DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2016 NFL Season 2016 NFL Draft Browns trade #2 pick to Eagles

The thing is you make it sound like we as fans really have any say in the fate of anyone on the Cleveland Browns. Yes, if they mess up and after a few years it is not fixed or at least significant head that way then yes there will be more changes. However, I also believe that because of who Hue is he will be given more time to get things turned around on the field because of his league credibility and unless Hue is dissatisfied with what the FO is doing I don't think Haslem will pull the plug. But just as you said it is wait and see.

Just what are you trying to say with that picture Vers.

+1

You're assuming we don't like Wentz. I'm assuming there was major convo going on about taking the QB or moving down to acquire more picks because we've created more of our own holes with the losses in FA. Filling holes won out. I'd bet we move out of 8 also for picks THIS year.

We'll never know the answer to this but what if this regime took over 2 years ago and has had 3 FA periods and this being the 3rd draft. Would we take Wentz because the team is building soundly?

Taking a QB at 2 that you don't like is stupid. I didn't say that.

How I see the state of the Browns:

When the Pettine/Farmer regime was fired, and the Brown/Depodesda team installed to lead the team forward, the decision had already been made to do a major rebuild of the team through the draft. This will, out of necessity, be a multi-year project.

They determined values for the 2016 free agents. Their negotiation with those FA was with those values in mind, with the intention to retain them within those values. If the FA chose to leave, the comp picks became the values.

The approach to the draft, while recognizing positional needs, is to acquire maximum total value, especially in this first draft. With all the needs this team has, trading the #2 overall pick for multiple picks, spreading and increasing the total value, better fit the overall plan than investing it into a single player.

The acquisition of a 'franchise' QB is still a priority, but so is building a strong foundation. Again, this is the first year of a multi-year rebuild, so specific positional needs are secondary to increasing the overall value of the roster. I do think they will draft a QB in this draft.

I believe that Haslam will not be quick to pull the plug this time. Despite his history to the contrary, this is not the 'fill the positions and hope for the best' approach. This is a long-term start from scratch plan that should have been done when he bought the team. I believe he has learned from his mistakes.

nice post man ... agree with everything

Why?

Because I do. Because I choose to, it's a belief.

Okay. I thought perhaps you heard something..........

Evidence shows that if a team likes a QB in the first round, there is no amount of picks they could get to move off that spot. We traded out of the spot where we would have gotten Wentz. I do not think we would have traded out if Goff was available.

So one team can figure out how to use his talent and another team can't. That's about coaching, not the QB. We have the QB whisperer, right?



Bottom line? The only reason this team had this much success was BECAUSE of Tom Brady. Brady was played out of necessity not out of him being selected to start.



Some teams know how to use and harness the talents of a great QB and some don't. A good QB has the talent. It's up to a coaching staff to utilize that talent.



And so it begins.

Pit - here's the problem that I see.

While you seem to claim you are totally open to whatever and whoever the FO picks... and you merely are stating the obvious that - just like every other team and FO - 'they better get it right" ..... every post I read of yours seems so laced with angst and pre-determined attitude that is anti our FO. It's there in nearly every post I read of yours.

And your claim that NE is only great because of a fluke 6th round draft pick again strengthens and reinforces how LUCKY teams need to be in the draft.

When you "get lucky" is when you pick a 3rd to 6th round QB who happens to turn into a franchise QB. If you actually believed he was a franchise QB, you wouldn't wait until the 6th round. That's taking a flyer on a project.

When QB's are rated high in the draft, the evaluations shouldn't be predicated on luck.

I'm not saying this FO is wrong on their QB evaluations. What I am saying is if this FO passes on selecting a QB that turns out to be a great franchise QB, they failed in their mission. We were told in no uncertain terms that finding that QB was priority number 1. That was their primary goal.

You seem to be saying that if they pass up a franchise QB it's nothing important. That it's all luck. Yet these guys receive seven digit salaries to do a job. You seem to be absolving guys who make huge salaries from all responsibility. Can't you see how doing that has gotten us to where we are? Name our impact our playmaking players? Look at where your theory has gotten us since 1999.

Sure they had better be right. You don't give away a franchise QB when your team has been starved for one for the last 16 years. That's a clear fail. I am open to whoever they pick. I hope whoever that player is that he's a great player.

I'm also smart enough to know that if they simply walked away from a franchise QB they failed at a mission that was their #1 priority.

There's nothing wrong with expecting accountability from people who are being paid well to do their job. Not the last time I checked anyway.

What he is saying is that we passed on a couple of project QB's and not a couple of franchise QB's. In passing on them, we got some draft picks that we desperately needed. In other words the front office tried to improve in their #1 priority, which is actually try to field a better team so they can win more games.

Accountability is great, as long as people don't try to make them accountable for goals that they make up in their head.

If you think trying to sell the idea that a team missing a franchise QB since 1999 doesn't make a franchise QB a top priority, good luck. But obviously the old saying is true... "There's one born every minute." So maybe you'll get some people to buy that.

Obviously there are a lot of people that don't believe they're projects. But I'm sure you and Sashi have it all figured out. lol

What are you talking about? If that qb turns out to be a great player and the Browns get a bunch of "guys," there is no doubt that the trade will be a disaster.

I like the trade. I support the trade. But man, some of you guys make so much crap up and then act like the opposing side is the clueless side.

It's not Pit who is clueless in this debate.

[1] You are missing the point on Brady. The fact that Brady is possibly the best QB of all time - and was taken in the 6th round proves beyond a debate that getting a franchise QB can be a matter of pure luck. . . . you can add to that and say that QB's like Russell, Leaf, Akili Smith, Couch and many many many others (just look at the Browns and their QB's taken at 22) and say that you can be unlucky too despite everything else too. . . . unlucky or just plain wrong.

[2] You're not saying the FO is wrong - yet you're not saying they are right. And yet the tone of everything you write is laced with contempt. . . . How about this - you state once whether you think they should have stayed at 2 and taken Wentz since that is the universal projection of who will be available. Once you have come out and stated that - maybe we can continue a meaningful conversation.

[3] I am not saying that if they "walk away" from a franchise QB then its no problem. I am saying I tend to agree that Wentz is not worth t a #2 pick. I don't believe that Goff is either - but from what I hear the FO would have taken him. But who knows what is true and what is spin at this time of year.

Bottom line - instead of repeating that they better get it right - how about you lay out your belief before the draft so that you don't appear wise after the fact? Pretty simple?

I think it's you that is making up a point. All you have to do is look at the odds of success when drafting a QB. The odds are MUCH higher in the top 5 picks in the NFL than later on. The only way luck should enter into the equation is when injuries are involved. Just answer me one question here....... Do you believe owners pay seven figure salaries to people simply based on how lucky they are?



How could you consider that meaningful? You claim even those who get paid seven figure salaries only find success based on luck? What difference would my opinion mean? See, unlike some I know I don't make seven figures to make these decisions. If I did however, I would take responsibility for my actions and not claim I make millions in hopes I'll get lucky.



None of us know what to believe this time of year. So it seems that in the end, you actually agree with me. If they pass on a franchise QB, it is a problem. So I'm not sure what the rest of this tripe is about?



Oh it's very simple. I have stated my belief time after time. If they pass on a franchise QB at #2 it will be a huge mistake to have traded out of the #2 spot. You see, I'm not foolish enough to believe I'm qualified to say what an NFL GM should do. Oh, that's right, we don't have a GM. lol

If I were that qualified, I'd want a seven digit salary. That's what cracks me up. Some want to appear to be wise. When in fact they're nothing but posters on a message board. My ego isn't quite that big.

My opinion has been stated in all honesty. From your above post, it appears you actually agree with me.



So would that mean your comment is laced with contempt? It is what it is. Why try to make it more complicated than that?

That's not acceptable to issue a challenge like that. It could be used to "disparage" the poster involved. Vers can fill you in on that should clarification be needed...

I just posted this on another thread, but I think it fits here:



Before anyone freaks out.........I am actually giving the FO some props for having guts. I just posted this in response to I can see why Pit says "they better be right."

I am still waiting for you to answer my question on the thread you started about what we would do at 8.

Are you going to call out all the homers who say they love the pick AFTER it is made if they didn't respond BEFORE? Or, are you only using that ammunition to attack the guys who criticize the FO? In short, are you going to be "fair?"

Did anyone see this?

Okay first you can rule out whoever got drafted #1. We were drafting #2 and that's the pick we traded away.

So if the Eagles QB studs out then you have to compare that to the guys that we got with #8, #77, and #100 this year, Next year's extra 1st and 2018's extra second.

We also should have a legitimate shot at the #1 QB next year if that is what we want next year.

I have my doubts about RG3, but this is also a moot point if he studs out as well.

Verse I have heard over and over again that you didn't want us to reach for a QB this year. We have a guy on our staff right now that is a "QB expert" that agreed with you. Now the hard part of the decisions that these guys make is that they have to stick to them afterward, are you straying away from your decision?

The thought that we need to reach for our franchise QB this year just so we can Tim Couch another one with not much of a team around him is quite frankly made up in someone's head.

If there was somebody worth it in Hue's opinion, we would have taken him.

And Pitdawg your strategy of reaching for a QB is actually hoping that we get lucky. Fortunately FO's don't make those 7 figure salaries to get lucky. They actually have to think about building a team beyond hoping by picking first in the QB grab bag hoping that they get lucky.

Please provide your link showing that the odds are better in the top 5. Even if you are right about that, which you aren't. Banking on odds is just hoping to get lucky. If there was a sure thing out there like a Peyton Manning or ANdrew Luck, it may be a different story, but there isn't so the song remains the same.

Yes. I think it's hilarious.

I think Sam Bradford has heard how QB-starved the league is a couple times too many. He's got talent, but not nearly enough to be doing what he's doing now. He was also the last big time draft QB to get the mega contract.

A good counterpoint is McCown. That knows his role and is happy to show his stuff and do his best, but also willing to help out in other ways if he's not the guy.

With all the benefits of hindsight, I am so happy we got Josh instead of Sam.

That isn't a serious question, right? You are a pretty smart guy, so I doubt you are dense. I keep saying "I SUPPORT THE TRADE!" Is that clear enough for you. Wait, let me go back and make it stand out more. That should do it. Maybe? LOL

All I am saying is that I get what Pit is saying and you guys insulting him does not change that he has a valid point. Period.

Yes it is serious. Right now you support it unless the Eagles QB studs out. If it was the right decision, then there shouldn't be any drama and no fence to straddle.

Sometimes you have to pick between agreeing with someone to trash a FO's decision and agreeing with the decision that was made.

Choosing both is just allowing yourself a cop out to be right in both cases.

The #2 pick is gone so it doesn't matter to me what their pick does ... JMHO

It's nice that "your opinion" is that the second QB in this draft is a reach. You may be right. You also may be wrong. And they may be too. Only time will tell. It's odd to me how you believe that Hue had sole control over what was done with the #2 pick when the pecking order in the FO doesn't suggest that at all.

Maybe he's smart enough to know what he wants and believes, but is also smart enough to understand he could be mistaken and that it could turn out either way?

I love how some of you message board experts and gurus seem to know so much about the draft. lol

I suggest you submit your resume to the Browns. Who knows what next year holds?

Sorry - not in on the joke or the meaning if you are serious.

I was being serious. Ask Vers...

I'm not as talented or experienced at responding to multiple points - so I had to delete everything accept for these major points.

- Kindly show me where I said success is only based on luck?? You can't ... my exact words : "getting a franchise QB can be a matter of pure luck" .... would you disagree with that statement? ... I am not advocating we rely on that method - but surely to goodness if we had, we'd have likely had more success than the garbage we have selected at QB since 1999.

- Everyone here is just a poster on a message board. period. Personally I think a debate or discussion is more meaningful with a statement about poster's opinions and believes, no matter how well informed. Otherwise every topic probably boils down to 'they need to do their jobs and perform at a high level'.

- I sort of agree with you - in as much as any person in any organization needs to be accountable. And the bigger they salary and the more vital you are to the organization the more that is expected. . . however, I don't think anyone in any job is infallible and we all err no matter who and what we do. With the NFL draft this is magnified. And FO's for every team will miss on picks. Period. And while it would total suck to have (with future hindsight) made a bad call on deciding to drop out of contention for Wentz - I don't believe that Went's future performances dictate how good a job Sashi and the FO will have done. Regardless of how high up the chain they are and how much they make, they will make mistakes. Do you expect somthing different?

I would have done so but, although I'm sure we could have agreed on the money, they likely wouldn't agree to the guaranteed length of the contract...

Exactly right! Just my opinion. Verse's too. I also said that Hue is the QB expert and if he decided that a QB was worthy of being taken, I'd shut-up and be happy.



And there is the difference. I don't see myself as such an expert that if I don't get my way, I'm instantly entitled to come out with the pitchforks before the draft even started.



Lot's of things you yourself seem to be an expert on here...

1) The FO has a mandate that we have to get a franchise QB this year.
2) There was a franchise QB at pick #2.
3) This trade was done against Haslam's wishes.
4) You understand how all this works above the so called select few.

I saw you responded to me - so I looked at your post. I still have you on ignore due to previous history where we seemed to disagree with some animosity and it was easier that way.

Am I going to call out someone who say they love a pick after but not before a pick? Probably not - I don't know how everyone's minds work. Although if that thread was the basis of the discussion - I'd comment on why they didn't post their comment before the draft.... I think one of the responses was a general comment and I stated I was looking for specifics.

Additionally - since you are using the word 'homer' - I'll add that it's entirely possible that a poster talks themselves into liking a pick because of the 'plan' or scheme. A good example is Justin Gilbert.... he wasn't on my radar. But the PLAN to pair an elite CB opposite Haden was great imo and I warmed to it. . . . as it turns out Gilbert has been a bust so far. So the execution of the plan sucked. . . Lets hope Hue can find the trigger to motivate the young man.

Fair? I always try to be fair - except with people who themselves are closed or abusive. I'm comfortable being honest about my own mistakes. In real life and on a Browns message board. . . I am not at all afraid to admit that I wanted Akili Smith!

There is an alternate scenario where nobody is right or wrong. Perhaps a QB was never in their plans at #2 in the first place. That would make it immaterial as to whether they thought that either QB was boom or bust...

I'm saying the later in the draft the selection is, the more luck that is involved. If you look at 4th through the 7th round, you're far more depending on projections than you should be in the first three rounds. So if earlier round QB's are drafted on talent and not luck, all the more reason to hold those making those decisions responsible.



When it comes to 1st and 2nd round picks at the very least, doing their job well is the only thing that really matters. My opinion nor your opinion makes any difference in the grand scheme of things. So to me that's a pointless exercise in futility and serves for nothing more than some kind of "gotchya" moment in the future one way or the other.



What I realize is that the higher the draft pick, the higher the investment, the bigger mistake it is. It's much easier to brush off a 4th through 7th round miss in the draft because at that point the investment is lower and the talent level isn't as high.

Missing on 1st and 2nd round picks has gotten us exactly where we are today while several teams at our current level have built, drafted their QB's and surpassed us. In case you missed it, those people are no longer here. It's simply what happens when you don't perform. Be you a player, a coach or a FO member.

If the team didn't want Wentz, then trading out of #2 is always a decision.

It will be regrettable if Wentz turns out to be a good player. That doesn't make the decision to make the trade bad. It will make the evaluation of the player bad.