DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Beckham Trade Part 2

Ok,, that makes sense.. But we don't get Nothing, we still own his rights and if he ever wants to play again, he's gotta do one of two things, show up for us or show up to where we trade him to. Right?

It's basically a La'veon Bell situation then.

I'm actually wondering if he's going to rehab.

Whatever he posted, he subsequently deleted.

Weird.

I know the quote of yours I posted is the very definition of a homer.

Having a bias toward your hometown team or toward the team for which you play/used to play.

Welcome to Diva World, lol.

A little drama, cryptic tweets, subtexts, going dark...

OBJ is our new Bron Bron. I love it.

He's on vacation.

Just a little attention grubbing by OBJ... get used to it.

Rehab? I don't believe OBJ has ever been in the program...

As far as I can tell he's never been arrested and has been nothing but a professional as far as his work ethic and accountability goes.


He is most certainly a Diva and while some will demonize it, he spoke the facts on Eli Manning.....who gets treated like royalty because of his last name.

Not sure where I read it, but he's supposed to be in Paris France for something.. Not sure what

Paris, Indiana. It's a fine place this time of year.

The Louvre pyramid turns 30. OBJ had to be a part of the celebration!

Seriously, Did I just read that wrong?

I don't think this has anything to do w/him not wanting to play for the Browns. I don't think that even makes sense.

Dude was probably buzzed and was sick of people driving him crazy and wanted a break.

I'd also like to add that in the return game, losing Jabril was addition by subtraction.

I also don't think Dereck Kindred is nearly the drop off from Peppers that people might think on the surface. I remember going into last season thinking Kindred might win the job from Peppers.

Once the deal goes through, it goes through.

It's no different than if Baker decided he didn't want to play here anymore.

He should've just come out and said he was going dark, (his hair), for a few days.

I know we are loaded at WR but drafting Paris Campbell at #49 isn't as crazy as it may sound, he would be an other capable WR (behind OBJ, Landry, Callaway, and Higgins) but would solidify our Return game, he was an excellent returner when he was used at Ohio State …

Also I agree with you about Kindred ...

That's a great point, hopefully Freddie can make that jump.

As far as the AHC thing, was that a title put on after Hue was fired or was that at the beginning of the year?

Again, I am not doubting Kitchens as HC, but if I am being honest, sure, it worries me a little bit, but my god am i pulling for the guy.

He's seems just about as likable as any Browns coach we've had.

And I'm sure Hue set a great example of things not to do.

We're all pulling for him. I doubt anyone is NOT pulling for him, but expressing skepticism over his rapid rise to head coach based on a half season as a coordinator and our fear he would be poached if he was retained as OC (let's all be honest, this is why he got the job) fine as well. You can pull for someone to succeed while being skeptical at the same time, as they're not mutually exclusive.

I am not skeptical. Proof is in the pudding ( not sure where that expression came from ) He won games! Not only did he win games, you can tell he won by using players to the best of their abilities. He also ran unique plays and most of the time they worked. That is key Freddie is innovative and smart with his x's and o's. I think the 3 headed monster of Dorsey, Freddie and Baker defeats all rivals for years to come!

I also hope that his success as an OC translates to HC. There are plenty of examples of that not happening, though. Can't know 'til you tried it, though.

This is from a PFT article. This Saquan quote is a new one for me. Everything I read/saw suggested that he was pretty excited to be coming here. Or at a minimum, happy about a change of scenery.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...ial-media-post/

Is anyone "really happy about it" immediately after the trade?

Antonio Brown was.

The comments all seem to be coming from Giants fans, also.

I don't know if he's happy or not... If you're not a Browns fan or Browns player, you can only imagine what it would be like being traded to the Browns... We were known around the league as one of the worst places to go. You come here to goof off and collect a pay check. Baker is changing the culture. The Browns are changing. We have hungry fans... In a year from now he'll say how this was the best thing that happened to him... I half expect Beckham to be here for a long time.

Cartoon characters don't count.

AB forced his way out of Pittsburgh. OBJ didn't. It wasn't an apt comparison.

I would think it has to be weird to be traded. It means someone didn't want you, so to speak... I'd imagine you'd have to be mentally tough. We hear about these trades all the time, but I'm sure it affects players in a manner we truly do not understand... especially with social media where you can see many fans he played hard for were happy to see him go. Reminds me of Couch a little.

Guy to his friend at his old company: Yeah, sucks I had to leave.

Guy to his friend at his new company: Yeah, I'm so glad to be here.

Saquan likely only knows about half of it.

Man, I cannot wait until his first day in Berea; the first day both he and Landry are together again on the field.

I think that getting to Training Camp this year is going to be difficult. If it sold out last year, it is going to be sold out in a *blink* this year.

Honestly, I am not worried about OBJ in the sense of all of these reports that take a negative connotation towards his attitude and feelings post trade. I am not concerned about him "going dark".

In the case of many trades, GM and or coach talks one on one with the player. Thanks them for their service. Lets them know the plan moving forward. And in most cases, diffuses any bad feelings. For the most part. As was said earlier, there is always that feeling that someone did not want you.

In the case of OBJ. The guy is on vacation in Europe. All reports out there are that the Giants "didn't sign him to trade him". Was he completely happy in NY? No...but he was fully committed. And he does like the large market that NY is. It is the only team he has known in the NFL. A team he has won a Super Bowl with. Not to mention...how often does the best player in your position ever get traded...It happens...but not often and usually with plenty of signs ahead of time. He was not expecting to be traded.

Now he gets a phone call from Gettleman, in what was only described as "brief". Now we don't know what was said, and I may be looking too much into it. But it doesn't seem like there was much "diffusing going on in that phone call. I am sure it wasn't nasty...But One second you are chilling in Paris. The next second, your world has been turned around. A team you have bled for, now appears to not want you. Your phone starts to explode with friends, family, teammates, and reporters wanting to get your reaction. You realize that now you have to move to "Cleveland" (while better than the reputation, it is by no means the same as New York...And OBJ seems to like the flash and dash of New York) There are a million questions to be asked concerning your new team. And as you are in Paris, you feel a million miles away from home.

It is quite a lot to take in when it blindsides you. At this point you are not even thinking about where you are going, the team you are going to and whether you will like it there. All you thinking about is what the heck just happened??? I do not feel the Giants communication with him prepared him for this eventuality nor left him feeling the Giants were feeling any pain in trading him. For example the Browns, while ecstatic about getting Vernon, feel some pain in giving up Zeitler. Sure there are ok with the deal...and they felt this was best for the team...but a part of them will miss Zeitler...Corbett or no Corbett.

I don't have any proof of this...it is just my general impression from the limited information that is out there.

As he communicates more with his new team and gets to the facility. I think you will see "excitement". Despite all of the antics...it is more than generally known that Odell is a very good teammate and one of, if not THE hardest worker. I will not question his commitment. And I think he will be a perfect fit within this WR room.

I think we will see exactly what the Browns want to see...a "dangerous, contagious competition" that spreads to the whole team. Just seeing the Jarvis and Odell trying to out do each other will be ridiculous...lol It will only make them all better.

One question that I haven't seen asked. Does anyone remember a Team whose starting 2 WR's were teammates and starters on their college team?

I mean, I am sure we have had teams with multiple receivers from the same College. But to have receivers from the same years as well as being the 2 starting receivers for that team???

No kidding,, I'm so excited I may return to visit camp this summer again, haven't done that for a long time....

Hey Pete. A couple of things:

--I don't recall a NFL team having two starting receivers who were both starters for the same collegiate team.

--I don't believe OBJ won a Super Bowl w/the Giants. I think they won their two w/Eli before OBJ got there.

--I don't think OBJ is indicating he is unhappy he was traded. I think he was on vacation and partying and put that tweet out there because he was sick of his phone blowing up. I think he deleted it later because the buzz wore off and he knew it would be controversial.

--I think OBJ is going to be a huge asset for the Browns and this trade was the biggest "splash" of the NFL off-season.

Listen to his teammates, they are sorry, very sorry to see him go.

It's a styrofoam tv brick.

What's the origin of the phrase 'The proof of the pudding'?
'The proof of the pudding' is just shorthand for 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating'. That longer version makes sense at least, whereas the shortened version really doesn't mean anything - nor does the often-quoted incorrect variation 'the proof is in the pudding'. The continued use of that meaningless version is no doubt bolstered by the fact that the correct version isn't at all easy to understand.

The meaning become clear when you know that 'proof' here is a verb meaning 'test'. The more common meaning of 'proof' in our day and age is the noun meaning 'the evidence that demonstrates a truth' - as in a mathematical or legal proof. The verb form meaning 'to test' is less often used these days, although it does survive in several commonly used phrases: 'the exception that proves the rule', 'proof-read', 'proving-ground', etc. When bakers 'prove' yeast they are letting it stand in warm water for a time, to determine that it is active. Clearly, the distinction between these two forms of the word was originally quite slight and the proof in a 'showing to be true' sense is merely the successful outcome of a test of whether a proposition is correct or not.

'The proof of the pudding is in the eating' is a very old proverb. The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations dates it back to the early 14th century, albeit without offering any supporting evidence for that assertion. The phrase is widely attributed to Cervantes in The History of Don Quixote. This appears to be by virtue of an early 18th century translation by Peter Motteux, which has been criticised by later scholars as 'a loose paraphrase' and 'Franco-Cockney'. Crucially the Spanish word for pudding - 'budín', doesn't appear in the original Spanish text. It is doubtful that 'the proof of the pudding' was a figurative phrase that was known to Cervantes.

The earliest printed example of the proverb that I can find is in William Camden's Remaines of a Greater Worke Concerning Britaine, 1605:

"All the proof of a pudding is in the eating."

The proof of the pudding is in the eatingIt is worth remembering that, as the phrase is quite old, the pudding wouldn't have been a sticky toffee pudding from the sweet trolley, but a potentially fatal savoury dish. In Camden's listing of proverbs he also includes "If you eat a pudding at home, the dog may have the skin", which suggests that the pudding he had in mind was some form of sausage. THE OED describes the medieval pudding as 'the stomach or one of the entrails of a pig, sheep, or other animal, stuffed with a mixture of minced meat, suet, oatmeal, seasoning, etc., and boiled'. Those of you who have ventured north of the border on Burns Night will recognize this as a fair description of a haggis - "the great chieftain o' the pudding-race", as Burns called it in the poem Address to a Haggis, 1786. medieval peasants, faced with a boiled up farmyard massacre, might have thought a taste test to have been a wise choice.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proof-of-the-pudding.html