I am seeing more and more reports that we are interested in Watson, Mitch, now I see Fournette is being mentioned.

You have to wonder how much is BS and how much might be stuff floated by us because we really do want to trade out of the top pick.

I have been in the Garrett camp as long as anyone, but, everything has a price. Our FO is value oriented. Say the Bears actually think we are going to take their guy, or the Jags, or SF for that matter.

We can stick to the Bears at #3. Say we could trade down to them. What would the price be? A swap of 1st's this year, a second this year and a first next year. Maybe more?? Giving up Garrett would cost a premium.

Would Allen plus the bounty be a better move for the team?


Again, I want Garrett, but I also understand that everything is for sale if the price is right.

i'll be upset if we take watson or fournette ... it's garrett or trade back IMO

This happens every year this time of year. There is nothing to talk about so every rumor becomes a story. Nothing has changed.

Oh, I agree. This isn't about taking someone other than Garrett at #1. That would be stupid when you can trade the pick.

This is about that would it take to move down, and I am not even talking about dropping out of the top 10. The names being floated aren't guys who are going to be around at 20.

What would the price be to drop down 3-4-5-6-7, then project who we could get and what we would get to make the trade?

Probably so. I just get tired of hearing about how our FO sucks.

Then again, maybe we do want to drop. Maybe we see the value in doing so as long as it isn't too far down. We really couldn't take Hooker or Adams at #1 over Garrett. We could take then at say 5 or 6 and get them in addition to much else.

I honestly feel we are looking at next year to get a QB. If I am right, we are interested in having a load of top picks next year. We already have three 2nd round picks, or is it four? I really feel we want another 1st so we can trade both the 1st rounders and maybe all of the 2nd rounders to get a QB.


Seems to me that trading down would give us a lot of picks.

If we dropped to, say #5 ... I'd want Hooker

Trading down has always been an option. This front office values picks, if we could drop down only a few spots and get a deal like we did last year I think we would do it. Teams haven't really ever traded up that high (and given up that much compensation) for non-QBs.

Also, getting someone else's first round pick for 2018 would then hopefully allow us to get the elusive QB because next year looks loaded as of right now.

(I do not agree with the above strategy.)

Anyone but Garrett and a Hole lot , lot , lot of Fans are gong to loss it !

I have just settled myself on Garrett, but if someone offers a kings ransom and we get hooker with it i would be ok with that ...

For what it's worth, I saw this article come accross my Twitter feed and it was suggesting that we trade #1 and a second next year for AJ McCarron, #9, a second rounder this year and their first rounder next year.

I dunno, if we could pickup at 9 and 12 + a second rounder this year and a first rounder next year for Garret and a #2 next year?

I think I'd have to think very hard about that trade.

It was just some guy filling space, but man it was certainly interesting.

I don't believe it. I think they are drumming up stories because it's that time of year.

I do, however, believe the latest that we may trade up from 33 for a player (Mahomes?) or more collateral for JG. OR, it is part of a smokescreen to help get NE talking for the 12?

that's a lot of moving pieces. I'm not sold on McCarron, but if Hue wants him I'd trust his knowledge

As would I.

I would be upset if we let a potential beast like Garrett go elsewhere. I really don't care what other teams offer us in terms of draft picks. We have plenty of those, what we don't have is very many impact players at vital positions.

Draft a running back at #1, oh boy.

x2

We better get a truckload if we trade out... I'd eventually understand but I'd be ticked.... Just take garrett

No way I do that. Not even close to enough value for me. McCarron is nothing, adds nothing to the trade.

That has to be 100% BS. There are so many unsourced tweets and articles. It is all speculation, rumor milling and fabrication to stir up interest and excitement in the draft.

Only if Jim Brown is available ...

By swapping 2nds, you're basically saying McCarron is the cost to move from #9 to #1.

Which means they (basically) think AJ McCarron is worth the #5 pick overall.

K.

Here are my thoughts:

1st Garrett is a generational athlete. I don't think that can be disputed. His size, speed, strength combination - WOW

What are my questions and concerns?

Will this generational athlete become a generational football player?
If I "knew" he was going to be a Lawrence Taylor type player then trading out of the number 1 pick wouldn't even be a consideration. Early in the Myles Garrett thread there was question of his motor/taking plays off/not finishing plays/?lazy. After a lot of consideration, I don't think any of those are accurate descriptions of what people are seeing. I don't think that he is lazy. What I think brought that up is that he doesn't play angry. LT played angry. Ray Lewis played angry. Seems like all the truly great defensive players in NFL history played with that anger and intensity that I just don't see in Garrett. Does that mean he can't or won't become one of the greatest DE of all time? No, but it is the 1st chink in the armor of what was considered the "perfect prospect" at one point in time.

Next is the Trade up for me Jerry video. In and of itself, the video doesn't bother me. The small issue is that he clearly wants to be a Dallas Cowboy. Raises a concern, after his rookie contract ends will he even consider resigning with us or will he just want to become a Cowboy? Yes we can franchise him but that extends him to a 7 year Brown. Big concern? No. Just another small chink in the armor.

The Mike and Mike thing. Refusing to go on Mike and Mike because Booger McFarland had made some critical comments about his play. Makes me wonder if he thin skinned. This I think bothers me the most.

There are some other things out there that make me think: This is a weird dude. Again, not a big issue but another concern. Also makes me wonder if football is a clear priority in his life.

Without those issues, I don't even consider trading out of #1. If we stay at #1, then I don't see how he isn't the pick. But with these concerns, I would consider trading down for the right deal.

So what would the right deal be.
1st, I would only trade down to #5 maybe #6. My top 5 players are Garrett, Solomon Thomas, Jamal Adams, Malik Hooker and Jonathon Allen. So that is 5. I say maybe down to 6. That is because I have yet to determine my feelings on Derek Barnett. Some people are really high on him. On paper his stats look great. On film, he didn't stick out to me but I have only had a chance to watch one quarter of his play. So at this point, I have him as a maybe.

Next, what would it take to trade down from #1 to another one of those other top 5-6 slots?
Starts with their 1st next year AND their 2nd this year AND their 2nd next year.
That would be the starting point in the negotiation and represents the minimum offer to entice me into discussions.

Would anyone give up that much for a non Qb?
I doubt it, but who knows.
I never thought anyone would give up a 1st for Trent Richardson.
I never thought the RG3 package would be what it was.
So stranger things have happened.

Long and short of it, I would need to be overwhelmed to trade down, but I would for the right offer.
And that speculated Cincy offer? Not even enough to give me hesitation.

Just my 2 cents on the topic.

... for what it's worth, I don't like that trade because it would be the bengals, and also, because two 2nd's are needlessly in there to confuse things, and also AJ McCarron Ain't anything special, and also you'd have to play against whomever they took at #1 twice a year, (see Julio Jones' 8 year+ career)
... and also for what it's worth, I mean I don't like (the thought of the pick of Garrett at 1) but i'll just watch what the Browns do, (maybe they'll find another Justin Gilbert clone) either way, it's their decision all I can do is watch,
But!
I clicked on here, to say, It's Tuff reading that paragraph in the quote, It's tuff hearing if you actually believe that,
I'm pretty sure I've read that same kind of thought at least most of the past 11 years, if not every single one of em.
To what avail.

Do you have some actual quotes to back that up? I mean, mac bashes them all the time. There are a couple of other guys..Squires and one other guy I can't remember, but who else?

Seems to me that a ton of people are praising them rather than bashing them. And we just came off of a 1 and 15 season.

Let me put it this way............I'm tired of reading how great they are when they haven't proved jack squat yet.

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/851968451417714689



https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/851970308458164224

Is Sashi driving up the price for the #1 pick? He knows he'll get more if QB is key.

Does 49ers get nervous moving up one to get their QB? Browns fall to #2 still getting Garrett and a 2nd round or 1st round next year.

Unless we suck enough to flat-out earn the #1 pick again in 2018 the best QB in the draft will be going to someone else. And the guy I think we're all thinking about may just return to school intead of entering the draft.

But you're still probably right.

Much focus is on Darnold. But, don't turn your heads on Josh Allen, Wyoming. He may well surpass Darnold as the #1.

We should have enough capital to move up to 1 if we need to.

I think the depth of edge talent makes trading out possible. McKinley, Thomas, Barnett, Willis, Harris. I see the logic - pick up our QB or safety a few slots down and still get premier talent on the edge. Only as long as we make like bandits on the deal.

The interview with Sashi a wee while back stated they had spent lots of time running draft scenarios. It's one area I trust they will be prepared and not be 8-balled.

Myles Garrett - DL - Player

ESPN's Adam Schefter reports Cleveland "has not made up its mind" with the No. 1 overall pick, and some Browns executives like Myles Garrett while others prefer Mitchell Trubisky.
Additionally, Schefter had an NFL executive text him to "not be surprised" if Texas A&M's Garrett is not selected with the top pick. Garrett has been the overwhelming favorite to be the first player off the board to the Browns for months now, but Trubisky appears to be picking up steam. Cleveland obviously is desperate for a quarterback, but it would be hard to see them passing on Garrett.

Related: Browns
Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter Apr 11 - 9:36 PM

MAKES SENSE TO ME ...

It does make sense, but only if Mitch pans out.

Interesting times.

And that is why I am staying away from talking about the FO so much and trying to have a football discussion about where we stand in the upcoming draft and trying to sift through all the rumors...you know, trying to figure out which ones have some traction and which one seem like pure smoke.

No thoughts on that?

https://twitter.com/DawgsByNature/status/851978336536600576

I do ... ... here's what i think is true ...

- it all hinges on JG ... I think there going to throw moneyball and analytics to the curb and offer the 12 and maybe as much as a 2nd this and next year .... maybe not that much ..... but i think we all ready have a starter offer on the table .... and i think we will make a significant run at JG ...

SF may also be a player here ... it may take the #2 but if Shanny thinks he can be a legite franchise guy under his tutelage ... then i see no LOGICAL REASON he wouldn't give up the two for him .. anyone know where there at cap wise? ...

I think Hue really wants him ....

- i think were going to draft MG at #1 .. I think we wil entertain offers but won't get what we want ... i believe there is a few in the org that see what I see in Mitch .. if we don't get JG they will lose ... if they do win ... Mitch is in play at #2 for SF ... so we can't trade down if we want him ... I'm dreaming there ... thats not going to happen ...

- i think us taking Watson at 12 if he's there is real ... if he's gone I think Mahomes will be in play at 12 .... if not then Webb at 33 ....

Thats what makes sense to me and what I believe to be true ...

I hope when all is said and done those executives get FIRED.

I actually would fire them right away....pffff

I wouldn't dare to guess if the rumors are true or not. I have no inside information as to what their plans are.

I can only say that I hope the Browns use the first pick of the draft on Myles Garrett. I would be extremely upset if they took Trub w/the first overall pick. I would be disappointed if they traded down.

Here is an article from the 49ers perspective:

Same... I am going to be cursing up a storm if we take Trub at 1. I get it if we trade down, I would be upset but if we get great value it's an easier pill to swallow.

Only obtaining an additional first in 2018 would keep me from having a stroke.

"...despite the consensus saying there’s no sure-fire franchise quarterback in spring’s crop."

While I agree that there is general consensus that Miles Garret is the #1 pick and hence there is no QB worth the #1, I dispute the consensus of no sure-fire franchise QB's, because there are a large number of analysts scouts and coaches who think Deshaun Watson is a bona fide QB.

Never liked the "next year draft crop is better than this year", which IMHO is like the backup QB infatuation.

Amazing how for some winning the national football title can be detrimental to a players career….

How can anyone justify drafting a QB with 13 College starts at #1 .. Look I like Trib but there is no rational for that !

the only way I'll "accept" our decision is if we get a ton of picks in order to move out of #1. If we don't think Garrett is a franchise pass rusher, fine. But then get a boatload of assets in return.

If we simply draft Trubisky at #1 I'll be angry. To the point I may just give up

All pre draft BS - Sports Journalist have to write about something.

Look I'm sure we are listening to all offers so your Schefter and others here we are listening, talking...and then they let their imagination run.

Its common sense we will listen. If somebody in the top 10 gives us a boat load of return so they can move up and take Garrett we just might take that offer! All this we will take a QB or RB is just silly talk.
jmho

realistically, which teams in the top 10 would want to move up to #1? And what would we accept in return?

It would have to be their top 10 pick plus their 2nd rounder and their 2018 first round pick...AT THE LEAST.
That is where we would seriously be thinking of the trade out of #1 nothing short of that.

jmho

In some cases, I believe the rumors are started by the Browns front office.

It can be a good maneuver by the Browns FO, in an attempt to generate discussion and/or gauge interest in the Browns #1 pick..floating a "trial balloon" is common practice in politics and can be useful to see if any teams might be interested in a trade up to the #1 spot.

It does not mean the Browns are going to trade the #1 pick...it's just a fishing trip to see if there is any interest in trading up.

As someone pointed out, everything has a price..if a team goes crazy jumping at the offer, willing to make a Ricky Williams type offer, we would listen. It would take an overwhelming offer to pass on Garrett, imo.

I think a lot of teams would want Garrett.

I think that's a very likely possibility.

Good post mac, and I agree.

Interesting take by a real scout:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27027...paign=editorial

Hue versus Sashi about a quarterback mmmm.

Who?

I know his college coach. Billy Joe Jim Bob, or whoever, said as much. Pretty much said the same things about Watson as he did about Tajh Boyd when he came out.

But who else is in this "large number"?

I think all 31 would, but would they want him THAT badly? like to give up what it would cost?

They can accumulate picks from now until doomsday but if you NEVER select any impactful football players their doomsday and this franchises as well will be nigh...

Thanks for sharing ... Good read from a pro ....

Not even a little surprised if Sashi and Hue clash on what to spend on a QB .... QB's NEVER fit well into moneyball or analytics ... hopefully I'm wrong here and Sashi gives in ... there's proof from FA he is willing to do that ... NO WAY Zietler or Trottier made moneyball or analytical sense ... NO WAY .... thats a good sign ... U can also throw the offers to the safeties that were the best out there and the offer to Pryor witch we think was the best out there ....

Those are GREAT SIGNS .... now we just gotta pray they can evaluate talent ...

Or they know it is impossible to properly value offensive linemen coming out of college and wanted to sign known entities.

It's not about "giving in" to one side. It's about being on the same damn page, which may actually be working here in Cleveland for once. I agree the Zietler deal isn't much an analytical one, and more of what Hue knows from his time in Cincy-- that, and he is a damn good guard. Trotter, I don't know.

The Osweiler deal was a deal that falls more in in line with the FO approach.

What an interesting thought.....coaches and FO working together during FA. Or even better, analytics, as to quote Podesta, Sashi (or both), "a tool" to complement the football people and their decision process. No one "giving in", just on the same page....hopefully.

I don't want my house destroyed, please don't pick Trub. I beg you Brown's front office.

IMO, the Tretter deal probably was analytical ... I mean, it was a gamble due to his health, but he's young, versatile, and has not reached his potential. If he works out, it's a great deal.

Plus, we knew getting OL in FA is the best approach. They're known quantities and this year's draft is heavy in DB and pass rush .. we'll go heavy there

Starting to look like the Browns will take Garrett then try to work a trade in front of the Bills to get Trubisky.

That means a deal with the Bengals. It would take the equivalent of a later third rounder to move to that spot. Which is doable.

I am still hoping for a deal on Garoppolo and believe that it is still possible. But you have to have and plan B and C.

Plan B I believe is moving ahead of the Bills for Trubisky.

Plan C is Mahomes later in round one.

Based on Mike Greenberg, who is diehard NYJ fan ... he said they'd take Trubisky if he's there. So we'd have to probably get in front of them to be safe

I really do think a trade up for Trubisky is in the cards. I think the team could be Tennessee just in case the Browns think NYJ likes someone.

I don't see the Bengals trading with Cleveland to potentially hand them over a possible franchise QB. But, you never know.

If you are trading pack into the top five to take Trubisky, you should just take him at #1.

Yeah, trading up for Trub is dumb IMO. In fact, I wouldn't take him at 12, nor would I take Watson, Mahomes, Webb, etc. I don't like any of the QBs. I want to take the best play maker at 1, 12, 33, etc. Just load up our talent

Agreed. Don't see Trub getting past the Jets at six, so it would have to me the Titans, IMO.

Just the idea smacks of desperation, and while we may be desperate, it's not the time to act desperately.

This is when I'm glad we have someone like DePodesta in the front office. It's all about process with him, there is no desperation. Try to make the correct decision every time and don't let the noise affect you.

the idea of staying at 1, passing on Garrett, and taking Trubisky makes me ill

If their plan is to draft Trubisky they won't take him @ 1 they will trade down within the top 5 ... JMHO

Why is this your opinion?

I mean, if they view him as the answer at QB. Sure shot, franchise guy ... then you take him at #1 and don't risk anything. What if you trade back to #4 and the Jets jump you? Or trade back to #3 and the Bills jump you?

IMO, you don't trade back to take Trub (or any QB)

I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the Browns brass could think there is a legit chance they can land both. I think it's is easier to draft Garrett #1 and then trade for Trubisky than to draft Trubisky and trade up for Garrett.

I think the Browns love Garrett but recognize they accumulated enough assets to move up still and get Mitch.

Essentially, to have your cake and eat it too.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/AllbrightNFL/status/852210934777094146

Smoke and mirrors.

I don't believe anyone would dispute that statement, Memphis. However, what if they did select Trub at #1 and then traded back up, but not for Garrett, perhaps Barnett or Thomas (which would cost them less in picks)?

I'm not sure that would cost them less picks. Barnett & Thomas could easily be selected in the same range if the Browns did want to move back up.

Along the same vein....


https://twitter.com/pdomo/status/852214041741332480

yeah, it was smart to sign FA OL this year ... it's a bad, bad class

"Assuming" then that Garrett would go at #2, both Thomas and Barnett would fall a bit, perhaps in the 4-8 range. I would expect Thomas to go a (very) few spots before Barnett. Obviously it will cost more to get Garrett at #2 than the other two a few spots lower...

Browns Stun Draft -Take 5th rated QB over Consensus No 1 Pick Courtney Brown


NFL Draft Year 2000 - ROUND 1

SEL # TEAM PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 Cleveland Browns Tom Brady QB Michigan
2 Washington Redskins LaVar Arrington OLB Penn State
3 Washington Redskins Chris Samuels T Alabama
4 Cincinnati Bengals Peter Warrick WR Florida State
5 Baltimore Ravens Jamal Lewis RB Tennessee
6 Philadelphia Eagles Corey Simon DT Florida State
7 Arizona Cardinals Thomas Jones RB Virginia
8 Pittsburgh Steelers Plaxico Burress WR Michigan State
9 Chicago Bears Brian Urlacher MLB New Mexico
10 Baltimore Ravens Travis Taylor WR Florida
11 New York Giants Ron Dayne RB Wisconsin
12 New York Jets Shaun Ellis DE Tennessee
13 New York Jets John Abraham LB South Carolina
14 Green Bay Packers Bubba Franks TE Miami (Fla.)
15 Denver Broncos Deltha O'Neal CB California
16 San Francisco 49ers Julian Peterson OLB Michigan State
17 Oakland Raiders Sebastian Janikowski K Florida State
18 New York Jets Chad Pennington QB Marshall
19 Seattle Seahawks Shaun Alexander RB Alabama
20 Detroit Lions Stockar McDougle T Oklahoma
21 Kansas City Chiefs Sylvester Morris WR Jackson State
22 Seattle Seahawks Chris McIntosh T Wisconsin
23 Carolina Panthers Rashard Anderson FS Jackson State
24 San Francisco 49ers Ahmed Plummer CB Ohio State
25 Minnesota Vikings Chris Hovan DT Boston College
26 Buffalo Bills Erik Flowers DE Arizona State
27 New York Jets Anthony Becht TE West Virginia
28 Indianapolis Colts Rob Morris LB Brigham Young
29 Jacksonville Jaguars R.Jay Soward WR USC
30 Tennessee Titans Keith Bulluck LB Syracuse
31 St. Louis Rams Trung Canidate RB Arizona


What I KNOW... is that NO ONE one knows.

From Erving Goffman's Strategic Intelligence:


Browns are just trying to get people to think we're not into Garrett, but possibly their target. In the end I think we're gonna take Garrett, they just wanting to test the waters now.

fixed ...

They must have not stunned the draft since no one else took him in the first round!

My thoughts exactly, Brent....:


https://twitter.com/brentsobleski/status/852130989618995200

But Spergon didn't Wynn.

The NFL likes drama.

The Draft is a TV show.

You don't want the premier of it to be a known fact.

Just a thought.

I don't think analytics plays nearly as big a role in this as many believe. It's like you and others have said before, baseball is one thing, football is another. In football each and every player plays a vital role in determining the success or failure of each play. You can't just look at a player in isolation, add up his stats, look at them a little differently and calculate his value to the team.

Do I believe the Browns are more focused on analytics than before, yeah. But are analytics playing a huge role in calling all the shots, I don't think so. If we had hired anyone else to fill his role besides DePodesta, then analytics would not even have been a talking point. But since we hired the "Moneyball" guy who was featured in a book and a movie everyone jumped up laughing that the Browns are going to try to win football by the numbers. yuk yuk yuk

Although there have been some Moneyball strategy tendencies, especially in the beginning, clearing costs and changing the culture for instance, I think the things you've noticed that don't make moneyball or analytical sense is just business as usual.

When it's all said and done, if the Browns do become a successful perennial contender, still, no one will know how they did it because they've been too focused on analytics. Teams will try to copy it, but it won't work because they'll rely too much on analytics thinking the Browns did that.

Is this me being the chief FO defender? haha NO. This is me giving my opinion on dividing up the use of analytics and real world football.

Why am I talking about this?

They shoulda forced him to change his name to Spergon Lost.

I prefer Notgon' Wynn.

Me too now, but it took me a couple minutes to get it.

Just to clarify the trade would look like this:

CLE
#1 2017
Second round pick 2018

CIN
McCarron
#9 2017
Second Round pick 2017
First Round pick 2018

So it wouldn't be McCarron for to move up, it would be McCarron and a first rounder next year (assuming the second round picks wash).

It is definitely not even a rumor, just speculation, but I'd be very tempted, IF Hue says McCarron is his guy.

You wouldn't trade until the team you were trading with was on the clock. There would be no jumping. If your guy is still left and your trade partner is on the clock there's nothing anyone can do. (Other than the league vetoing the trade for some reason.)

They are dumb if that is what they believe. If there is a QB available who you think is worth a top five pick, then you don't screw around. You take him.

I understand your reasoning, and I know I've said that before about certain QBs and draft situation. I don't think that's applicable based on what they have in assets to move up, if they want to. Assuming SF and CHI aren't drafting QBs, #4 gets a bit curious. Hell, even if teams wanted to move up to draft #2 or #3, guess who is getting a call to see if they are interested to trump the deal based on their assets?...its absolutely unbelievable the flexibility the Cleveland Browns have this year.

I think our front office values draft picks too much to move up from 12 to 4. Everything they have done points to gaining more draft assets, not giving them up.

Also, I've seen the Bears linked to Trubisky quite a bit.

https://twitter.com/TurfShowTimes/status/851978434926575616



https://twitter.com/TonyPauline/status/852129216925753346

This summary of the whole situation is worth a read:

http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2017/4/12/1...-mitch-trubisky

I would believe just the opposite. Hue wants a QB and the FO wants Garrett. I hope we get Garrett.

The fact that the rumor is our "analytical" FO wants to over draft a QB is hilarious.

It just leads me to believe the whole thing is made up.

That isn't true. That makes no sense. It isn't like we would be wasting our time with Garrett.

Maybe we want both. We have Garrett. Now it is time to find a way to draft Mitch. I seriously doubt any team before the Jets would take a QB with the talent on the board. If they do, so be it, it wasn't meant to be.


I agree about trading with the Titans at 5. I have read they are looking to trade back.

There are a few value charts out there. On one the value of the Titans pick is 1700. The value of our pick at 12 is 1250. A 450 point difference.

Our pick in the 2nd, at #33 is worth 580 points. Our pick at #52 is worth 380, so it is out of play.

If it was all fair and square, we swap first rounders, give the Titans our first 2nd rounder, and the Titans give us a later pick, but it would probably work out that we would have to swap 1sts, give up #33 and maybe a 4th

Question: Who in the Browns Organization (Not the Media) said that they were contemplating taking Trubisky over Garrett at number 1? ... NFL Network is ripping the Browns a new one tonight for even thinking of such a thing ...

It's only going to get worse between now and the draft. Slow / No news means the media fills the void with complete speculation..... Get ready for more "It's rumored that ..." --
"It's being speculated that ...." -- both of which then lead to .... "It's being reported that .... "

About time to put the blinders on because there's so many conflicting reports, it's hard to keep up with them lol.

I heard on NFL that Hue wants a QB and FO wants Garrett. I hope we take Garrett and then at #12 take OJ Howard, unless Fornette is there of course But if Hue wants a QB and he's sure of his guy, we have to get that QB. It's Hue's ass if the guy doesn't work out..... He better be sure...

It is very likely that this is all bull anyway.

Maybe all of this nonsense and speculation is really to cover up a trade with NE > #1 for JG?

I mean, if Hue BELIEVES the guy is a franchise QB for 10+ years then you would use the 1, right? If there was a rookie they felt was worth #1 they would choose him over Garrett. Maybe, they feel that way about JG?

On a side note....imagine NE with Garrett?

Could be, but I don't trade Garrett for JG.

I don't see JG Elway'ish or Manning'ish.


I do see Garrett Selmom'ish or Smith'ish.

The closer we get, the more I think we're about to trade down for Fournette or Trubisky. Then again I'm hoping this is just all smoke screen

I am sure we have a standing offer to the Pats for JG. Possibly this talk about Mitch is to help nudge them into taking our deal.

I just want to throw out what I heard on ESPHN Radio the other morning about the Browns:

The guy said:

"do not thing the Kirk Cousins trade if off the table even for a minute. The Cousins to Browns trade makes 100% sense. the Red Skins can get a high draft choice, and the Browns can get a franchise QB. The Browns have the pockets to pay Cousins the big longterm deal he is after, and its crystal clear Cousins won't be a Redskin after this year if he stays. Washington stands to lose him with no compensation. That simply doesn't make sense. As we inch closer to draft day, it wil become more apparent to Washington that they run the risk of losing Cousins and being left empty handed. Its for these reason i won't be suprised if Washington moves Cousins. Trades like this don't usually happen until draft day, but Cousins to the Browns makes the most sense for both parties. Don't be suprised to see Cleveland trade the #1 overall to Washing for Cousins. He has been on of the best Qb in the league the last 2 years in the overall superior NFC conference. He is a difference maker day one for Cleveland. We will just have to see if the deal happens. I'd say talks have been going back and forth for sometime, but teams generally keep these things quiet till draft day"

Nothing is off the table until the Browns actually make the pick or trade....they are def entertain offers and making calls...i think if they can get Cousins i think they use #1 instantly and don't think twice about it....im looking forward to see what happens on draft day.

I hope we get Garrett too. April 27th can't get here fast enough!

I would not trade the #1 pick for Cousins even if Garrett wasn't in this draft.

#12. Maybe. Eh. If you twist my arm.

I agree. I don't want anybody over Garrett in this draft. None are good enough.

To me it is kind of like trading LeRoy Selmon or Reggie White for Joe Flacco.


Flacco is a nice QB, but come on!!

I wonder how much of this Cousins rumor is to try to get NE to play ball with us? OR, how much is simply that the journalists have nothing better to write about so they are stirring the pot to get people to click on the article.

The Cousins rumor is not a rumor. It is a thing a random person said on the radio.

Also, journalists have nothing to do right now.

Well that "thing a random person said on the radio" is now being picked up across the web and becoming a rumor:

http://sports.yahoo.com/video/browns-could-trade-no-1-132446782.html

#1 pick and pay a guy 100m dollars. Nonsense.

I'm not saying I disagree with you but that's a very extreme way to try to make a point. It's definitely not like that. Like trading a 5% chance of Reggie white for a 1% chance of Dan Marino or something? Sure. There's way too much uncertainty and odds with prospects to make such a statement. Perhaps I'm just nitpicking though.

Personally I would say it's more like trading cameron wake for Flacco. Both could be roughly equally better or worse than those players. It's impossible to know that now. So the mid point of what they could be is where I look. Wake is clearly far superior but they play different positions.

Lets say they are not convinced of Garrett for some reason. What if they LOVE Malik Hooker and decide he is there #1 guy in a position that we are horrifically bad at. BUT, they don't want to draft him at 1. THEN they trade the 1 with Tenn or NYJ and we move down and take Malik and the draft picks we get from the trade.

Just a thought.

That is the scenario I believe is very possible ... The Browns seem to really like Hooker and would pick up a 1 next year and another 2 this year + getting what may very well be their top guy in Hooker ...

^I've been saying this for a while. Imo hooker is not far off the specimen as a safety that myles is an edge. It doesn't even have to be that they dislike something about myles. If the value of trade compensation exceeds the difference between 2 prospects you desperately want you take the higher value. If hooker(or anyone really)+picks>myles you trade imo.

They could then offer the 12 and 33 (or 52) to NE for JG. If we felt we still needed an edge we could move up and get Barnett or Taco.

Hooker, JG, Barnett/Taco

Not a shabby 1st round.

EDIT: If we did that trade with TN we would have 5, 12, 18, 33, 52, 65!

Why is Tennessee trading up to #1 (and giving up that much compensation) for a non-QB?

Within the league rules, yes, we can trade for Kirk Cousins.

You know what I thought of? Suppose we draft Trubisky at #1 and then O.J. Howard at #12. We don't pick again until #33. That would mean we miss out on all the top D talent in this draft. You don't think that would happen, do you?

For Garrett....a "generational player". To get him I would expect we would ask for their 18 as well. But, I can also see NYJ asking to trade up for a QB. Kinda surprised they haven't inquired about Brock.

Also, this is all hypothetical based on all the rumor articles centering around the Browns trading the 1, taking a QB over Garrett etc. etc.

No way in the WORLD we trade the #1 overall pick for Cousins. I MIGHT see #12 if they give us Cousins and a 2nd. But even that is pushing it. I wouldn't mind if we traded 2 seconds this year and a second next year. That I could live with. But no way #1 overall. Garrett is a stud pass rusher. Likely at least as good as Von Miller. He is a game changer. A guy that can make QB's have happy feet all day long. We haven't had a player like this on the D line since the return. And not in a long time before it. To trade out of #1 I'd want a LOT in return and Cousins alone wouldn't get you even close. Cousins plus the Skins first this year and next year and that might be close.

IF there is a QB that we just HAVE to have then we do have the ammo to take Garrett at #1 and then trade up to #2 or #3 to take the QB we so covet. We are swimming in picks both this year and next. We could give #12 this year plus a 2nd rounder and a pick next year. From 12 to 3 or 4 isn't impossible. I could see that a lot sooner than giving up the #1 or using it for a QB and passing on Garrett. I think this is all bull anyway. I think we are going to draft Garrett and then if Howard is there at 12 take him too. That is two players that are best at their position and almost guaranteed to stud out barring injury of course. Those two players would be a big win for a front office that needs a win badly.

IMO, if we could get Cousins for our #1 and then sign him long term we would be crazy not to. He has started 16 games each of the last 2 seasons, threw for over 4,000 yards in both as well, completion % over 65% in both, over 25 TD's in both, passer rating over 95 in both. We immediately have a legit Franchise QB. He is a much surer thing than MG. We win 8+ with Cousins next season easy, and beyond, can you say the same thing about MG?

I'm sick and tired of losing, and all the regime changes. If Hue doesn't get his franchise QB this offseason he gets fired after year 3. No way he goes into year 2 without HIS guy at QB.

And you stick it to Pryor, because now the Skins have no QB. Just my $0.02.

I doubt the Redskins are ganna consider trading multiple first round picks to move up ever again.

How many QBs in the league are better than Cousins?

I'd take the following over Cousins:

Brady
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Luck
Mariota
Rivers
Carr
Newton
Winston
Ryan
Brees
Prescott
Manning
Wentz
Rodgers
Stafford
Wilson

My opinion 10

That's hilarious.

You can't be serious.

Just because I don't like the idea doesn't mean it isn't possible. I'll only scoff at goofy ideas. That isn't one of them.

I think Cousins is vastly underrated by most of this board. You should do some research and check out his actual stats over the last two years.

Cousins was 5th in QB Rating in 2015 and 7th in 2016. He threw for 29 TDs and 11 pics in '15 and 25 and 12 in '16. Here is the link for 2015 and then just click on "next season" to see what he did in 2016.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2015/passing.htm


Like I say...........he's underrated by many.

If we want Hooker, I'm not sure he makes it to 5. Unless his medical outlook is worse than people have let on, which I am starting to wonder about a little. I was surprised when he wasn't even mentioned in the Draft invitee article on NFL.com, though they have updated the article and gotten rid of the section mentioning Garrett and others opting out to be with family.

I have Cousins in the 3rd tier of QBs. Elite-> Great-> Good. But it's okay that we see him differently. I'll give him more respect when/if he wins a game in/after January. He is in the conversation to move up.

I am curious to see how he does this season. Does he take the jump or hit the slump? Can Pryor and Doctson fill the shoes of D-Jackson and Garcon? How does the contract friction play out?

I might break down and shell out for the all-22 this season so I can give players a better look.

If you have time all-22 is worth it. It can tell you a lot more then TV broadcast, especially about the QB.

I agree 100% on KC, Vers. I have had numerous discussions about this very issue with both my dad and my 16 year old son who both think he is overrated and would be disappointed if we went down that route. JG would be my #1 but, even then he is a gamble as his sample size is so small. KC is battle tested and much more of a for sure thing. We will know what he is capable of doing and what we are getting whereas with JG it is still a question mark.

Bottom line....I would be happy with either a JG or KC deal going down. I would scratch my head if a McCarron deal happened but, as Hue knows him better than anybody I would have to trust it was the right thing (and hopefully not out of desperation).

IF we decide to fill holes on defense and offense and run with Kess and even Brock this year I will be fine with that too. But, I think JG will be harder to entice to come to Cleveland as a FA as he will have many teams vying for him and can choose his city/team. Same with KC. We should have accumulated enough picks though to move back up to #1 in 2018, if needed, to take Darnold, Josh Allen etc., which may actually be in this year's overall plan anyway.

I'd take Cousins over JG 10 out of 10 times. Want no part of McCarron, and I pray that the Trub rumor at 1 is just smoke because they would easily be the dumbest thing this FO has done

You'd take Winston, Prescott, or Wentz over Cousins? I dunno about that at all.

Some of the others are at least debatable based on past seasons that could be abberations or questions about time left in the league.

Brees, Flacco and Manning too. Manning is junk at this point. Brees is 38. Flacco - what the heck did he do last year?

Building a franchise - Cheeseburger is also getting up there in age but dang if he isn't a great QB still. I'd take Cousins though. KC over Brady (he's 40 even if he's the GOAT) Mariota, Rivers, Prescott, and Wilson (I think he's more game manager than great thrower). Even though I liked the potential I saw from Wentz - he's not there by a long way yet and I'd take KC over him too.

There's not many I'd want ahead of Cousins as a basis for building this Browns roster around .... 7. Luck - Carr - Newton - Winston - Ryan - Rodgers and Stafford.

Ahead of Cousins? No on Stafford, maybe on Ryan, yes on everyone else you mentioned.

Can you win a Super Bowl with Kirk Cousins?

Most definitely imo

I think we are just on opposite ends of the Kirk Cousins argument. I think he is an average QB in the perfect situation. I would hate to pay him a ton of money and be hamstrung the way the Ravens are with Flacco.

Well Shanny left town ... we'll see how he looks this year and can see what happens. But he's been good for multiple O coordinators now. SO not sure what other perfect conditions you mean?

Cousins has been with Gruden for a while but he hasn't had too much as in an OL and weapons...

I like Cousins...said he is the only FA QB I would wish for us to go after...if he was a FA - He's like a more finished and consistent Hoyer...good head for the game but more arm talent then Hoyer after 15 yards.

I think we can win with him...at least compared to JG we know exactly what we are getting.

In HUE I TRUST regarding the QB situation.

But if Redskins are losing him after this season...it shouldn't take a ransom to get him...but Shanny just might offer more.

jmho

I disagree on the weapons part. He's had Reed, DJax, and another good, if young, WR (Crowder is his name?). He's fine on weapons. OL, you may be right.

Addition: I also forgot about Garcon.

If he is good, and he has good weapons.... then, unless the OL is utter trash, he & the weapons should be able to make the OL look better.

I'm of the mind that while it is ideal to have all three be good, I believe that if you have two of those three, that can compensate for a lot. Is it possible that he really isn't that good, and the OL is actually decent but looks bad because of him?? I mean, yes, he did better than RG3, but that isn't really saying all that much.

Cousins has been the clear starter for Washington for the last two years. Jay Gruden was the head coach both of those years.

I'm going to be beside myself if we draft a QB at number one. I think many of us diehards will be. Please, just take Garrett.

99% sure that won't be the case...I would suspect we would do a trade down and get some more picks before we would do that.

But if we do - he must be a success to become a Franchise QB outside of Couch we only invested in #22 or later. So I would suspect the odds of success would be much better and heck if we do Get our Franchise QB by 2019 from the pick...It was worth it.
jmho

Lol, this is true. 22 is a cursed pick. But I've been seeing a lot this morning on Trub going to us at 1. Maybe Hue knows something we don't. I'm sure he's seen every throw he's made in college, maybe even had him for two workouts (local guys and his own), talked to his coaches and so on. Probably with Garrett too.

But if this is who they feel is the best player, gotta take him instead of getting cute and hoping to get him later. No one knows what anyone else's board is, so you've gotta play it by yours.

I've seen a lot of articles this morning saying we might take Trub at 1. Maybe there's something there. I was def feeling him at 12, but if he's the guy to take at 1, let's take him. There'll be good players at 12.

QB is hands down the most important position in the game. I'd take a good QB over an elite anything else

EDIT: I also don't think waiting for next year's class makes sense. There'll be a lot of QB needy teams real soon

It is silly season...So the more we hear about Trub at 1 the more I'm convinced it's Garrett. The NFL is all about this draft and wanting to keep everybody guessing. Otherwise we'd have already signed Garrett.

I just read today that the Coaching staff is all over the Garrett pick and that "OWNERSHIP" is the one pushing Trubisky...maybe Dee Likes him...

God help us if Ownership is putting its 2 cents in. Why we ended up with JFF, IMO.

QBs sell more jerseys and fill more seats.. at least temporarily.

I heard today that the Jets would like to trade back from 6 to 12 so I went to the NFL Draft Value Chart @ www.walterfootbal.com ... #6 is worth (1600) so if we made that deal it would cost us #12 (1200)#52 (380)and #164 (25.8) not a whole lot if your QB is there or maybe a FS say from Ohio State named Malik Hooker

I think I'd do that trade today. At 6 we get one of Thomas, Allen, Hooker, Adams, or Howard to go with Garrett, which is pretty much my dream scenario. Worth the 52 pick to me.

I got to tell you clevesteve that Jamal Adams is growing on me, we haven't had an enforcer like that since the late great Eric Turner ...

I'll take Adams over Hooker all day, although I would be pleased with either...

Garrett and one of those two would be a great day one

If that's all it takes to move up from 12 of be game as well.

I think you are wrong. Jimmy isn't a perfect owner. Maybe not even a good owner, but I do believe he allows his hired help to make their own decisions.

I agree. This year I want players who can help day #1.

In this era of average QB's, which will remain, you have to go with the time.

Until the NFL understands the QB's being produced today don't fit the mold they have set, they are always going to be seeking QB's. I said this 10 years ago.

All you have to do is go to a few HS football games this fall on Friday night, then watch some college football on Saturday afternoon and evening.


You don't see any drop-back QB's playing.

The NFL needs to catch up.

I'd dive all over that trade.

Garret and Hooker, yes please.

Garrett and anyone else in the Top 5 basically.

Agreed, give me hooker with garret and it's aweseom

i wouldn't trade up for a safety. stay at 12, and let the people in front of you make the decision easier.

If we do that trade it will be Garret and Trubisky. That is my guess. I don't think we would trade up to get anyone but MT. I feel we should keep our picks and let the draft fall to us because of all the talent and all the holes we have to fill. JMO

Would be nice to see QBs start falling at the top thus pushing more talent our way at pick 12.

That's where I am... there are multiple players I would like to have at 12 and one of them is going to be there.. and I'm not crazy about giving up picks to move up to get any of them particularly.

I'd give up just about anything but the #33 to move up to 4-6 range. The thought of Garrett and Allen on the same D-line just boggles my mind. Then you got danny and og not to mention collins running wild and free and God help the o-line trying to block those 5 players coming in all at once.

Or you could move Og inside and take Soloman or Barnett. It's just sick.

I am with those who don't want to move from from #12. I can see it at any other point in the draft, but moving up to 6 from 12 doesn't give you a much better player. Tweleve is high enough you are still going to have very good players on the board. We have enough holes that I don't believe we need to be targeting positions or players that high in the draft.

Save the picks and maybe move up from 33 to 20 or something like that.

What if a team in the top 10 wants to move up for Garrett? They offer to swap #1s and also give us their 2nd rounder this year, 1st rounder in 2018, and 2nd rounder in 2018

If qbs fall that means more talent has already been taken. If no qb goes before 12 the board looks kinda bad. See our mock draft

I'm fine with that.. as long as we don't move up to pick #22

. Not #22...

I never want to draft at #22 again

The only player in this draft that I would move for would be Howard and I see him going to say , Maybe , the Chargers !

I feel we shouldn't give up any picks in this draft. There are too many good players, too much talent, let the draft come to us. We've tried to force things in the past, moving up and down and how did that work out? Our FO has put us in a good spot with all these picks in a talented draft. It's time to pull the trigger and get that much needed talent we've been lacking. Impact players and talent, can't say it enough.

I agree. I don't want to move up at all, especially in the early part of the draft. There's talent and depth here

+1

I could see us move up into the 2nd and/or 3rd rounds for some specific talent we are targeting.

We will not keep all our rookies this year. Might as well parlay some volume for some quality.

Odds that we move back into the first round unless its for a QB we really want...I doubt it.
jmho

I have Garrett and then Hooker and Adams at the top of my board. There are other good edge rushers and DBs in the first round, but I feel like those three have clearly separated themselves. They also play at our biggest positions of need outside of QB. I'd prefer we have someone full speed in the offense (Kessler) before we go drafting another project QB. If we can get Garrett and one of those safeties, I'm for trading up. I wouldn't use future picks, but we have plenty of picks this year. Probably more than we can effectively work into our roster. I believe that trying to work in 14 rookies was part of our problem last year.

I hear the Howard buzz and I can somewhat get it, but I can't get past the lack of production. The most TDs he has had in a season is 3 (2,0,2,3). If he is such a great player, why was he so under-utilized? Yes, he can block and he's athletic, but that's not the primary reason I'm drafting a TE. I want a TD maker at TE. I'd have liked to see him make more jump ball and contested catches. Most of his big plays are when he is wide open/blown coverages. Plus, I don't feel like TE is that big of a need for us.

I don't want us to draft an RB early. I like Perine/Conner later.

We have 2 LBs I like already.

We've addressed OL already.

The DB class is deep enough we should be able to trade up and still have picks in the mid rounds to add talent.

We might not be able to get a stud 3-tech, but you can't address everything as well as we'd like with the needs that we have and there's a chance we could still get someone like Ogunjobi.

I'd love to come away with Garrett and Adams or Hooker, but I doubt we do that trade for anyone but Trubisky. I wouldn't hate that either, to be honest.

Myles Garrett - DL - Player

Browns EVP Sashi Brown said Cleveland won't announce the No. 1 pick ahead of draft night.
"We feel good about who we're going to pick there," Brown said as he fielded questions at a Wednesday media session. He mostly talked about Texas A&M Myles Garrett and UNC QB Mitchell Trubisky, while also flat-out denying there is any friction or in-house split among the Browns' executives regarding the top pick. Our money is still on Garrett being the choice.
Related: Browns
Source: Marc Sessler on Twitter Apr 19 - 12:32 PM

Be hard to pass but I would set a spot not to trade past like 6-7 ... JMHO

For those who didn't watch, those two were the ones reporters specifically brought up, same with Mixon. The only names I heard him mention freely were from the QB position, and I think it was in response to a QB question. He mentioned the Deshones, Mahomes, and Davis. Having brought them in to private visits and doing their homework or something like that.

But the most talk was of Myles and Mitch because they were the subject of most questions

Pre-Draft Press Conference

Cousins Baddddd


RG3, if he'd stayed, better rrrr


Cousins only a franchise QB in Washington, no other market.


Rant boiled down to 3 lines, (4)

I think the Pros value TE's more than does the college game.


That is a position where you can create a solid mismatch. In college, good teams have a mismatch on the outside most of the time.

I know many go by the antiquated hierarchy of position importance but imo a TE is my #3 behind only qb and edge. Many would argue LT and CB but imo a good cb is easier to avoid than a TE is to shut down and a good Lt isn't nearly as important with the exotic blitzes DC dial up. A balanced OL with no weakness is much more important than any 1 OL. For that matter a TE can even assist a Lt with a chip.

The position requires more variance of skill than any position other than edge imo yet is very devoid of talent at the high end im the nfl. If used properly A great balanced TE is the ultimate chess piece for a good OC.

Trust me...inside the Red Zone...a TD machine.
Anywhere on the field of play...a Play Action fake Nightmare!
jmho

Don't have to preach to me Bro. I am all over Howard. We could run a devestating O using a 2 TE set as our base O with Howard on the field.

We'd have so many ways to attack a D no matter what defensive set they play.

Howard would be our #1 receiver. He'd be like Ozzie. He'd catch 90 balls a year and score a bunch of TDs.

And it's not like DeValve doesn't have experience going out wide either.

He's going to be a interesting read this season. I expect him to be a big part of what we do.

OJ looks like a freak in the highlight videos I watched. I too am very open to him. With our o-line upgrades, OJ and Gary... this gives people like Coleman a chance to step up too. This gives people like Kessler options to get rid of the ball quick to if needed, or deep (since he's claimed to be working hard on the deep ball both on the field and in the weight room) and this helps the RBs get mainly seven man fronts to run on.

I like the idea of safety more if one is there worthy or it, but if we select Howard - I'm screaming almost just as loud!

DeValve flashed a couple times. He's big, he's aggressive and has good hands (going from the few catches he made). . IMO he showed enough to be intriguing. I hate how rookies are written off if they don't have breakout seasons. Sometimes it's warranted, but patience is needed.

He reminds me of Jordan. Who as a rookie/2nd year guy didn't show much. Few flashes.

Then boom.

Hope for the boom.

As long as it doesn't lead to a concussion.

I like his height and wingspan.

He's the only guy I say is an Automatic pick if there at 12...was saying it for a while now even before the top 10 stuff. Why I was upset that Foster failed his drug test.
I was counting on him getting taken before our #12 so that somebody like OJ can actually fall to us...now the odds got worse...

What the hell is this BS?

Mitch Trubisky still a serious candidate for Browns at No. 1, sources say

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Mitch Trubisky is still under serious consideration by the Browns at No. 1, league sources tell cleveland.com.

Despite that Browns head of football operations Sashi Brown gave strong vibes during his pre-draft press conference Wednesday that the Browns have zeroed in on Myles Garrett, they're still strongly considering taking Trubisky there, sources say.

The feeling on the part of the front office, sources say, is that the Browns are ready to draft their quarterback of the future and might not want to risk losing him if they try to trade up or hope he falls to them at No. 12.

Sources have told cleveland.com that the 49ers also like Trubisky and might take him at No. 2. "Don't be surprised,'' said one.

If that's the case, the Browns would likely turn to DeShaun Watson or Patrick Mahomes. But if they believe that Trubisky can be their franchise quarterback, and some in the organization apparently do, they might want to pull the trigger at No. 1.

...more within link

I know it's MKC and she's as plugged in as oil lantern, but how are these rumors still coming out? And what would it benefit the Browns to have this smoke screen? Maybe force the 49ers to trade up to #1 to take Mitchell and we still get Myles at #2? At this point, I want the Browns to announce Myles is our pick and let the 49ers know they're on the clock.

So we really really REALLY might take Trubisky at #1 because we think he's a franchise QB..

But also might "settle" for Kizer or Mahomes?

This is beyond "silly season"

This is just stupid.

Look this is probably bull, but we have been looking for our "Franchise QB" since 1993, so if these guys think MT is it then take him @ #1, we still have #12 and can take a pass rusher or DB there ...

This is nothing more than the NFL telling Cleveland to keep the draft talk exciting. They were upset a few years ago when the #1 team(s) kept signing their players before the draft. They want this big production number with the draft. If we start talking about signing our #1, then it takes away from the draft. Anyway that's MO.

Can't wait for the draft to be over. omg.

NRTU,

If this report is to be believed then you should believe it in its entirety. So, If Hue and Williams both want Garrett and you brought Hue in because of his QB prowess, and you brought Williams in because he's a elite defensive coordinator AND you disregard BOTH of their stated preferences for Garrett, WTF is going on in Berea?

I figure it's to make Chicago and SF nervous. If they can get Chicago to offer a trade maybe they can get SF to match it and gain a future pick and still get Garrett. Doesn't hurt to try.

I've said it before...

But this rumor started with the premise that our FO people, who are very heavy into analytics, wanted to take a QB with 13 college starts over the DE they were already reported to have an "astronomical grade" on..

It's not even a good rumor.

You wanna say we're considering trading down (because we might be) to try to get more picks (what we do) and still get this QB we seem to want? Ok fine.

But this story is just not believable.

Sorry Pastor, that is moronic to take Mitch over Myles.


Right now, at this time, I just want to build with soild, as sure as you can guess pieces.

We can build a winning team on D this year. I want guys who can step in and help us win the opener against the Steelers. Mitch can't do that. He won't play against the Steelers in the opener.


You guys do realize that if we go all in on D this year, we can have a top 5 D that is only going to get better, don't you? This is a very deep defensive class.

Don't draft against the strength of a draft class, draft with it. This isn't hard. It's football. It's a game. This isn't hard to figure out.

OJ Howard is the only player I would consider in the top 12, and it wouldn't be at #1 either..

j/c:

Anyone think all this Trubisky love is being pushed out by the Browns so they hope he is off the board? Basically, so it potentially opens up another available player they like to pick at #12?

That and the hope that the 49ers want him. Trade down one spot, pick up an extra pick, still get Garrett.

In the end it won't work, but it doesn't hurt anything to try.

Garrett is a total lock unless someone offers an rg3 deal.12 is the mystery.

As is 33.

Hopefully we won't screw up and not take Garrett at 1.

I really think they want Trubisky next. I wouldn't be surprised if they trade up to get him. If not, I wouldn't mind if we took another defensive player at 12.

That is from "league sources." What league sources actually know what the Browns are thinking? It's all BS trying to stir interest.

I think they want Watson. I just do not know if they want him at 12 or 33.

The draft is like poker. When you have a weak hand you bet like your hand is strong. When your hand is strong you bet like it is weak.

In the draft you openly talk about players you do not plan to pick and keep quite about the ones you want.

Granted, BPA will win out overall but assuming Myles goes #1, next two priorities would have to be safety and QB.

After Adams and Hooker, there's likely not a safety worth 12.

Most assume Trub will be gonzo by 12 and there seems to be alot of doubt that Watson, Kizer or Mahomes would be worth it that high.

SO if Trub, Adams and Hooker are all gone, what's the play? OJ Howard seems to be gaining momentum but we still have Barnridge plus DeValve showed some good things. If those three are gone, I'm betting we look to trade down.

I think trading down is a real possibility at 12. If last year taught us anything it is this FO will move around when ever the chance arises to accumulate more draft capital.

Garrett is a prize at #1 and unless another team unloads a kings ransom Garrett will be a Brown Thursday.

At number 12 unless a player falls to them that they feel they cannot pass on trade down pick up another 3rd or 4th round pick in the process.

I can see us trading back from 12 too ... however, which player(s) at 12 will be enticing to teams below us?

Maybe if a team falls in love with an OL since there is no depth/quality at those spots

If you believe the rumors, the guys that seem to be generating multiple interest from teams right behind us:

Christian McCaffrey
Hassan Reddick
One of the WRs (assuming one goes in picks 1-11)
OJ
Gareon Conley

I don't think any of those are worth #12, even Howard (given the depth of TE talent). I like all of those players including Davis and Williams but at least 5 slots or so later.

I believe a lot of people in the press are pimping QB's as they always do.

At seasons end, nobody was suggesting that QB's should go high in this draft. And they haven't taken a snap to change that since then. They are the same guys they were then.

As such, out of sheer desperation, the fan base has bought into what the media is selling. Being in desperate need does not make these guys any better.

But as usual, some teams will use that desperation as a catalyst to draft at least one of the underachievers early and flop as history of the draft suggests.

I just hope it's not us.

That's been us in the past, every time we drafted one, at least in the 1st round. Let's do something different this time; stay we're we are and take BPA especially in the 1st 3 rounds. With all our picks and a deep draft we can really start to turn this around.

J/C The INDUSTRIAL size manure spreaders are hitting on all cylinders as this is their last week to be relevant. They all want that "I told you so story". We are picking Garrett #1 end of story. After that,I really think the chess match begins.

I agree Prison we should take MG. With MG along with Gregg Williams and some other new players our D can become very good in a short time. We already have some solid guys that still have room too develop going into their 2nd and 3rd years. Good opportunity to really load up on D in this draft. JMO

agreed Homewood ... an improved Ogbah and Nassib and Shelton and Kirksey .. along with the leader Collins .. add a good safety and Garrett

j/c...how bout the rumor of Denver looking to move up to #12 to draft the best LT prospect in this draft.
I'm wondering if 20, 51, 82 and a 2018 2nd rounder...oh and they take BO with us paying half his 2017 cap hit.

jmho

If Howard, Adams, Hooker, Thomas, and Allen are gone, I'd be all about moving back to 20. More likely be just 20 & 51 though, but I'd still be all over that. Might have to throw them back a pick, like 145 maybe, but the delta in what we would get between 12 and 20 in that scenario is minimal if anything, and 50-something is a prime pick in this draft.

JMO.

Mike Siver, aka Hue's BFF, is in Berea all week. He's worth a follow on Twitter for the next several days.

I'd rather take that LT ourselves, put him at RT and in two seasons when Joe retires, slip the new guy over to LT.

Except. This draft sucks for Oline. And there doesn't really appear to be a guy like that available. (Imo)

I believe that is the plan for Shon Coleman. Although I don't think Joe Thomas will ever retire.

Actually in the story I read it was 20, 51 and 82...I threw in the 2018 2nd rounder cause we were including Brock who Denver might be one of the only teams willing to bring him into their camp.

Top NFL Draft prospect accused of sexual assault at downtown Cleveland hotel



Who visited the Browns on April 8-9?

Wayne Gretzky once told a reporter that he would never get in an elevator alone with a woman.

If a QB did, Mary Kay will be all over it

Obi Melifonwu was in town April 7th per Dawgs by Nature.

When did we work out Mixon?

Way to sour a potential player on our city.

Could be Trubisky, could be lattimore

I could see it being Marshon Lattimore. He's from Cleveland, sounds like the guy had a posse. Kevin Spellacy is the lawyer for Josh Gordon and Joe Haden, probably some others. Hard to guess with no information, but isn't how these fake accusations happen? It's always someone they really know. It's never some crazy one night stand. Look at Zeke.

Man, I always forget Trubisky is from the area too. I hope it's not Charlie Frye 3.0 aka Brady Quinn 2.0

Would be hard to believe a young man would be so stupid to do anything like this days before the draft.

j/c...The police are hiding this from the media but that doesn't mean the Browns with their PI's don't know who the young man is. And probably a matter that will not have merit which is the only reason I can think of the Police holding back info to the public as it can UNECESSARILY ruin his draft status.
If a done deal and he was caught with the hand in the cookie jar, I'm sure the police would proceed with standard procedure on making it known to the media.

jmho

Oh and now is the time to leak it out to the NFL ala Shula...so this player who we would love to have us at 12 will be there...lol

j/c

This article is a prime example of horrible journalism. If you're gonna run with a story, either name the person or wait until he is charged. This in-between stuff is garbage. Clearly, this person decided to just run with it without getting all information.

This is horrible, horrible journalism.



Seriously? Then wait until more facts are out instead of trying to be the first to report. Shame on CBS 19.

On the contrary ; This is typical , typical , typical Journalism today .. ( agree , sorry state of affairs )

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2705670-gareon-conley-accused-of-rape-in-cleveland-police-report

Nice . . .

This is basically a much worse version of Tunsil's weed gas mask.

https://twitter.com/MarcSesslerNFL/status/856950640500645888

cough-cough-getting-cough-smoky in-cough-here . . .

Well two things.
If this was just somebody trying to advantage then I fee bad for Conley.

If this is true then not only is Conley Stupid but he deserves all that will follow.

Either way this close to the draft he is DONE!

I'm going to go ahead and assume that this is bogus for a moment.

I think we're seeing a very disturbing trend (La'el Collins, Tunsley (or whatever that dude's name was from last year with the weed gasmask... and now Conley).

I'm wondering if, one of these years, we're going to get a bombshell investigation report of teams tampering with the draft process.

Dont' forget the two High Water dilusion failing a drug test the last two days also.

I got a bad feeling about this though. Although he has 3 witnesses, Is he a local kid cause he had friends with him?

The first high profile one I remember is Sapp. Reports a few days before the draft came out he was a pothead. He was a top 3 pick that year. Not sure where Tampa finally drafted him....somewhere in the teens as I remember.

It's a shame people deliberately try to screw up a persons life.

I believe in God. I have a hard time believing that God is not going to frown on that. Even if you don't believe in God, something, say Mojo isn't going to be happy.

He's originally from Michigan, but he's been at tOSU for four years so I'm sure he has a ton of teammates/friends from the Cleveland area.

If he did it I hope he goes to jail, but with that said Conley never got into an ounce of trouble at tOSU and this would be out of the character he demonstrated so far.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/MaryKayCabot/status/857321431717335042

I don't believe this.

it can't be true

Trubisky at number 1, book it!

I don't either.

But what if......it is true? Hmmm

If he doesn't know who were drafting then they fired him and have not yet told the rest of us.

He doesn't know because they haven't made the pick yet, and who knows what craziness could yet take place. Trade offer, bong mask video, criminal allegations, plenty of ways things could go sideways.

Please, not at number 1. Pick the pick that is most likely the best selection in the draft, Garrett. Don't blow this opportunity.

If that happens I'm pretty sure you'll hear the screams of horror from my house in Galloway all the way over in Westerville.

Galloway? My son lives there.

Draft Mg #1. Stay at 12 and take the best player available. Now if Trubisky is there a #12 and they really want him then take him. I may not agree but so what. I would not trade any of our picks to move up to draft him. There is too much talent in this draft and we certainly need it.

I just hope we take the best players available...this team ultimately is lacking talent in many spots...not just QB...take the best players whom have the best odds of transferring their skill set...if a QB whom they judge has it, falls into their lap...i don't mind that...However don't bet the farm just to select a QB...build the talent and go for the strengths in the draft...make it your strength...there are QBs every year...and most would acknowledge this year of QBs are more of 3rd round talents and subpar..

If they take Trubisky #1 overall, they had better be right
If they take Garrett at #1 overall, they had better be right

If they take Garrett and IF he is a bit of a slacker, Williams will either fix and make him a HOFer or run him out of the league in a few years.

I am not believing this. Cabot is getting as bad as Tony Grossi.

There's no chance we don't know the pick

Yep, moved here in December. When you are down visiting him you'll have to swing by and say hi!

Todd McShay has picked Trubisky as #1 pick for the Browns in his lat mock draft per Mike & Mike.

It says that HUE doesn't know the pick. As in others do, but he does not.

If this isn't all a bunch of smoke, I'm going to be pretty darn ticked.

A) I don't want a QB at pick #1. I'd wait til 33 (or even later) or trade out of the 2nd into the BOTTOM of the 1st.

B) WHY THE HECK ARE PEOPLE KNOWING WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO???

Please just be a bunch of smoke. PLEASE . . .

I think the Trubisky stuff is fishing for a sucker to offer the farm for the #1.

"The analytics on Trubisky are such that you pick that guy. The analytics say he has the potential to be a very good quarterback.”
-Schefter

I'm very torn.

I believe that Garrett will be out of the league in 3 years. I think he doesn't have a passion for the game, and while I applaud having diverse interests in a well rounded individual, that's not what I want out of the first pick in the draft.

I also believe that if he were as good as advertised there would be teams dying to trade up with us to get him. I'd certainly give up a #2 this year and a #1 next year if I knew I were getting Von Miller. But we don't know that he's that guy and I don't think anyone else truly feels that way either.

Having said all that, while I don't want to draft a quarterback with #1 and my dream scenario would be a trade back, the logic behind taking the QB we want #1 and then taking BPA from there out makes too much sense. Take all of the emotion out of it and it's a better strategy in this heavy defensive draft to take the QB you want and then come back and take the best fit on defense at #12.

Man, I thought I was going to be excited for today and I'm sure by tonight I'll have convinced myself that whatever happens will be GREAT! but this rainy Thursday morning in Chicago is kind of a bummer...

Let's hope there aren't any true/false questions in my classes today. I'm pretty sure I'd get sick to my stomach picking anything that started T-R-U today.

I don't hate Mitch, but all this talk of taking him at 1 makes me want to scream.

I like the Watson to JAX rumor. That'd be nice for pushing someone down to us. Mitch at 1 feels a lot like Bortles at 1.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/NickCaminoWTAM/status/857589170524520448

Well played, Browns. Well played.

I'm just so glad the day is finally here and we can put all the nonsense articles, rumors and speculation behind us. Later tonight we will be talking actual players rather than what this person mocked, this rumor said or who fans think is best.

Now it's time we bring in Jim Brown to select Joe Mixon at #1

I think MKC is pretty terrible, but let's not bash her undeservedly. She was quoting Mike Silver when she said the above quote.

It's like christmas in april.

Lets hope that we don't find a lump of coal in our stocking.

Have a good day dawgs.

I wouldn't be surprised if Mitch isn't the guy they have wanted all along. Everything changed once they met him. After they met him everything went from "were all in on Garrett" to "Trubisky may be the pick"

I don't think they take him at #1, I think the Browns trade out of #1 and move down a few spots and then take Trubisky. There are a few teams interested in moving up is my understanding.

Even if we do end up taking Garrett it is what it is, he will be a Brown and that will be that. I may not agree with it, but I hope he does well.

I just can't see going into the season with the pile of trash we have at QB...Brock, Kessler...those guys are atrocious...the fans will revolt and empty the seats by week 4....

Hold on to your seats, should be an interesting ride...one way or another we will get a QB...we simply have no choice. unless 2-14 sounds appealing...

My God, that sounds made up. Like hey, we know the front office is into analytics. Let's use that word.

What a misleading title. Because a few sources think it will happen, it's "expected"?

Also



I think Garret is the pick if they have a deal to move up at #12. However, if they can't move up, Trub, Watson will probably both be gone by #12. Its just one of those cases of teams having longterm Qb problems drafting in front of our #12 pick.

As i said, should be an interesting draft night.

Yeah, what is the success rate of QBs with 15 or fewer college starts?

Mannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn I cannot wait until after tonight and all this dust storms, smoke screens and "I heard" and "it's expected" and "sources indicate..." and everything else goes AWAY!

I think all of this Mitch chatter is designed to sucker the Jets into drafting him so the Browns don't have to trade up and they get the guy they wanted all along at 12...Watson.

We definitely can trade up, the price is the question.

...and the "I knew it all along" also?

Smokescreen, obfuscation, choose your words... No one knows until tonight.

This one is either a blatant lie or someone who doesn’t know what analytics are.

In stats (analytics) there is something called sample error, in the case of Trubisky the data we have isn’t a sample but the entire population. If the number of games were a random sample of the entire body off his work, then maybe we could tell that his analytics were impressive (which even if true, I don’t think that they are that impressive).

If the analytics are talking about measurable and not the body of work, then this is definitely a lie, since Mitch doesn’t have off the charts measurable. His size is ok, his arm is average, his release is on the slow side, etc

I don't know if its is a smokescreen, at least not on the part of the Browns, unless we realy don't want Trubisky but are targeting another QB and we want to make other teams move for Trub...

I clearly have doubts, and think this is the talking heads making up theire own stories.

https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/857608487932760065

Jon Gruden just destroyed Miles Garrett on ESPN. As I have been saying all along, there is serious questions about his effort and going hard every play. Gruden also pointed out his weak run defense, invisibility in goal line defense and inability to be a leader. These are big red flags and there are many guys in this draft that have character and leadership ability - Garrett does not.

That said, I don't think the Browns draft Trub number one over all but they must get a game changer and a team changer. Do not be surprised if 1) the Browns trade out of the #1 over all or more likely 2) They draft the best defensive back in the draft Adams from LSU #1. They can still get Watson at #12 who I believe they have been actually looking at all along and Trub is a smoke screen to either get a trade partner or make another team trade up for him after the Browns draft Adams opening up Watson for their pick at #12.

In any case, something isn't adding up with all this negativity on almost any channel about Garrett and surely the Browns wouldn't take Trub #1 over all would they? If they do, expect a brand new management staff here next year because at #1 over all on a 1-15 team he has to start on Day 1 and the kid is not close to being ready.

#DueDiligence

That should be done every year by every team

So they haven't contacted Balt, Cincy,Pitt and one other team....:D

I wouldn't be suprised they are trying to move down then take a QB...the Bears and Titans would both be the most logical partners probably.

Deshaun Watson is getting a late boost up the board

Posted by Mike Florio on April 27, 2017, 11:06 AM EDT

Many have pegged quarterback Deshaun Watson as the second quarterback off the board on Thursday night, behind Mitchell Trubisky and likely just beyond the top 10. (This year’s PFT Worst Mock Draft Ever has Watson going to the Cardinals at No. 13.) But something is happening as the draft approaches. Unless it isn’t.

Chatter has emerged in recent days that could push Watson as high as No. 3 to the Bears. More recently, talk has emerged that the Jaguars could take Watson at No. 4.

While it’s possible that some are speculating accurately, it’s difficult to envision either team leaking their true intentions. The Bears have become notoriously secretive in recent years, and the Jaguars managed without Tom Coughlin running the show to keep quiet their interest three years ago in Blake Bortles.

Could Watson go that high? Sure. Some would say he should, given his dominance of the Alabama defense in back-to-back national championship games.

For the bad teams at the top of the draft, there’s a greater chance than ever that one or more of the good teams toward the bottom of the draft will squat on quarterbacks who otherwise would squirt through to round two, Derek Carr style. So if a team without a franchise quarterback hopes to find one in the draft, they’ll either have to jump at the top of round one or swoop back in at the bottom.

I think the Jaguars take Watson.

In the 1st round? Wow...

I just threw up in my mouth. And not a little.

If the Browns take one of this years draft class at #1 there will be a TON of Browns Fans loose their minds ( me included ) .. Not much left ther for me to loose though !

I mean, they're pretty well guaranteed to take one of this year's draft class number 1...unless we can draft Darnold this year!

Just messing with you, I know what you mean...

Very dangerous to mess with a Browns Fan head on Draft day , lol !

This has been reported to have been gaining steam. NFLN mock had it earlier today on one of the shows too.

Which if you think about it is what Grossi does. Actually, most all of them do that to some degree.

Funny thing is, I used to think that Cabot didn't go for this kinda stuff. I used to believe she was pretty honest and direct. Frankly, the only guy I believe in Cleveland sports is Jimmy Donovan.

He tells you what he knows, he tells you what he doesn't know and tells you his sources (generally). And he's classy

If the Browns draft a QB in the top half of the first round this FO and coaching staff will be putting a punctuation point on the end of their careers here.

I don't believe there's a QB in this draft that would have been selected in the first round the last few years. Desperation is not an excuse to reach for a QB.

People need to remember, at seasons end not one of these QB's were considered to be worthy of such a high pick. Since then, not one of them have taken a snap. They are the exact same QB's now that they were then. If they weren't worthy of it then, they certainly aren't now. Nothing has changed.

IF any QB is taken in the top half of the fist round it would be Watson.

To be fair, the teams have been able to interview and work these guys out so it's not like NOTHING has changed. They've gotten first hand exposure to them. Not that I necessarily disagree with you on their relative value, but there has been a lot of work put in since the end of the season and now...

New England, Minnesota, and LA Rams don't have first round picks.

I'd guess the teams we haven't contacted are Balt, Pitt, NE, and Minnesota. Cincy is top 10 and I'm sure we've called them, just to see what it'd take to move up. Rams have an early 2nd rounder. Just my hunch.

Say what you will but only playing in games really matter unless a guy is a complete moron or jackwad. You can't take second round talent and he suddenly becomes a top 10 talent based on some work out or interview.

He can drop, but not move up.

Just saw a segment on NFL.COM with Silver talking about our #1 pick.

He said we have known for 2 weeks now who we are going to pick.
He said there are only around 4-5 who know who we are going to take...we can only ASSume Hue is one of them. Sashi, AB,
Depodesta and Hue...possibly the Owners also???

He said that Sashi said we are not desperate for a QB and won't make a desperate move for one in the draft! So I don't think there is a doubt who #1 is and I don't think we will move up in the draft to take a QB.

jmho

Happens every year though...and it's not always wrong.

It really doesn't. Just because the media "claims" people are moving up doesn't mean it's true. They just figure out more the closer things get to the draft and aren't willing to claim stupidity. lol

Under your scenario it seems you believe that teams expect some of these players to be stupid prior to their interviews. That's simply not the case. Now you may move someone up a few spots because he's even more than you expected, but not a lot.

What often times happens is a guy comes in and you find out he's dumber that a box of rocks and he moves down.

possibilities at 12 are endless and then you have players with so much talent with so many ?????

Mixon top 10 talent + the video
Conley top 15 talent + rape allegations no arrest
Sydney Jones top 10 talent + ACL could play this year
Reuben Foster top 15 talent + failed drug test
Corey Davis top 10 talent + hasn't been able to run
Malik Hooker top 10 talent + cant workout for anyone

Has anyone ever seen this much talent at the top of the draft with so many questions going on and there are probably a few guys I have forgotten.

Last year Deshaun was the #1 QB, and I would say that although Wentz really impressed me, I still think that he's better than him and Goff.

So with all the info we have, Dak would be #1 and Wentz or Watson the #2

Report: Broncos looking to trade up

Posted by Mike Florio on April 27, 2017, 2:17 PM EDT

At a time when plenty of teams in the first round would like to trade down, there’s not an overabundance looking to trade up. One franchise exploring it, according to Adam “Stella Liebeck” Schefter of ESPN is the Broncos.

Denver currently sits at No. 20. If they’re looking to move up, it’s not because they generally want a higher position; it’s because they have a specific player or two in mind.

One could be local product Christian McCaffrey, the son of former Broncos receiver Ed. Earlier this week, Broncos G.M. John Elway laughed off the team’s pre-draft meeting with McCaffrey.

“He was close and it was free,” Elway said, laughing. “And we wanted to meet with him. He’s a great kid. We like Christian a lot and we wanted to bring him in. It was one of those [where] he was in the area, so we wanted to take advantage of that to get to see him again. He’s a great kid.”

With McCaffrey expected to go between No. 5 and No. 15, the Broncos could possibly get him without having to go up very far.

No way Trubisky is #1. He only played 13 games. If our FO drafts him #1 they will be fired sooner rather than later. If we draft excellent defensive players with 3 of our first 4 picks (I would not mind the TE Howard), then that can be a good foundation to a solid football team.

Even if it is Jimmy & his homeless buddy that pull the trigger.

Report: Falcons could trade up in first round

Posted by Josh Alper on April 27, 2017, 3:10 PM EDT

We’ve heard a lot this week about teams drafting early that would like to trade down in the first round and the lack of interest from buyers, but there are some teams that are reportedly open to such a move.

The Broncos are reportedly looking to move up from No. 20 and the 2016 NFC champions may be joining them in that pursuit. Ian Rapoport of NFL Media reports that the Falcons are “plotting a potential move” during the first round on Thursday.

Any move up wouldn’t be done just for the sake of picking earlier in the process, so any deal will almost certainly be contingent on a player the Falcons want being available at the right spot. It’s not clear who that player would be, but pass rusher and guard would be two spots where an addition would make sense.

Unless they are planning something similar to the trade that netted them the pick they used to select Julio Jones, that would seem likely to be somewhere near the end of the round as moving way up from No. 31 would cost Atlanta a lot.

I never mind trading back if everyone available at our pick is "even". Unless Hooker, Howard, Adams falls to 12 at least

If we are at 12 and Adams Allen Howard, Hooker, and Thomas are gone, our best bet would probably be to go corner. If that's the case, I'd take 20 and 51 from DEN, then 31 and next year's 2 for 20. The CB you're going to get at 12 isn't that different than what you'll get at 31.

The rumor is that they want to trade up for McCaffrey. If that's the case they will probably need to get into the top five.

Not Trubisky at one. Media shouting for it, but no way I pray. Keep our one and twelve. Trade with the residue for him if you want him. Trading up puts other choices in reach. Have fun with it. AFTER # 1!!

Have told my Son over and over again ( he is a nervous wreck for this draft ) They will do the right thing at # 1 but will probably screw up # 12 .. lol

They are? I haven't seen one person in the media say we should take Trubisky at #1.

Watching lots of NFLN today and they guy reporting from Berea says Browns are gonna take MG.

You haven't read Mary Kay, have you?
Plus, it's all over the place today.

I avoid Mary Kay Cabot like the plague.

I know some media is saying we might take Trubisky, but I haven't seen anyone say we should.

West coast bias.

Turn on ESPN or the NFLN thats all they are talking about ... McShay picked him at one ...

I can't wait!

Should take him. Has anyone said we should take him?

Yes they just did on ESPN

Mike Silver is probably the most connected IMO ... He says MG, I trust him

I don't think you don't know the difference between them projecting what we will do and what they would do if they were drafting.

I had read Denver wanted to move up to make sure they got Bolles.

Yep, seeing it again:

http://www.milehighreport.com/2017/4/27/...f-the-nfl-draft

If Denver wants Bolles and Atlanta loves Lamp, it could work. Miami could take Lamp at 22.

Are you serious lol

I'm pretty sure he is. If he's not, I am.

One things for sure, we're going to have to wait out the entire night with the possibility of a trade up from 33...

2 peas in a pod, all thats missing is vers

That will be a piece of cake after the wait for pick 1 today. Can't wait.

https://twitter.com/SportsCenter/status/857657407203397632

It's pretty simple. I've had NFL Network on all day. I have heard them say what they thought we would do, yet I haven't heard them say we should draft Trub #1 overall or even trade up or draft him at #12.

There's a big difference in what people think you will do rather than say what you should do.

If you want to actually take a look, most of these draft people have Trub rated as the #2 QB in this draft with Watson rated at #1.

These people understand how weak this QB class is and how much of a reach it would be to draft Trub this early. They just don't trust that we're not fools. I'm worried they may be right. Trub at #12 or a move up is the act of fools. I hope we avoid filling that role.

Not McShay Matt Hasselbeck said it ... "Cleveland Should draft Trubisky"

I've had it on all day too, I wasn't talking about NFLN it was on ESPN where I heard Hasselbeck say that ...

https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/857694365082411008

The Kicker from Arizona State?

MKC: Garrett the #1, per multiple sources.

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ss...art_maj-story-1

I don't know about anyone else, I know it's only 5:10 pm. I'm not talking about this post.

I don't ask for much, but I think posting picks before they are made is Uncool. Right or Wrong, I don't know, nobody knows, and it just makes things confusing,
I think it's rude, maybe I'm In the minority here.

2. This is the CLEVELAND BROWNS MESSAGE BOARD: I think if you want to talk about other teams drafts, they should get their own thread.

3. Vague or unclear picks, I think it leaves something to be desiered to read about "the next big guy" and the poster assumes we know :
The position he plays,
The school he plays for, or
The team he's going to, and
when it's unclear if it's a rumor, maybe or a fact!

Merry Christmas!

Shefter now tweeting the same thing. Sor, I didn't copy the link.

Jeremiah Ledbetter at 1?

So we're repicking manziel?

Nope, we're picking Zombie Bernie Kosar and the ghost of Otto Graham.

Oh, you made it sound like someone who is credible on the draft said it. lol

Are any of them really credible?

Some more than others but really, no. lol

With the first pick of the 2017 NFL draft, the Cleveland Browns select....Davis Webb, Quarterback, University of California.

Sashi Brown defended the pick by saying Webb fits all the analytics.

Nope. He fails the cranial volume metric.



Like I said last year, I don't want a QB with a tiny head.






Also, this...

Sorry man. You're flat out WRONG.

Any one team can bring this Kat in and put him through what THAT team wants to see. If this dude shows them exactly what they wanna see for THEIR system? You bet your ass that QB just moved UP on that teams board.

well, garrett it is

These cal QB's are still living off of Aaron Rodgers.

Davis Webb is really a Texas Tech QB... isn't he? Just spent one year at Cal.

Dunno bro. But he's reppin' Cal so....eh.

U calling me a fool bro .. cause i would take Mitch at #1 ...

I'm guessing u mean I'm being foolish in this instance ... gotcha ...

2 more f'n hours til we take MG and then the fun can begin ....

Even though u called me a fool I'm helping u out by giving u an example of what i think they should do and what i think they will do ...

Now quit hurting my feelings .... u know how big of a snowflake i am ...

That's a good point actually. Cal has a lot more caché than Texas Tech when it comes to drafting QBs. Probably calculated move on his part.

I think its hilarious that all these draft experts are actually announcing we will take Garrett as if it is some investigative reporting and a scoop...Really.

Its been OBVIOUS that we were taking Garrett all this other stuff/rumors was a load of crap to bring attention to writers...smh

Yep and they were the ones who stirred the pot on Trub going #1 anyway

I'll believe it when they read the card.

Just whip out the popcorn and Jack man. Do a few primer shots. Then start paying attention about pick 5.

It's Garrett. It's always been Garrett.

I agree. Finally we are here. All this BS was starting to get me mad.

You are 90% sure it is bull, but that 10% was just enough to get me ticked.

Just take Gaeertt, then if we feel we need to move on Mitch, we can do it, though I see this as a deep draft. I'd kind of like to keep the picks, especially #33. I see that as a trade down point to gain more for next year.

I think the entire Trubisky thing was not real.