brady199

If the reports are true the Pats wanted to take Greg Little (who I think will be a stud) or Torrey Smith with the 60th pick. With Clevland and Baltimore both picking in front of them it didn't make any sense to go RB first. Both Teams needed a WR, I've seen many Mocks with the Browns picking AJ Green or Julio Jones with the 6th pick, I've also seen a few mock drafts with Baltimore taking Torrey Smith in the first round.

I would of been much more excited with Greg Little @ 56 instead of trading down and picking up Ridley, or Mallett

patchick

Where'd pick #57 go in your analysis? The Lions took an RB immediately after the Pats, so there's no certainty at all that Vereen would have been around at #60.

TheSolderKing

we don't need another WR in this heavy TE based Offense. We have gadded RB's to supplement our blitzkrieg style strikes.


Tate Branch Price suffice the need at WR


if you deny it then I am sorry for you.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Keyser Söze

Tate Branch Price

__________________

BelichickFan

I would have loved to take a shot at Little.

However it's a lot easier looking back.

Although Baltimore and Cleveland took WR, the Lions also took a RB. There are two reasons to take the RB :

1 - Although Baltimore and Cleveland were possibilities to take a WR, we had to go 2-2 (in a bad way) for both Smith and Little to be gone. It only took one team to take Vereen, it took two to take the two WR.

2 - We needed the RB more. Little would be an intriguing developmental player but we had no depth at all at RB. I don't know why they didn't like Leshoure but they didn't so it seems Vereen was their clear choice at RB at that point. With zero depth at RB that was a reasonable way to go.

reflexblue

Why ask Why? It is what it is

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.

convertedpatsfan

Is Little really an upgrade over Tate?

I mean they're both UNC receivers who didn't play much receiver. Tate was an STer while Little was a high school LB who played RB and WR. Both were pretty raw in terms of route running. They both ran about the same at the combine (4.52 vs. 4.53). Little's bigger, but also has attitude concerns/diva behaviour.

Tate is developing slowly, working his way back from that knee injury, but the routes are getting better. Little could be a great WR one day, but he isn't one right now. I just don't see how he's an upgrade to what we have. If anything, he's a bigger, slower version of Taylor Price, but with attitude issues.

PatDaPatriot

James Walker from ESPN mentioned during espn.com's "draft live" coverage that the Browns were after Vereen. I imagine that they felt that Vereen would have gone to Cleveland at 59...

I guess if they really wanted Smith/Little and Vereen they could've traded up from 60. However, they clearly didn't see the value in doing so...

brady199

Almost everyone had Leshoure rated higher then Vereen. So I think the lions would of went with Leshoure. Also Vereen is a slower, but stonger version of Jahvid Best, just like the pats took Ridley to compliment Vereen, I think the lions wanted a back to compliment Best. As far as someone else saying the Browns wanted Vereen, I've never heard that, but with Hillis and Hardesty coming back, I don't see RB being a need they would address in round 2.

brady199

Is Nicks better then Tate? They are both UNC WR's? Little's ceiling IMO is much Higher then Tates. Little has been compared to Andre Johnson, I think he's a beast. When I think of Tate I just think he's JAG.