I had with the first round pick in Coleman is his position. Look at the last two years, especially last year's playoff semi-final. There's no Megatron, no Julio Jones, no insert-your-best-WR-here guy. Aside from Gronk, who is an outlier and plays TE, a lot of these WR's wouldn't even start on other teams. I think the position that has quickly become the most overrated is WR. Since defenses can't put their hands on them, even mediocre receivers can now look great, especially with a great QB and in the right system. Not that I'm depending on him, but if Josh Gordon ever gets his act together in Cleveland, he is the best WR in the league anyway.

All that being said, I don't like the Coleman pick. He played in a great college system against mediocre Big 12 defenses. His numbers are going to be inflated. He's fast, and that's great. But Travis Benjamin was fast and that didn't mean much. For a long time,  he was a 3rd or 4th-stringer on a below-average receiving corp. Then once he started running better routes and actually catching the ball, he became a solid option. If Coleman becomes great, great. Maybe this was a weapon for RG3 to show him that the Browns are doing things to allow him to succeed. If that's the case, okay, I get it. Still not a great pick though. Grade: D-

Round 2, Pick 32: Emmanuel Ogbah, DE Oklahoma State

I will say that the Browns are now picking the right kind of guys. These guys don't have problems off the field, they come from humble backgrounds, and have chips on their shoulders. Cleveland can't afford any more Josh Gordons and Johnny Manziel's. Ogbah's story is a really cool one.

So here comes Ogbah. The knock on him is that he was inconsistent in college. I think Sashi Brown summed it up best. He said to look at all of Ogbahs' games against up-tempo offenses: he stunk. Now look at all of them against normal or slower offenses: he did exceptionally well. In the NFL, unless we play the 49ers, we won't be playing against fast offenses. He's a solid pick. They had him graded as a 1st round talent and I think you could make the argument for that. And they picked him over Noah Spence, who some thought was better but who's a guy that had to mail 20 drug test results to all NFL teams to show he's actually serious about his career now. Even if Spence is better, Cleveland needs a guy like Ogbah, even if he is slightly less talented which I don't think he is.
Grade: B+

Round 3, Pick 65: Carl Nassib, DE Penn State

Again, this is the right kind of guy. Kudos for that point.

I always laugh when I hear guys say, "you should take this guy because he's a winner." Especially in college. Tim Tebow was a winner in college. Ryan Leaf, Vince Young, Jake Long, Michael Sam, there are a lot of "winners" in college who don't make it in the NFL. So picking a guy in college simply because he's a "winner" doesn't make sense to me.

However, picking a guy because of his work ethic does appeal to me. There's something to be said about a guy always beating the odds. Nassib has been told on every level he wasn't good enough and has worked his way into success on every level. Nassib is a guy who will do whatever is asked of him, and there's a good chance he'll succeed at it. I don't know if he will be an every-down starter. He may be a package edge-rusher or just a special teams guy, but he will come to work every day. This guy could easily develop into a solid starter.
Grade: B

Round 3, Pick 76: Shon Coleman, OT Auburn

There's always a debate in draft selection: do you take best player available or need? What is there's a really talented DE but you already have five? What is he's head-and-shoulders better than everyone else in the draft? What do you do?

I think you draft for talent using need as a guide. In the case of Coleman, you have both. He's very talented, although it's a slight risk in that he's coming off of an MCL injury. He's also needed on a line that just lost 1 great player and 1 starter. He's a big guy, great skills as a blocker, and can play a couple different positions. We really need a strong O-line, and even if he doesn't work out as a starter, he provides really nice depth at a depleted position.
Grade: A-

Round 3, Pick 93: Cody Kessler, QB USC

This was probably the worst player-pick in the draft. Coach Hue Jackson loves this guy, but when asked about it, said "I understand where everyone's coming from. You gotta trust me on this one." I know Hue's not the same guy who picked Manziel. In fact, he ran Manziel out of town which I loved. But you'll forgive me if I'm a tad overly cynical when it comes to QB selections, especially after having passed on two franchise QB's to take this guy. Supposedly Kessler is one of the most accurate passers in the draft, but Kessler couldn't drive the ball down the field in sunny L.A. You think he's gonna do it in Cleveland's weather? Not a chance. I'm growing a little tired of the Browns, who play in a very cold division, taking weak-armed QB's (Manziel, Colt McCoy, Brady Quinn, Tim Couch) seemingly every year. When are we going to learn? Kessler's accuracy isn't going to matter much because of the weather conditions he hasn't had to deal with yet. Look around at all the other AFC North (and NFC North) QB's: they all have big arms or their teams are held back because their QB is Andy Dalton or Teddy Bridgewater. Stafford, Rodgers, Favre when he was there, Flacco, Big Ben, Cutler...all big-armed QB's. You need that in bad weather. Even Connor Cook has a better arm than this guy and was available at the time. Bad pick.
Grade: D-

Round 4, Pick 99: Joe Schobert, OLB Wisconsin

This was the favorite pick of Mel Kiper and Todd McShay for the Cleveland Browns to this point. Schobert isn't a really big guy but seemed to make really good plays. He found himself around the ball. He isn't a big guy but he could knock some guys over. I think that the captains on a football team are found in the middle of the field: QB, center, DT, MLB, and safety. Keep your captains in the middle and provide competition everywhere else. Schobert brings in some good competition for a spot he may eventually win, especially in Horton's 3-4 scheme. And this is an area of need. Solid pick.
Grade: A-

Round 4, Pick 114: Ricardo Louis, WR Auburn

The WR I wanted from Auburn was Sammie Coates last year. I don't think many people would argue that this selection wasn't a reach...it was. He's fast and athletic. He's got a lot of confidence. Louis may end up on special teams for a while, but he's got enough athletic talent to at least be considered on this WR corp, especially if Josh Gordon doesn't play this year.

For years the Browns have been criticized for not taking WR's. I argue that this position is overrated, that you don't need great WR's. Plus, this guy may not even be the best WR on his own team. Only time will tell.
Grade: C

Round 4, Pick 129: Derrick Kindred, S TCU

If nothing else, this guy is a tough guy. Apparently he had a broken collarbone his whole final season at TCU. Still managed to make 80 tackles. I like his tenacity and he earned a spot on a very talented defense. Especially with the departure of Gipson, if Kindred doesn't win out the starting spot, he'll wind up on the field somewhere. He's very talented and works really hard.
Grade: B

Round 4, Pick 138: Seth Devalve, WR Princeton

I don't really get this pick, either. He's listed as a WR but will probably play some TE or slot receiver. He's had some foot issues, so that's a concern. The Browns continue to add skill position players, I'm guessing to pacify RG3. I don't really know why they went with this pick, especially when they could've gotten a guard like Connor McGovern or Joe Dahl, some D-linemen, or highly-ranked RB's who were taken shortly after.
Grade: C-

Round 5, Pick 151: Jordan Payton, WR UCLA

Even though they've picked way too many WR's at this point, I like Payton. He's got good size and great hands, possibly the best in the draft. I have him ranked as the 2nd-best WR the Browns took behind Coleman. He could be a solid slot receiver, or just a completion guy who runs solid routes for shorter yardage. The fact that the Browns got him so late is a great reflection on Sashi and company.
Grade: B-

Round 5, Pick 168: Spencer Drango, OT Baylor

Browns reporter Pat McManamon thinks that Drango will end up being a guard, despite playing tackle in college. I agree. In fact, I think college tackles make great NFL guards. He's got some speed to him and he's great at run-blocking. He's 6'6" and 315 lbs. Baylor disguised him in their offense as he was a below-average pass-protector and Baylor is a passing team. But with his combination of size and speed, plus he's a smart guy, I think right guard opposite Joel Bitonio would be the perfect spot for him, but he still has the ability to play tackle as he did very well in college. It seems like the Browns are becoming Baylor-North.
Grade: B

Round 5, Pick 172: Rashard Higgins, WR Colorado State

I didn't watch any Colorado State games this year, but from the highlights I've seen and articles I've on him, he seems like a solid player. He's got some size at 6'1"and he made some good plays. He'll definitely be in the running for a spot at WR, especially at first since he's already played in a pro style offense. He isn't the most talented receiver they got, but he is the most NFL-ready receiver they picked up.
Grade: B-

Round 5, Pick 173: Trey Caldwell, CB Louisiana-Monroe

This was the second of back-to-back Browns picks. He's only 5'9" but I love taking players from small schools at this point in the draft. There's always a risk factor of how they're going to handle the elevated competition. Typically players from FCS schools don't go up against many NFL players. Caldwell will compete for nickel and dime corner spots, but will probably end up on special teams for a while. A decent amount of upside with little downside.
Grade: B

Round 7, Pick 250: Scooby Wright III, ILB Arizona

The final of 14 picks in the draft, possibly the best pick in the draft. Most people had him going in the 3rd or 4th rounds. Scooby has a lot of talent, but injuries have plagued him. That's always a wild card, but wild cards are great choices in round 7. If he's as talented as he was before his injuries, he'll easily be a starter in a year or two. He won't even have to assume the main ILB job as he'd be in a 3-4. He can cover and rush the passer. This pick strongly assures me that Sashi Brown may not hit home runs in the first and second rounds, but he's a guy who will pick out some really good players in the later rounds, even if Scooby doesn't turn out to be one of them.
Grade: A-


So here are the grades for each round:

Round 1: D-
Round 2: B+
Round 3: B, A-, D-
Round 4: A-, C, B, C-
Round 5: B-, B, B-, B
Round 7: A-

Now, if you just went off grades giving no weight to earlier picks, the Browns would get a B- based on my grades. However, since rounds 1-3 clearly represent your better picks, I'd have to give a C as my overall grade. I think Shon, Joe, and Scooby were the best picks of the draft. Of those, I'd probably say the best was Scooby considering his value.

I have some mixed feelings about this draft, which makes me want to trust in the Browns front office right now. I'm not as close to the organization, so there are probably reasons why they're doing what they're doing. Hopefully they know what they're doing. I remember a couple years ago when the Rams opted to go for 2 instead of kicking an easy field goal. They got hammered because it would've put them in a position to kick a field goal to tie the game. Instead they didn't convert and ended up losing because they needed a touchdown to win. Jeff Fisher got killed in the media. What everyone didn't know, including the media, is that while their kicker was out (everyone knew that), their second guy wasn't 100% and neither was the long-snapper. With that many people out, he didn't want to take a chance on missing a field goal. Yet the public criticized him while not knowing the whole story.

If the Browns truly consider RG3 to be their future franchise guy, then Sashi and Paul did a good job. I'd upgrade them from a C to a B+ overall. I just don't think that's the case, and I don't like that they passed on two consensus franchise QB's in the first round. They also took too many WR's. They got some extra picks over the next couple of years which I think is great. They obviously know how to wheel and deal. They can find great value picks, which will be important AFTER we get a franchise QB. But maybe we already have.

I'm sure there's a lot of things going on behind closed doors. Out of all the good and bad decisions the Browns have made so far since the new owner arrived, only one has been absolutely horrendous decision: drafting Johnny Manziel. All the other bad decisions happen to a lot of teams. I really don't like that they passed over on a franchise QB, but they've made some good moves as well. Time will really tell us if they're legitimate and if "NFL Moneyball" is going to work. Here's to hoping.