Quote: This may be just me but does he look really really stiff to anyone else? I saw his 40 and saw some highlights and the guy just kind of looks stiff in all his movements.
He has this thing when he runs that his upperbody stays extremely vertical while his lower body is dancing shifting and all that funky stuff. It makes him look a bit stiff but the opposite is true. It is a bit freaky lol.
I only got about halfway through that video, but what stuck out to me the most is that it was a highlight reel of gaping holes.
He showed some nifty feet at point, and some power, and of course some speed on his long TD runs. Maybe I just need to watch more of it, but I didn't see anything that really screamed "wow" for me at the next level. I mean, I'm sure he's gonna be good and all, but.... yeah. I'm kinda underwhelmed.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
I think that his vision might even me his most incredible attribute.
He seems to see everything all around him, and processes it into the right hole, cut, break off a block, and so on ...... then he turns on the speed and power and he's still using his eyes to stay aware of what is going on around him.
He's going to be a great one.
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.
He looks great against Florida and Auburn. I would like to have seen more highlights vs LSU. Why bother including any runs vs Kent St or N. Texas? How good were the defenses of the 2 Mississippi schools? Did Alabama not play South Carolina?
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown. Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
The Heisman View From Alabama: Trent Richardson By MARQUAVIUS BURNETT
Quarterbacks are naturally destined to collect big statistics and have high touchdown numbers. They touch the ball on every play.
A running back has to work for his numbers, before and after contact. When that running back faces seven of the nation’s top 50 defenses, five of the top 50 rush defenses and five top-20 total defenses, and still ranks in the top 5 nationally in rushing, he deserves credit for such a high level of production. Alabama running back Trent Richardson led the Crimson Tide to an 11-1 record on his way to receiving an invitation to the Heisman Trophy presentation in New York, making him the second Alabama player in three years to rank among the Heisman finalists (Mark Ingram won in 2009).
In 12 games Richardson averaged 6 yards a carry, running the ball 263 times and accounting for 1,583 rushing yards and 20 touchdowns. Richardson leads the Southeastern Conference and ranks fifth in the nation with 131.9 rushing yards per game.
Over the years, Richardson has developed into a complete player, improving his pass catching and protection along the way. This season he has 27 receptions for 327 yards and 3 touchdowns and giving him a total of 1,976 all-purpose yards – an average of 164.7 yards per game. Richardson finished the regular season with a “Heisman moment” against the Tide’s in-state rival, Auburn, rushing for 203 yards on 27 carries.
Alabama Coach Nick Saban paid Richardson the highest compliment following the Tide’s win against the Tigers.
“Trent is the best football player in the country,” Saban said. “You love saying that about someone who is such a good person. He does so much to serve other people. He’s a great teammate, a great leader and he cares about everyone around him. His performance and production speak for itself.”
On a weekly basis, Richardson faced the stiffest competition in the country, running against the tough SEC defenses and multiple top-25 opponents. He averaged 142 rushing yards per game and 198 all-purpose yards per game against five top-25 opponents, with 6 total touchdowns. In his toughest game, against the top ranked Louisiana State Tigers, Richardson gained 169 all-purpose yards (89 rushing, 80 receiving).
He had seven games with two or more touchdowns and nine 100-yard games – six of them consecutive. Richardson demonstrated the speed to outrun opponents, the power to run through defenses and the footwork to leave defenders frozen. But his most telling attribute is his ball security: he has lost only one fumble in 614 career touches and has turned over a fumble since the sixth game of his freshman season, a span of 550 touches.
Richardson, who on Monday he was named the SEC’s offensive player of the year, is also a finalist for the Walter Camp Award, the Maxwell Award and the Doak Walker Award.
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 love the kid but I get my QB first and take my back at 22 or 37 or even 68. With Jackson and Armond Smith as my 3rd down backs, I would feel comfortable going with a Lamichael James or Turbin as my feature back.
Funny they say "IN BEAST MODE" because he runs a lot like Lynch. He really swings that ball around, though. He's got to tighten that up. I wish he had played against some better competition... there's a lot of stuff vs. Idaho in there.
Quote: I love the kid but I get my QB first and take my back at 22 or 37 or even 68. With Jackson and Armond Smith as my 3rd down backs, I would feel comfortable going with a Lamichael James or Turbin as my feature back.
mourg...got to agree...Browns find themselves in the middle of great talent, picking #4 but if they are thinking QB, Tannehill won't last much longer than our #4, especially after his workout today.
While some have labeled Tannehill a reach at #4, he will likely be trending up and you know the Dolphins are just itching to draft him.
With this being a "show me" year for Hardesty and Brandon Jackson appearing to be healthy, this might not be the year for the Browns to consider drafting a RB.
Most of the time I would agree with ya Mour, but If we take a QB at #4, then aren't we leaving more talent on the board and reaching? I think TR is a #1 rated RB and Tanny is around 3 (some would argue 4) rated QB. So you almost have to take the higher rated talent, if not then your reaching. Thats been alot of our problems over the yrs. Our past coaches out thinking themselves and drafting a big $$ instead of the safer RB pick. I don't think we can afford to pass up the talent just to take a chance.
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.”
I am usually strictly Best Player Available but I see franchise QB in the kid and I dont know when we will get a chance to draft another.
Since 2002 we have had, Tim Couch with dead arm, Holmcomb in shell shock, Garfumble, Fryebaby, DA (and those initials didnt just mean derrick Anderson, Quinn, the washed up version of Jake Delhomme, Senneca Wallace and Colt McCoy.
Tannehill has the potential to be an elite level QB if groomed properly. WE have all these freaking QB guru's and I be damned if it isn't time they drafted a QB with the tools and developed him.
Wait till next year and we are probably drafting around 10 and no firepower to get into the top 2 or 3 to get a QB worth a damn because the Chiefs, Seahawks, Cowboys, Jags, Bucs, Eagles and Cards are all ready to draft another QB. Hell throw in Denver with Peyton's age and injuries.
I understand that. I wish I could bring myself to trust what you see. We seem to destroy QB's, so I'm gun shy. But I see what your saying. I hope on Draft day, If we don't go RB, then I'm trusting ya to come thru on the QB!
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.”
4.50 in the 40 Which is really good for a back with his size. 28 in the bench and showed great hands in the receiving drills. I actually thought he showed the most natural hands of any back.
Quote: 4.50 in the 40 Which is really good for a back with his size. 28 in the bench and showed great hands in the receiving drills. I actually thought he showed the most natural hands of any back.
There are just a lot of really good backs.
No offense to all the Trent Richardson promoters here but I'd much rather have Doug Martin from Boise State at a discounted price (in draft position and dollars) over Richardson.
Doug Martin might end up being the best pro of the bunch.
I think this draft is awfully flat. Moreso than any I can remember.
What I'm saying is that the skill level at 10 and the skill level at 60 is not night and day.
If I was GM I would position as many of my picks from 20-60 as possible. You're even going to get quality guys at 100.
If someone wants to give up a second rounder for a few spots back from 4 I do that in a heartbeat. I also move back from 22 if I can get a second or a third for a small move like we did with Phil Taylor on the opposite end.
I then use the non compensatory picks to get myself back in the top 100 and I think we could make a case for filling out the front part of the roster. We then draft 2013 and beyond like most teams do eg the Ravens and the Steelers...grooming depth to replace free agents.
We know the projected top-10 pick ran the forty-yard dash twice.
But we don’t really know what his forty time was.
It was repeatedly said on SportsCenter Thursday that Richardson registered “a 4.4 forty.” NFL Network’s Bucky Brooks clocked Richardson “in the 4.45 to 4.49 range.” The times relayed by ESPN3′s live broadcast were 4.58 and 4.58, “unofficially.” In his Pro Day review, SI.com draft analyst Tony Pauline wrote that Richardson “failed to run an elite 40 time.”
While there was no consensus on Richardson’s forty time, he did 25 reps of 225 pounds on the bench and told ESPN’s Merril Hoge following the workout that he was “mad” he didn’t run a 4.3.
Working in Richardson’s favor is the fact that (most) teams don’t make draft choices based strictly on forty times. They watch the game tape, and Richardson’s is very, very good.
Richardson has pre-draft private workouts set up with the Cleveland Browns and Tampa Bay Bucs. He is considered likely to be drafted either by the Browns at No. 4 or Bucs at No. 5. PFT
By now it's pretty clear which way I'm leaning in the draft, but I have never seen anything in Richardson that would make me believe he could have run a 4.3. He's a 9.5 or higher in every single category in my book, except for straight-line speed. He's incredibly fast for a guy who is barely over 5'9 yet is a meatloaf away from being 230. 4.50 is truckin' it for any starting tail-back in the NFL, but he has never looked like he had 4.3 speed to me.
Now, since Mourg had the audacity to come into a Richardson thread with his Tannehill propaganda, I'm going to make a case for Richardson out of retaliation.
Tannehill is about upside. Richardson is about known production and a known quantity.
In 2007, JaMarcus Russell was about upside. Adrian Peterson was about production and being a known quantity.
Robert Griffin III has a ceiling like no QB in decades, but the Colts are going to take Andrew Luck.
Why is that?
Because with Griffin you have a higher ceiling, but with Luck you have a higher floor and an almost guarantee of him not flaming out.
With Tannehill you have a higher ceiling in terms of playing a greater position of need (though in terms of pure ability nobody has the ceiling of Richardson in this draft) but with Richardson you have a virtual guarantee that he's not only not going to suck, but will instead be a pro-bowl caliber guy.
So why should we take Tannehill over Richardson? It shouldn't be because we don't have a franchise QB, and thus should make a risky selection.
The Raiders could have Adrian Peterson, while the Browns were *this* close to taking Russell because Opie loved his upside.
Thanks for your time.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
Understand I don't want to see them draft Richardson, but I won't be too upset if they do. I'll be upsed that that means they didn't get a Qb.
But I read this and the 6 yards per carry stuck out at me. And I remembered something, Maurice Clarett was a 6 yards per carry back.
This other line here. " Richardson LED Alab, to an 11-1 record." Coach, and about 3 top 50 defensive draft picks helped. I mean if he led Indiana U, to an 11-1 record then HE would have led them.
Maurice Clarett had a similar team, 14-0 National title, they HAD to have some big time defenders on that team coming out. So I want to know, 1 on 1 comparison Trent Richarson college career, vs Maurice Clarett college career. and Trent Richardson college career vs Eddie George college career 1 on 1 comparison.
Quote: A running back has to work for his numbers, before and after contact. When that running back faces seven of the nation’s top 50 defenses, five of the top 50 rush defenses and five top-20 total defenses, and still ranks in the top 5 nationally in rushing, he deserves credit for such a high level of production. Alabama running back Trent Richardson led the Crimson Tide to an 11-1 record on his way to receiving an invitation to the Heisman Trophy presentation in New York, making him the second Alabama player in three years to rank among the Heisman finalists (Mark Ingram won in 2009).
In 12 games Richardson averaged 6 yards a carry, running the ball 263 times and accounting for 1,583 rushing yards and 20 touchdowns. Richardson leads the Southeastern Conference and ranks fifth in the nation with 131.9 rushing yards per game.
Over the years, Richardson has developed into a complete player, improving his pass catching and protection along the way. This season he has 27 receptions for 327 yards and 3 touchdowns and giving him a total of 1,976 all-purpose yards – an average of 164.7 yards per game. Richardson finished the regular season with a “Heisman moment” against the Tide’s in-state rival, Auburn, rushing for 203 yards on 27 carries.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
I think this draft is awfully flat. Moreso than any I can remember.
What I'm saying is that the skill level at 10 and the skill level at 60 is not night and day.
If I was GM I would position as many of my picks from 20-60 as possible. You're even going to get quality guys at 100.
Spot on and many others have observed this, that's why I'd like to "punt" the #22 or #37 into next season and settle for a 2nd/3rd this draft..but it's tough to trade down as almost every other FO tried to move down in our mock
This also means 3 other things:
1. We will see even more "wtf" picks deviating heavily from "consensus" internet rankings
2. It's a "bad" (it's never really bad, but...) draft to have an extra mid/late 1st
3. While there is mid round depth, it's NOT the same depth the draft offered last year, where round 1 talent dropped in to the 2nd (Sheard)...the 2nd to 4th round range "looks" better because that's where those guys are expected to go...that's their talent level, we're not talking about Top50 talent dropping here...they aren't better because some 2nd round guy gets picked in the 1st, it's just that there's a lack of "safe" 1st round talent and the 2nd and 3rd tier groups are bigger instead...I just want to dampen the expectation level of folks around here...I don't think this draft will deliver as many day 1 ready contributors as last year's draft...much more developmental/"ceiling" talent and some will just be AVG or worse NFL players when all is said and done....I'm saying this because posters already expect to have 4-5 new day 1 starters out of this draft..it's not gonna happen and if it does, there are going to be growing pains like all of even our good picks had (Haden, Mack, Ward, Pinkston, Little etc)...this draft won't upgrade our 2012 performance as much as people around here suspect it will, sorry...2011 was the exception not the rule (good, deep draft class combined with a great job from our GM)
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
Quote: The Raiders could have Adrian Peterson, while the Browns were *this* close to taking Russell because Opie loved his upside.
The Raiders shoulda taken Joe Thomas.............
I have no regrets in that draft. I remember reading an article on how we may be shoulda drafted Peterson ahead of Thomas (years later), and I thought that was silly.
Joe Thomas is money. Like any tackle, he has given up some sacks, but overall, he's still one of the very best in football, if not the best. He does a very good job protecting the blindside, and it's not his fault that our QBs and rest of the offense have sucked it up. Plus, he'll play a few more years than Peterson will (period and at the elite level)
So gotta disagree Toad. The Raiders, who I believe had no LT at the time prob, shoulda gotten Joe T --------------- Otherwise, good post. In that draft, I dropped to my knees and said "Yes!" when we got Thomas. Simply because of what you said, he's an elite talent, who barring some freak injury would be an elite player for awhile. Luckily he also plays an essential position.
With Richardson, I feel torn in many ways. I've always been a huge fan on making sure you make the safe pick, but I do like the potential that Tannehill brings. Tannehills a high risk high reward pick. If we get our franchise QB, we just climbed a very big hurdle. But screwing up the number 4 pick would also set us back pretty significantly.
I still lean Richardson at this point if we stand pat. At 22 we get ourselves a RT or WR, and at 37, we get ourselves the position we didn't get at 22. I like Tannehill's skills, and I've watched a lot of tape on him. He's got a good arm, he also shows an ability to throw on the run and scramble a bit (thus extending plays). I think it's funny how a pro-day all of a sudden changes a guy's perceived value.
I've watched a ton of youtube on Tannehill. He's got a strong arm, stronger than McCoy's. His accuracy irks me a bit unfortunately. Plus, his decision making. Now that could have to do that he's really played only 2 seasons of college football at QB, and it could be me just being nitpicky. So if we select him at 4, I have faith in Heckert.
But, if I'm selecting, I go Richardson (who i've been high on all along).
Either way, it's funny how these guys have pro-days which seem to increase their stock to the people who report on them. Hasn't Mayock seen enough film to know that Tannehill has a good arm? The guy played college WR, of course he is a good athlete. Duh
Richardson's best attribute - Vision. He does a great job of seeing then hitting the hole
Speaking of holes, that is a pretty impressive o-line that Alabama has.
He has good but not great speed.
He has good but not great shiftiness.
I tried to keep an eye out for Claiborne. He was conspicuously absent on most of those plays. Granted those were mostly run plays in the videos so no comments on his coverage ability but it makes me question if he is as good in run support as reported.
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown. Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The running back position in the NFL has undergone a devaluation, but the great running back never goes out of style.
With the salary-cap changes in the pool of money available to rookies, investing in a running back near the top of the draft isn't as risky as it was previously. So simply acknowledging the NFL in 2012 as a quarterbacks' league isn't enough for the Browns to pass on Alabama running back Trent Richardson, who -- last time scouts checked -- catches and blocks as well as he runs.
Doubtful that San Diego is ruing the day it settled for LaDanian Tomlinson, you know, with Gerard Warren already spoken for.
Some would say, though, that 2001 is ancient history, that the game has changed. OK. Then it's just as doubtful Minnesota is second-guessing itself for taking Adrian Peterson seventh overall in 2007. Has the league changed that much in five years?
John Madden might be pushing to give quarterbacks the same protection afforded punters and kickers -- namely that you can breathe in their direction, just not heavily. But until quarterbacks start wearing jerseys the color of a "Stop" sign or pass rushers record sacks only by pulling a flag out of the QB's pocket, handing the ball off has its place in the game. Handing it into the wheelhouse of a home-run hitter has even more benefits.
Two recent developments are cited in making the case that this isn't the NFL of Byner and Mack, let alone of Jim Brown. The argument goes beyond the usual concerns about how much punishment a running back takes and, consequently, the relative shortness of his career.
Just a year ago, no running back was taken in the first round until No. 28, when the Saints picked Alabama's Mark Ingram. What does that mean, though, when just a year earlier three went in the first round, two (C.J. Spiller and Ryan Mathews) in the Top 12? Spiller is the only running back taken in the top 10 in the last three drafts. But go back five drafts and he's joined by Darren McFadden (4) and Peterson (7).
Not every draft is as well represented at every position, so it's dangerous to draft too many conclusions using too small of a sample. For instance, no wide receiver got drafted in 2010 until Denver took Demaryius Thomas at No. 22 and Dallas grabbed Dez Bryant at No. 24. Were wide receivers devalued that year?
You can find as many quarterbacks who were overvalued in the top 10 (Jamarcus Russell) and wide receivers (Darius Heyward-Bey) as you can running backs. Last year quarterback inflation pushed Cam Newton, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder into the top 12. Wide receivers A.J. Green and Julio Jones went in the Top 6.
That same inflation has pushed Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III to the top of the 2012 draft boards. Would the No. 4 pick be better spent on a franchise quarterback than on Trent Richardson? Absolutely. But if that's not possible -- and I'm not buying Ryan Tannehill as a close replica of Griffin III -- the Browns need to take the best offensive player who can make the biggest impact. That's Richardson, whom some believe is the best back since Peterson.
Will his career be shorter than wide receiver Justin Blackmon's? The statistics for the position say so, but not every running back is Montario Hardesty.
Another shaky reason why running backs may look less important in 2012 is how little fanfare surrounds the free-agent class. That includes Peyton Hillis signing for one year and $2.5 million. Had Hillis become a free agent after 2010, though, you can't tell me teams would've turned a cold shoulder to him because they see a trend toward increased passing in the NFL.
Just because the Browns didn't value Hillis doesn't mean they made the right decision. Getting Richardson would shine a light on why the Browns didn't sign Hillis for what Kansas City paid him.
Drafting Richardson gives the Browns a dynamic offensive talent whose contribution is not predicated on the quarterback's arm or his grasp of the West Coast offense.
A great talent that other teams would have to target in their game plans? Now, there's a concept.
Please see my previous posts which laid out a full description of Cleveland's running game since 2000. It showed how we have fared with it as well as the number of years (7 or 8) we have had 1000 yard rushers or combined 1000 yard rushers due to injury. It also shows how we have not succeeded with a passing game because of the lack of production from the WR positions. Except for.... (surprisingly enough) the 2 winning seasons we have had in the past decade.
Sincerely,
SBD.
Blocking those who argue to argue, eliminates the argument.
Had to laugh when Buddy said that WRs play longer than RBs on AVG but than cites Hardesty as counter argument...it's fact Mr.Shaw, LARGE sample size fact...how many "prime" seasons does even an elite RB have? 5? 7? How many prime seasons does an elite QB or WR have usually? See?
I'm astonished how many who cover football for a living don't get the concept of value and I really like Richardson and won't moan if we pick him...but we better have a sound plan for those other Top 100 picks that makes sense...I'm on board with pretty much ANY possible pick at 4, as they are all good, high upside players, some safer, some less....the question is how we play the rest of the draft and imho it will be tougher to draft "around" Richardson or Blackmon than it is around a QB or shutdown CB
Can't put it any better than Bellichick: "We're not collecting talent, we're building a team"
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
I'm coming around on Richardson. I do agree with those that say you probably shouldn't draft a back that high, because of the abuse taken at that position, and the fact that it's become more of a passing league, but I think I would be ok with the pick there.
For one, You're not getting RG3 or Luck, which are the 2 real prize pieces. The next best piece is probably Kalil, who besides the fact that he may not even be there at 4, is playing a position that you are already set at, as well as having a lot of money dumped into.
I think if you don't take Richardson or Claiborne, you could possibly be reaching, which would be unhealthier than taking a RB when RB is a giant hole right now.
If you take Richardson, I think you have to feel good about the RB situation. You have maybe the best RB prospect since AP, and you have a good backup/3rd down back, coming off injury in Jackson, as well as Hardesty, who has a lot to prove, and Chris O who filled in nicely (should he stick around)
I think you can really mix things up with that group. I feel better about taking Richardson because we also have that 22nd pick, plus 37, so you could see it as a bonus.
I'm with most. I have no problem taking the best player available, and if the Browns have Richardson as their best player on the board when 4 comes up, you won't hear a complaint from me.
Quote: I'm with most. I have no problem taking the best player available, and if the Browns have Richardson as their best player on the board when 4 comes up, you won't hear a complaint from me.
Ditto. Too bad we'd all be holding our breath hoping he didn't get injured on his way up to the podium . . .
I also look at what player is most likely to make an impact on winning games next year. (which is the criteria that Holmgren put forth) That would definitely be Richardson. His skills would help take the pressure off of Colt McCoy. We could run play action that teams would have to respect, McCoy would not have to throw on every 1st and 2nd down, and we would likely find ourselves in manageable 3rd down situations with a great RB .... because even 3rd and 4 or 5 could be a running down. I think about teams going Nickel or Dime .... and then running a back like Richardson against 200# DBs ......... I like it.
Anyway, I think that a guy like Richardson could be a huge security blanket for whoever the QB winds up being, next year or beyond.
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 wont complain if we draft Richardson because he does have a lot of talent but at the same time, 8 man fronts are what our backs faced last year. 8 man fronts will be what they face this year. Richardson would put up 1200 plus easy enough but we honestly would not be one damn bit better.
In the article the guy was talking about LT vs. Big money. Well Warren was a turd from the start and should never have been drafted but the league has changed so much since that draft. Defenseless receiver rules and illegal contact rules have made it so a below average QB can have a good year. SAdly really bad QBs are only having bad years.
However, if we can run play action against an 8 man front, then the QB can pop the ball over the top and really make the defense pay. He should be able to do it anyway, but with a truly credible threat at RB, it makes selling it even easier.
All I kept hearing last year was how the loss of Hillis hurt McCoy badly, so I want to make sure that we give him a premium weapon at RB to help him the best we can.
I honestly do not see Blackmon as an elite guy. I think that he'll be good ...... but he's not a guy who is physically dominating on the football field. He's not a big receiver, and he's not a particularly fast receiver ..... and that, to me, is not a top 5 receiver. He also had that DUI in 2010 .... which I suppose could happen to any of a thousand college kids ...... but it is a concern 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.
Quote: I wont complain if we draft Richardson because he does have a lot of talent but at the same time, 8 man fronts are what our backs faced last year. 8 man fronts will be what they face this year. Richardson would put up 1200 plus easy enough but we honestly would not be one damn bit better
Sure, but this opinion will only last until we draft our hall of fame WR in the same draft, right???
A great talent that other teams would have to target in their game plans? Now, there's a concept.
No Bud it is not. Hillis had our opponents defenses attention too and all that lead to was 8 or 9 in the box, forcing (tempting) us to beat them with the pass.
Nice try Bud, but we have already seen that hand.
My biggest fear with Richardson is that we will rely on him like we did Hillis when healthy and stay one dimensional.
I started out a Blackmon guy but as time has gone on I feel that with 22 we can get a great receiving talent. More talented than what we'd get at that pick of remaining RBs. Richardson is a stud. Pair him up with Jeffery, Wright, Sanu, or such and go with it. Holmgren had Alexander, Shurmer had Jackson. We need our stud.
Quote: I started out a Blackmon guy but as time has gone on I feel that with 22 we can get a great receiving talent. More talented than what we'd get at that pick of remaining RBs. Richardson is a stud. Pair him up with Jeffery, Wright, Sanu, or such and go with it. Holmgren had Alexander, Shurmer had Jackson. We need our stud.
I highly doubt that we can afford to spend that 22nd selection on a WR, because we also need a RT and one who we can expect to start.
We don't just need another body at the WR position either and whether you agree or not there is a big difference between the top 2 and the rest. I doubt that more then 3 WR will be drafted in the 1st round ( I see only 2 that I would take) and we are all witness to getting one in the 2nd round doesn't mean that you will have made any upgrades at the position for certain.
We need to stop beatting around the bush and trying to catch fire in a bottle where our WR's are concerned imo.
JJ was the only quality WR we have had since 99 and we haven't had a star receiver since Paul Warfield for the love of God.
We had some decent ones, like Brian Brennan and Webbstar Slaughter, but they where not great.
Quote: the Browns need to take the best offensive player who can make the biggest impact. That's Richardson
Boy!, It sure is nice to read something I've been trying to say for the last couple of months. Just didn't know how to put it in words like that. Another thing I've tried to say but I guess fell short was it takes a WR a season or two to "get it", and since were in the WCO maybe even longer. With a RB, it is pretty much plug & play. So, since we need playmakers and have to contribute immediately, it is the best option in my opinion.
Quote: Drafting Richardson gives the Browns a dynamic offensive talent whose contribution is not predicated on the quarterback's arm or his grasp of the West Coast offense.
This is another big reason, Give Colt some help & take if off his back.
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.”
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)