Theres been a lot of Trent Richardson talk lately...
We keep saying dont take him because it is too high to take a RB.
Look at RBs that have been taken in the top 10 in the last 10 years...
2011 - Mark Ingram #28 NO (First off) 2010 - CJ Spiller #9 Buffalo 2009 - Knowshon Moreno #12 Denver (1st off, not top 10) 2008 - Darren McFadden #4 Oakland, also Jonathon Stewart #13 Carolina (though not top 10) 2007 - Adrian Peterson #7 Minnesota, also Marshawn Lynch #12 Buffalo 2006 - Reggie Bush #2 NO, also Laurence Maroney #21 NE 2005 - Ronnie Brown #2 Miami, Ced Benson #4 Chicago, Cadillac Williams #5 TB 2004 - Steven Jackson #24 STL (first off) 2003 - Willis McGahee #23 Buffalo (first off), Larry Johnson #27 KC 2002 - William Green #16 Cleveland (first off), TJ Duckett #18 ATL 2001 - LaDanian Tomlinson #5 SD, also, Deuce McAllister #23 NO 2000 - Jamal Lewis #5 Baltimore, Thomas Jones #7 AZ, Ron Dayne #11 NYG, Shaun Alexander #19 1999 - Edgerrin James #4 Indy
Looking at first round running backs, especially those taken in the top 10 or first off the board...Are generally VERY successful and successful to the point where they are franchise guys. Not always has it been for the team that picked them, but they have become legitimately good running backs in this league...Some of which have gone on to be the best in their franchise's history, or the best since.
Point is...saying that #4 is too high because its easy to find guys later is not overly true.
Yea theres an Arian Foster or MJD to be found, but your franchise backs are found in the 1st round...hahaha, but really, 1st round backs are pretty darn good.
Maroney, William Green, Duckett, Dayne and Moreno have been busts... Benson, Lynch, McGahee, and Bush were better for other teams... Larry Johnson is the only back that was good that it wasnt sustained...
taking a first round back, or the 1st back off the board is rarely a bad thing, and Richardson seems to have the abilities of Adrian Peterson...
I keep hearing Stronger Ray Rice and bigger MJD...With our RB situation...how can we go wrong with this guy? We need production there, especially if Hillis leaves...
"It has to start somewhere It has to start somehow What better place than here? What better time than now?"
I agree, I know FLdawg does not like that I said that the RB touches the ball 20-25 times a game vs. 6-7 for a WR, but my point was that We Need A Playmaker.
What better way to do that then draft one that touches the ball the most? Yeah you need a big play Wr. But you also need a QB who can get them the ball, and until Colt learns this offense a little better we need a go to guy now.
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180 You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow #GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.
Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.
In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.
Quote: Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.
Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.
In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.
Because so many running backs die off at age 26 or 27. Every premium running back plays at a high level until at least 30.
Personally I wouldn't want to take a RB that high. If Chris Polk from Washington is there in the second I would jump all over that pick. He would be a pretty good fit in a WCO I think.
Quote: Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.
Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.
In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.
Because so many running backs die off at age 26 or 27. Every premium running back plays at a high level until at least 30.
Are you assuming that Richardson is going to come in and instantly be a productive running back?
Quote: Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.
Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.
In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.
Because so many running backs die off at age 26 or 27. Every premium running back plays at a high level until at least 30.
Are you assuming that Richardson is going to come in and instantly be a productive running back?
He'll be a top-five running back from day one, just like Adrian Peterson in 2007.
Give me Cyrus Gray in the 4th....perfect fit, great receiver
Gotta love what Sherman had to say about him:
Intangibles: Sherman referred to Gray as a "guy you want to marry your daughter" because of his attitude and work ethic on and off the field. Accepts whatever role he is given on the team, supports teammates who may get more touches. "We" player, deflects praise to teammates.
Quote: Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.
Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.
In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.
Contracts are I believe 5 years max, and as such EVERY PLAYER only has a 5 year max production on first contract. If he's good, you re-sign, if he's not he's gone regardless of position. Moot point.
Arian Foster, Ahmad Bradshaw, Pierre Thomas, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Michael Turner, Frank Gore, LeSean McCoy, DeMarco Murray, LeGarrette Blount, Ray Rice, Maurice Jones-Drew.
All are good reasons why we shouldn't take a running back in the first round.
Quote: taking a first round back, or the 1st back off the board is rarely a bad thing,
You just listed twenty-four players. Of those twenty-four, twelve (Spiller, Moreno, Bush, Maroney, Cadillac, Brown, Benson, Green, Duckett, Jones, and Dayne. Lynch was good for two years before they had to trade him.) were busts for the team that drafted them. When I see rarely I think, "most of the time these guys will be successful". 50% is not most of the time.
I would much rather use a later pick and draft a guy like LaMichael James, Chris Polk, or Doug Martin. I would also try and sign a few undrafted guys and see if they stick.
There absolutely is a way. Every top running back comes along sometime, and Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?
Quote: He'll be a top-five running back from day one, just like Adrian Peterson in 2007.
This I agree with. Trent Richardson is not your normal top RB in the NFL draft.
Richardson is about as sure a bet as we can get at the RB position. He's got the talent at the level of Adrian Peterson and Ladanian Tomilinson.
Rarely does a RB do much for me, and I've been much more interested in Doug Martin lately, but drafting Richardson would not be a problem for me at all.
I get that a lot factors into a successful run game, the scheme and the O-Line are very important. But talent wise, Trent Richardson blows most everyone out of the water. He's a workout nut, he's very good on the field, great vision, doesn't fumble the ball, good hands, decent blocker.
He has the talent of a future HOFer. Would I mind drafting someone like that? No, not at all
Quote: Theres been a lot of Trent Richardson talk lately...
We keep saying dont take him because it is too high to take a RB.
Look at RBs that have been taken in the top 10 in the last 10 years...
2011 - Mark Ingram #28 NO (First off) 2010 - CJ Spiller #9 Buffalo 2009 - Knowshon Moreno #12 Denver (1st off, not top 10) 2008 - Darren McFadden #4 Oakland, also Jonathon Stewart #13 Carolina (though not top 10) 2007 - Adrian Peterson #7 Minnesota, also Marshawn Lynch #12 Buffalo 2006 - Reggie Bush #2 NO, also Laurence Maroney #21 NE 2005 - Ronnie Brown #2 Miami, Ced Benson #4 Chicago, Cadillac Williams #5 TB 2004 - Steven Jackson #24 STL (first off) 2003 - Willis McGahee #23 Buffalo (first off), Larry Johnson #27 KC 2002 - William Green #16 Cleveland (first off), TJ Duckett #18 ATL 2001 - LaDanian Tomlinson #5 SD, also, Deuce McAllister #23 NO 2000 - Jamal Lewis #5 Baltimore, Thomas Jones #7 AZ, Ron Dayne #11 NYG, Shaun Alexander #19 1999 - Edgerrin James #4 Indy
Looking at first round running backs, especially those taken in the top 10 or first off the board...Are generally VERY successful and successful to the point where they are franchise guys. Not always has it been for the team that picked them, but they have become legitimately good running backs in this league...Some of which have gone on to be the best in their franchise's history, or the best since.
Point is...saying that #4 is too high because its easy to find guys later is not overly true.
Yea theres an Arian Foster or MJD to be found, but your franchise backs are found in the 1st round...hahaha, but really, 1st round backs are pretty darn good.
Maroney, William Green, Duckett, Dayne and Moreno have been busts... Benson, Lynch, McGahee, and Bush were better for other teams... Larry Johnson is the only back that was good that it wasnt sustained...
taking a first round back, or the 1st back off the board is rarely a bad thing, and Richardson seems to have the abilities of Adrian Peterson...
I keep hearing Stronger Ray Rice and bigger MJD...With our RB situation...how can we go wrong with this guy? We need production there, especially if Hillis leaves...
Of those 24 1st round rb's you name, knowing what they produced, how many would you take with the #4 pick?
I would take:
AP, Steven Jackson, Shaun Alexander and Edge. Larry Johnson and JLewis would be a maybe's. Many might say McFadden but he is way to fragile.
That is 4-6 out of 24. When I read your list I thought you were trying to convince me to not take Richardson at #4
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
Quote: Give me Cyrus Gray in the 4th....perfect fit, great receiver
Gotta love what Sherman had to say about him:
Intangibles: Sherman referred to Gray as a "guy you want to marry your daughter" because of his attitude and work ethic on and off the field. Accepts whatever role he is given on the team, supports teammates who may get more touches. "We" player, deflects praise to teammates.
I really like Gray... wouldn't mind him here... He's a hard worker and I think has a lot of talent... if I remember correctly though he had some injury problems this year, but I might be wrong on that...
I'm not high on Richardson at #4... I'd take him a little later if we traded down, but I'd rather go QB (if RG3 were there) or the CB from LSU... I'm just not sure about a WR or RB at #4... thankfully I'm not drafting though
Quote: Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?
We agree Deep, we agree.
There's two guys in this draft who are ridiculously good. Andrew Luck and Trent Richardson. Richardson, talent wise is better than pretty much any running back in the NFL. Production wise....... That's up to how the dice rolls (injuries) and the rest of his offense. But that's the case with many WRs and QBs too.
But as a pure player, who would I rather have on my team, Trent Richardson or any other RB. I'll go Trent Richardson over everyone. Peterson tore his ACL and I've always worried about injuries with him.
But IMO, he's got the talent of the great ones. Watch, Browns get Richardson, and we'll have our Curtis Martin (a back who plays about 10 seasons and never misses a game!) Except, he'll be even better than Curtis Martin, and he won't leave the Browns, the way he left the Pats (how stupid were they for letting him go to Parcells and the Jets!)
Trent Richardson = STUD and could possibly become my new favorite RB ever (over Curtis Martin) and the next Cleveland Brown and Danger's next Jersey
Quote: There absolutely is a way. Every top running back comes along sometime, and Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?
I want to see him catch more passes, I want to see him pass block. I want to see how great his vision is and what type of decisions he makes on cutbacks and finding the holes. He doesn't have elite speed, it's okay 4.4-4.5 maybe on a good day.
Show me all the highlights you want, i've watched plenty of Peterson in college and plenty of Richardson. These are guys I have watched. Richardson is as good of a prospect AND he didn't get injured the way Peterson did.
That was the knack on Peterson coming out, and why he didn't get drafted very high. Injury concerns. Richardson hasn't shown this to be an issue. And talent wise, I find Richardson to be as good.
You can say I'm wrong, that's okay. But you'll see. Save some career ending injury, I'm willing to bet I'll be right on Trent Richardson. He's as good as any RB in the NFL. Will he lead the league in rushing and rushing TD's? That depends on the position he's put in, but if given the correct opportunity, I'm willing to bet he will
Love his hands but man I love his ability to avoid loss of yards. Over and over, I see what should be a 3 yard loss turn into a 3 to 8 yard gain out of absolutely nothing. The last back to do that was Emmit Smith and that is who Richardson reminds me of.
RB is one of the easiest positions to scout (Thanks, Butch ) so the one's taken early tend to have very high hit rates. With that in mind, I'm still of the opinion that while RB's tend to be over-rated by fans (but not the league) Richardson is probably the safest guy in this draft. I've no idea where it is, but I'm still of the sentiment that I wouldn't be the least bit upset if we took him. Would #4 be high? Yes, but if it were me personally, I'd pay an extra premium to have a much greater chance of a successful player.
As for the comparisons, the very first guy I thought of was Rice, as he truly does look like a bigger version of him. He's a true 3-down back. If I remember correctly, he's fumbled exactly one time in the last 450+ carries. Speed, strength, great vision, natural pass catcher...What's not to like.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
I get the concept of value. What are positions of value for a #4 pick?
I look at value as...if its a top 5 pick...does that guy solidify that position, and make it a strength for 8-10 years. I think Trent would do that, therefore the value works for me.
Could anyone argue that LaDanian Tomlinson was a good value for the Chargers at 5? Was Edge good value for Indy at 4? Or...AP at 7?
I feel like if we went on value for things...the only guys that should go in the top 5 are LTs and QBs...
"It has to start somewhere It has to start somehow What better place than here? What better time than now?"
I am trying to remember the last truly great RB who took his team to a Super Bowl victory without an equally great QB by his side.
Maybe the Ravens in 2001 ..... but that was more a once in a lifetime defense than anything else. maybe Anderson going for 102 in a defensive struggle back in 1991. Marcus Allen in 1984 certainly had a performance for the ages. Other than that, it's been mostly QB driven teams, especially in the past decade or so, who win Super Bowls.
I want to win Super Bowls. I don't want to get "pretty good" ..... I want a great team. Great teams need a great QB more than they need a great RB, especially with the way the passing rules are today.
I would have no problem with Richardson if we were set at QB, but we are not. The QB is the game changer in today's NFL, and we should get one while we have this opportunity. I believe that there are 2 game changing QBs in this draft, and that this draft will be a major failure if we make our selections and one of the 2 names Luck or Griffin III are not on our list. (unless we have already traded for a potentially great QB... like if Tampa loses their mind and decides to trade Freeman to us)
As always, JMESHO.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
I went through the last eleven drafts (2001-2011) to try and find out how easy it was to find a RB in rounds 3-7.
There were 161 RBs drafted, 14 of those have had a 1000 yard season (8.7%). Of those 14, only half had more than one 1000 yard season. (Charles, Gore, Jacobs, Turner, Dominack Davis/Williams, Westbrook, and Rudi Johnson). Seven out of 161 RBs draft in rounds 3-7 have had multiple 1000 yard seasons (Charles is the only of those RBs drafted in the past 6 years to have multiple).
That tells me that RBs aren't as easy to find as most seem to think.
Quote: Seven out of 161 RBs draft in rounds 3-7 have had multiple 1000 yard seasons (Charles is the only of those RBs drafted in the past 6 years to have multiple).
214...that's some good stuff that definitely supports the pov, where RBs are drafted does matter.
As for Richardson becoming a Brown, impart, depends on what happens with Hillis.
Another consideration, do the Browns rate the need for WR ahead of RB.
However ..... then you look at guys like BenJarvus Green-Ellis, LeGarrette Blount, and Arian Foster who went undrafted entirely, and who have each had at least one 1000 yard season, and you have to ask yourself if it's all that hard to do.
Further, I think that part of it is the age of specialization we find ourselves in. Buffalo, for example, had Jackson and Spiller combine for about 1500 yards. Carolina had Williams and Stewart combine for almost 1600 yards. (plus Cam newton's 700) Chicago had Forte and Barber combine for over 1400 yards. Dallas had 2 guys combine for over 1400 yards. The list goes on.
Some teams rely on a single guy, (mainly) but it seems like most teams today rely upon a variety of guys to carry the rushing load. Maybe one guy doesn't get the huge numbers, but the team has an effective rushing attack nonetheless.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
If you've been around for a while, and you ask your self "what is Browns football?", the answer has to start with a strong running game. Yes, there has been one great QB, and several good QBs in our history, but until the 90's, when the wheels came off this once proud franchise, the constant in our offensive approach was "in Cleveland, we run the ball". Marion Motley, Dub Jones, Jim Brown, Leroy Kelly, Greg Pruitt, Mike Pruitt, Kevin Mack, Earnest Byner. 3 HOF RB's, and a host of "very goods".
I know what you're thinking: the game has changed, old man, the NFL is a passing game now. To which I reply, with all due respect ... bollocks. A good-to-great running game energizes an O-Line, fatigues and demoralizes an opponents defense, keeps your defense off the field and fresh for the 4th qtr, keeps your opponents offense off the field, shortens the game, and reduces hits on your QB. It is intuitive that in this climate, in an outdoor stadium - especially in November and December - that you need a strong running game. In this division, with stack-the-box, blitz-crazy defenses, a strong running game will save your QB's life, and set up the passing game with play-action that is meaningful because D's respect your run. I watched our games against Pitt, Baltimore, and Cinci, and I'm going to tell you, those teams could be run on if we stayed with it.
Which is my long-winded way of saying that if you can get a Trent Richardson at 4, you do it and never look back. Then, you sign Hillis. Then, in 2012, you pound the rock right up their keesters. Its Browns' football, the way it oughta be.
[Taking the onion off my belt and turning off my Grampa Simpson voice now.]
) so the one's taken early tend to have very high hit rates. With that in mind, I'm still of the opinion that while RB's tend to be over-rated by fans (but not the league) Richardson is probably the safest guy in this draft. I've no idea where it is, but I'm still of the sentiment that I wouldn't be the least bit upset if we took him. Would #4 be high? Yes, but if it were me personally, I'd pay an extra premium to have a much greater chance of a successful player. 
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)