Home » Browns » KKE, 2: Do the Browns HAVE to Draft a Cornerback at Number Six?

KKE, 2: Do the Browns HAVE to Draft a Cornerback at Number Six?

So it turns out that 30 odd federal agents DO don bullet-proof vests to procure Lori McFarland’s emails.  

I admit, I find it disappointing that, when given the choice between:

  • building a landmark case that might protect the truly most vulnerable of our society and possibly strangle off the worst of the truck-stop sub-culture or;
  • demonstrating the how a truck-stop chain with 650 locations and expanding to 850 presents all manner of unfair trade practices leading to an effective monopoly within years or;
  • scaring up a case for one, or is it two? millions of dollars in non-paid rebates and kinda leaving open the door for speculation on politically motivated use of the Justice Department as there is precedent for AG Holder’s questionable discretionary use of his office;

your federal law-enforcement agencies chose to…

Oh sorry, wrong post!  This is part two of the Kanick/Kolonich Exchange (KKE) wherein I rebut Reboot’s indifference toward the drafting of a CB.

Screen Shot 2013-04-18 at 8.26.03 PM

I have not Reboot’s deep art gallery, but I can go toe-to-toe with him on Dr. Strangelove screencaps.
A prize will be awarded to the reader who comes up with Sterling Holloway’s classic line from this pic.
And that prize is the solemn pride that must be yours for your mastery of classic American cinema.


In case you missed it, Kolonich is mezza mezza on whether a CB should be taken by the Browns at #6:

In the name of Cary Williams – NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  I contend the following:

1. If Dee Milliner was such a top prospect, why would he fall ALL THE WAY to Number Six?
2. Assuming that #1 was a grand bit of exaggeration, I give you the following:
3. They don’t make first round cornerbacks like they used to.
4. They don’t really need to.

I’m going to take the liberty of contorting Dave’s argument in a way that works for me.  It just makes it easier and at the same time this method of debate can serve as a demo should I ever need to present bona-fides on my potential as a radio talk show host.

  • Drafting by position of need is wrong-headed.
  • Cornerback as a position isn’t that important due to changes in offensive and defensive scheming.

Taking them one by one.

Drafting by position of need is dumb.


Skrine side.

This, I think, is NOT Dave’s main point but a corollary one in need of attention.  I daresay, Dave and I agree that Buster Skrine, starting CB, represents the most vulnerable, exploitable starter on the team… thus CB is the greatest need.

Let’s play it out and see what happens if it is not addressed and in our role-play, Kolonich is Jay Gruden:

If DK is offensive coordinator for the Bengals, he has already started working on the many ways he can isolate AJ Green (6’4″), Mohammed Sanu (6’2″), and Marvin Jones (6’2″) on Skrine (5’9″).  And it’s still April.  By the fall, DK will have a play where Jermaine Gresham (6’5″) goes in motion wide to what is now called the ‘Skrine Side.’

Moral:  You gotta patch your holes.

Are there many ways to patch holes?  Theoretically, yes.

But my perspective is informed by our long regional nightmare at Right Tackle several years ago.  Ryan Tucker retired.  He was followed by Kevin Shaeffer, John St. Clair, and Tony Pashos.  They were acquired as free agents under thinking similar to DK’s:  ‘You don’t spend a high draft pick on a RT.  You just don’t.’  And while it’s true that Tyson Clabo was undrafted,,, some teams just don’t have that kind of luck.  We don’t have to do research on the number of undrafted-Browns-Pro-Bowlers to know that the Browns are among the unlucky.

The Browns have holes at CB, FS, TE, and OG.  The Browns are strong at defensive front, OT, WR.  I think CB is the biggest hole on the team; but I’ll be ok if they opt to plug one of the other holes at #6.

I will f***ing scream if, at #6, we draft a 6-3-ish, 300-lb-ish, DT/DE-ish guy to go along with Rubin, Taylor, Bryant, Hughes, Winn.


42-13 says CBs matter.

CB:  not that important anymore.

Let’s take a step back and think about today’s NFL.  Every week is a war and every week gets a game plan.  Every (most) game plan is keyed on finding an exploit.  As we discussed above, you don’t need to be Mike Martz to find the exploit in the current Browns defensive roster.

But let’s talk about CB in particular.  Let’s talk about nickel becoming, effectively, a base defense.  (Capn Munnerlyn visited!!)  Let’s talk about shrimpy-but-quick CBs who specialize in being the shrimpy-nickel-slot defender.


Here’s who I want to talk about.  The guy who has and does and forever more will own Jim Harbaugh:

Pete Carroll knows CBs are important.  And none of these shrimpy CBs either.


Canty: the force behind the Browner/Sherman duo.

Recognize the guy to the left?  Why would you?  He sucked and was out of the league in three years.  But this guy is actually the key to the dominating force that is the current Seahawks defensive backfield.

The guy is Chris Canty.  He was a 5’9″ short-armed cornerback who Pete Carroll drafted in the first round for the Patriots in 1997.  We can only surmise that Pete was trying to repeat the magic of 5’9″ Aaron Glenn (who Carroll drafted while with the Jets).

How does Canty relate to the most dominating defensive backfield in today’s NFL?

Well Canty was such an abysmal failure that Carroll resolved then and there never to get a shrimpy CB again.  Here’s the proof, the d-backs Carroll has drafted/acquired since Canty (current starter in bold):

  • 1998:  Tebucky Jones, 6’2″ (22nd);
  • 2010:  (All-Pro) Earl Thomas, 5’10″/210lbs (14th) <–not tall, but is big;
  • 2010:  (Probowl) Kam Chancellor, 6’3″ (133rd);
  • 2011:  Byron Maxwell, 6’0″ (173rd);
  • 2011:  (All-Pro) Richard Sherman, 6’3″ (154th);
  • 2011:  (Probowl) Brandon Browner, 6’4″ (undrafted);
  • 2012:  Jeremy Lane, 6’0″ (172nd);
  • 2012:  Winston Guy, 6’1″ (181st).

    Screen Shot 2013-04-18 at 9.35.40 PM

    Seahawks pts/allowed: 15.3.  A full touchdown less than the median.

Now then.  Can we agree that Seattle has the best defense?  NO?  Well check the stats first… yes, that’s Seattle looking like a statistical anomaly by averaging almost two full points less than the second best defense.  But leave the stats aside:  what do your eyes tell you?  If you’ve watched them, you know the Seahawks are the most intimidating defense.

Why?  Is it their front?  (Oh look!  They run a 4-3!  WHAT DINOSAURS!!)  Well even with the pickup of Cliff Avril, I don’t think Red Bryant, Tony McDaniel, Brandon Mebane, and Avril register as a classically dominating front four.  The 24M expenditure on the front reflects this.

Is it the linebackers?  Bobby Wagner is looking like a nice MLB and he’s flanked by KJ Wright and Heath Farwell.  But not quite name brands, are they?

No.  The Seahawks are number one because they bring four absolute beasts in the defensive backfield:  Sherman, Chancellor, Thomas, Browner.  They demonstrate that d-backs matter.  Even #2 cornerbacks; even strong safeties.


But Kanick:  Chancellor, Sherman, Browner were all late picks?  Why burn #6 there?
Answer:  the days of finding big athletic d-backs late in the draft ended at halftime of the Seahawks/Niners game in December with the score 28-6.


Dave, we’ve talked about this in the past w.r.t. Shurmur’s 1983-brand of WCO.  We agreed.

Don’t follow trends, set them.

Now that Pete Carroll (of all people) has shown how a big d-backfield can not just win, but dominate, I have to say:

Why in the wide wide world of sports would we NOT get the best -and biggest- possible d-backfield guy available?


Frankly, after writing this, I might adjust my earlier piece touting big/tall/long/fast Xavier Rhodes as the pick.  NOW I think I want to take Alec Ogletree and convert him back to his original position when he started at Athens:  Safety.

Hah, don’t laugh.. Kam Chancellor anyone?

No that would be outlandish, Kanick.

And with the 6th pick, the Browns select… Sharrif Floyd.

Because you can’t have too many pass-rushers!



  1. bupalos says:

    More good stuff Kanick. Keep rolling! The only thing I’d quibble with is the idea that you’d want to stay away from any smallish db’s. There are some smaller guys that play big, and there’s no reason to overlook that and get too caught up in numbers. I’ll take Joe Haden’s tackling over 30 more pounds and 3 more inches any day. But I do like the idea of strong tacklers that can get off blocks all over the field.

    • jimkanicki says:

      welp the DB corps is:

      bademosi, 6’0″
      barnes, 6’1″
      gipson, 5’11”
      haden, 5’11”
      hagg, 6’1″
      miller, 5’8″
      owens, 5’9″
      k.richardson, 5’11”
      skrine, 5’9″
      wade, 5’10”
      ward, 5’10”

      so it could stand to be bigger… but 100% agree they have to be ballers. along those lines, i saw one report on xavier rhodes that he played soft (and i’ve seen a half dozen like reports on kerry rhodes)… based on this, i’ve cooled it on the draft x. rhodes talk.

Comments are closed.

Cheddar Bay Leaderboard

Cheddar Bay pick frequency.

Promoting blogs and things.

. . . . . . . . . .

Recent Posts


%d bloggers like this: