Until the Browns are perennial contenders I feel that Heckert should do everything in his power to continually add top 50 picks. If that means striking a deal with the Rams, so be it.
If he drafts well, that means that's an extra guy who can immediately contribute to the team.
If they want to move up... I think a reasonable deal would be a swap this year and their 3rd this year, and their second next year. That's minimum, ideal plausible would be Swap this year 3rd this year and their First next year.
Quote: I would ask for one of their firsts next year or one of their seconds this year and their second next year.
I know you are just goofing around.....the best we would get is a 3rd this year, and possibly a 4th next year.
We can say we would hold them hostage, but that isn't a smart thing to do. First, Homie can't blame the Rams because he bungled the deal with the Rams and if we do indeed want to trade down, you have to do what is good for the team and not hold out or refuse to trade with them.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Quote: So you wouldn't want Bradford, is that what you're saying?
I would have been OK with us getting him based upon Holmgren's reputation ....... but he's not my ideal QB, no.
I like what Brian Billick said about taking a 1st rd QB (Tannehill was the discussion). He said if you are convinced he will be a Franchise QB and has all the tools to BECOME one, then you take him anywhere you have to, it wont matter where if he pans out. BUT.. He said M. Holmgren as a coach, GM or President in the NFL of 30 years has NEVER taken a 1st rd QB and if he MISSES.. he loses his QB guru card forever.
Quote: First, Homie can't blame the Rams because he bungled the deal with the Rams and if we do indeed want to trade down, you have to do what is good for the team and not hold out or refuse to trade with them.
peen...you keep claiming the Browns bungled the deal but you seem to forget there was a personal relationship between Shannahan and Fisher as well as the Redskins owner and the Rams owner.
The Rams wanted to deal with the Redskins and it would not have mattered if the Browns entered into a bidding war, offering even more...because Dan Snyder was not going to be outbid and the Rams wanted to make the deal with the Redskins.
Now you can continue to look for someone to blame, because Browns fans just have to have someone to blame... or you can try to deal with the fact that the Browns realized they were not going to win the bidding for RGIII because of the two franchises involved.
The Browns felt they already had a better deal on the table when the Rams closed the bidding. Tell me, what team closing the bidding when draft day is over a month away?
The Rams wanted to deal with the Redskins...end of story.
I don't think Cleve is goofing. If The Rams or anybody want to move up they had better make it worth our while or we don't trade. We don't owe it to them to trade down. A 3rd doesn't cut it. No way no how. With the new rookie wage scale the draft value chart goes out the window. A completely revised edition is being molded. And everything has changed with the Redskins/Rams trade. The bar has been re-set. And don't give me that QB premium crap. You don't know who someone is trading up for. Hell the Rams "could" be trading up for Tannehill. If they were why would they tell anyone? So that they would have to pay more? We all THINK the Redskins will take RGIII (including me) but perhaps they take Tannehill because he fits their offensive scheme better. Who expected the Broncos to trade up for Cutler a few years ago? OR maybe they take Blackmon. Unlikely and probably ridiculous but you don't know who people are going to draft.
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
I agree... if we make a trade just to get more picks, and not good picks.. we are fulfilling a precedent that we will accept anything to try and make our team better.
If you want our pick.. prove that you want it. Don't low ball us.
Quote: I would ask for one of their firsts next year or one of their seconds this year and their second next year.
I know you are just goofing around.....the best we would get is a 3rd this year, and possibly a 4th next year.
We can say we would hold them hostage, but that isn't a smart thing to do. First, Homie can't blame the Rams because he bungled the deal with the Rams and if we do indeed want to trade down, you have to do what is good for the team and not hold out or refuse to trade with them.
First, I don't think you can say what we'll get with any authority.. as we just found out, it did indeed take 3 firsts and a 2nd to get RG3 (or the pick that will net him to be precise)...
As for blaming Homie for not getting that pick,, I guess you will for ever blame him so nothing I can say, but if he offered 3 firsts and someone beat that,, I don't call that a miss.. or a blame kinda thing.. 3 first round picks for that move should have more than done it. But when you deal with a loon like Snyder,,, you just don't ever know..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: He said M. Holmgren as a coach, GM or President in the NFL of 30 years has NEVER taken a 1st rd QB and if he MISSES.. he loses his QB guru card forever.
Quote: Bucs want to move up how about a 3 to move up 1 spot. RAms want to move up to 5 to get their guy another 3rd.
now you have the buying power to secure the players you really want at the other draft slots. Those mid round picks are money.
Wait! Weren't you one of those that suggested we trade the moon for RG3 (moving up two freaking spots within the Top 5!) but will settle for a third round pick to fall back?
It's craziness like this that really gets me! If some team wants a player and wants to move up, they have to pony up the proper picks. Sadly for them, Dan Snyder and the Rams set the pricing scale to do so. If teams want to move up, it's going to cost them plenty. If the Bucs wanted to move up from 5 to 4, I'd demand their 2nd rounder this year and their 2nd rounder next year as a minimum. Anything less and they can take their chances. If it's the Rams, it take both 2nd rounders this year and their 2nd rounders in 2013 and 2014. If they don't like the price, we'll find a different trading partner.
it all depends on the player you are getting (especially in the top 5).
If we value Richardson Claiborne and Blackmon completely equally - then we'd be fools not to trade down from #4 to #6 -- even if the price was only a 7th round pick.
Now that's not a realistic scenario, nobody has three players exactly equal on their chart, but you get my point.
Quote: it all depends on the player you are getting (especially in the top 5).
If we value Richardson Claiborne and Blackmon completely equally - then we'd be fools not to trade down from #4 to #6 -- even if the price was only a 7th round pick.
Now that's not a realistic scenario, nobody has three players exactly equal on their chart, but you get my point.
No it doesn't and I don't get your point.
If we valued each of those three guys (and you could throw in Kalil into the mix - as he could possibly be there) equally, then just select one. It would make more sense to write each of the names on a slip of paper, fold them up, put them in a hat and pull out a piece of paper and write that name on the card before handing it to Goodell.
What would make sense if trading back is to find the best offer and meets with your minimum demands. If no offers meet your demands, then I refer to the procedures outlined above.
There can be no such thing as a 3 way or even a two way tie for the top of your board. Your later picks maybe influenced by your earlier selections, but teams have to make that determination prior to the draft.
It may not be a simple and cut and dry determination, but they have to conclude their process of evaluation in order to set their Draft board.
There maybe some last minute debating (2nd guessing) before the time is up and they must hand in their card, but if you stick to your board, then you will end up with less regrets I think down the road.
Quote: And give up a free seventh rounder -- just because you want to pull names out of the hat instead of having your friend do it for you?
Yes I would give up a "free" seventh rounder and do such that. If you trade down for so little other teams will see the same and lowball you the next time you are in a position to trade down.You don't want to look like an easy pushover.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
Quote: I would ask for one of their firsts next year or one of their seconds this year and their second next year.
I know you are just goofing around.....the best we would get is a 3rd this year, and possibly a 4th next year.
We can say we would hold them hostage, but that isn't a smart thing to do. First, Homie can't blame the Rams because he bungled the deal with the Rams and if we do indeed want to trade down, you have to do what is good for the team and not hold out or refuse to trade with them.
First, I don't think you can say what we'll get with any authority.. as we just found out, it did indeed take 3 firsts and a 2nd to get RG3 (or the pick that will net him to be precise)...
As for blaming Homie for not getting that pick,, I guess you will for ever blame him so nothing I can say, but if he offered 3 firsts and someone beat that,, I don't call that a miss.. or a blame kinda thing.. 3 first round picks for that move should have more than done it. But when you deal with a loon like Snyder,,, you just don't ever know..
Of course i can't say with certainty that is what we would get. If you look at the charts and think about it, getting a 1st just isn't going to happen.
Sure....maybe we could get a 2nd rounder.
As for what we offered for RGIII, we then said we would toss in the 2nd rounder after the fact.....but did so after the deal was done...but that's old news at this point, but you Sir are correct. I will always remember how Homie and Heck bungled the chance for RGIII.
Hey, if we can get a 1st and a 2nd for moving down 2 spots, great....I bet it is closer to a 3rd and maybe a 4th next year is all the more the Rams would be willing to go.
Could that equal just a second this year, to show I am a reasonable guy who can't speak with authority on the matter, I will say, sure, maybe we could get that much.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Quote: As for what we offered for RGIII, we then said we would toss in the 2nd rounder after the fact.....but did so after the deal was done...but that's old news at this point, but you Sir are correct. I will always remember how Homie and Heck bungled the chance for RGIII.
Peen...why would the Rams put a time limit on the deal?
Have the Colts said they won't listen to deals for the #1 draft slot?
This thing is flying right over your head...the Rams wanted to deal with the Redskins and not the Browns...they did not want a bidding war that would drive up the cost to the Redskins.
Quote: Peen...why would the Rams put a time limit on the deal?
To be fair Mac, it was reported by multiple sources that the Rams asked all teams to make ONE offer and make it thier best. The Skins said, 3 firsts and a second, the Browns said 3 firsts. then supposedly came back later to offer up a second to go with the deal.
If reports are correct, then the browns offer simply wasn't as good as the Skins on the first pass and the Rams went with the first good offer.
Again, that's what's been reported but who the hell really knows what's behind door number 2
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: Peen...why would the Rams put a time limit on the deal?
To be fair Mac, it was reported by multiple sources that the Rams asked all teams to make ONE offer and make it thier best. The Skins said, 3 firsts and a second, the Browns said 3 firsts. then supposedly came back later to offer up a second to go with the deal.
If reports are correct, then the browns offer simply wasn't as good as the Skins on the first pass and the Rams went with the first good offer.
Again, that's what's been reported but who the hell really knows what's behind door number 2
Daman...to be fair, that is the excuse the Rams used "after" it was learned the Browns wanted to offer more or did offer more. I do believe it was still the same day, when the Browns went back at the Rams to up the annie.
There was absolutely no reason for the Rams to even have a deadline for a deal unless it was to benefit the Redskins.
If the Rams are the only ones looking at the offers and they happen to be good friends with one of the teams trying to make a deal, they can choose which offer they want to accept and make sure that their friends win the bidding.
The way deals usually go down if a team is trying to maximize the benefit to their franchise is, teams make an offer, the franchise looks at those offers and tells those bidding, they need to do better or drop out...then the haggling begins and the highest bidder wins...which benefits the franchise selling or trading the product (#2 draft slot in this case).
The terms the Rams settled on must have been, we will accept one offer...that is it...and just for one day, March 12.
No team in the NFL is going to have such terms unless they already know which team they want to win the prize...it was a freaking set up, folks...the Redskins were going to win the #2 draft slot, no matter what the Browns offered.
March 12 was 45 days away from draft day...there was no reason for the Rams to set up stipulations such as a time limit.
Like I pointed out previously, the Colts of Vikings have not announced any time limits to listen to offers for their #1 or #3 draft slots, have they?...and there was absolutely no reason for the Rams to set a time limit, unless they wanted to steer the deal to a team they preferred.
But listen, I understand that some of our fans just have to have someone to blame because the Rams chose the Redskins and not the Browns... it's Holmgren's fault that the Rams were biased and steered the deal to the Redskins.
Perhaps the Rams said make your 1 best offer. The Browns offered up 3 1st round picks Then Fisher calls his buddy in Washington and says "We haven't received your offer yet. The Browns are high bidders so far with 3 1st"
Conspiracy theory? Yes but sometimes conspiracy theories are true. But in this scenario The Rams get the highest bid and still help out their buddy.
I think the Rams maximized their return by selling the #2 pick quickly. It could have lost value depending on where FA Qb's signed. And now with the rise of Tannehill it's value possibly drops farther. Though I personally believe that if the Rams still had the #2 pick for sale that Tannehill would be getting nowhere near the kind of attention that he is now.
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
First, I don't think you can say what we'll get with any authority.. as we just found out, it did indeed take 3 firsts and a 2nd to get RG3 (or the pick that will net him to be precise)...
As for what we offered for RGIII, we then said we would toss in the 2nd rounder after the fact.....but did so after the deal was done...but that's old news at this point, but you Sir are correct. I will always remember how Homie and Heck bungled the chance for RGIII.
How can you claim they bungled the RG3 deal when the Browns are ripe to haul in Tannehill, the consensus solid lock for franchise QB? Why trade even a 7th round pick to get Luck or RG3 when you already have the franchise?
It's funny how things change in the weeks leading up to the draft. A few months ago I wanted no part of trading out of our slot. I don't know that Richardson will be there at #6, but I'd still be in favor of dropping down in order to pick up an extra 2nd rounder and maybe even a little extra.
I think we could do some SERIOUS damage with #6, #22, #33, #37, #67, #100, and #118.
Over the last few days I've been quietly watching all I can find on the non-"franchise" QB's in this draft. What's happened during that time has surprised me.
I didn't see anything unexpected with guys like Foles and Osweiler. Both guys look stiff, mechanical, and anything but NFL starting QB's. These are guys IMHO that you waste middle-round picks on. Foles looks over his head too often and this is on the college level. Osweiler looks awfully unathletic. He looks big and lumbering and slow, and what's worse, he pushes the ball from a weird angle, effectively negating his height advantage (if what he has can even be considered an "advantage.")
But I have to say that Kirk Cousins has caught my eye. I honestly believe that he's a decent bet for a team that wants to take a guy outside the 1st round. He's far more athletic than I recalled. He has a quick release with a strong enough arm. I was really surprised at how often and how quickly he worked through his progressions. He has a natural feel for moving within the pocket while keeping his eyes downfield. He ran an offense that mimics an NFL offense, and threw to many of the WCO routes in our offense. He can take off and do a little running, though he doesn't have that extra gear that the top-3 guys have. Made many good throws in the face of a blitz, but also forced some throws from time-to-time. Has enough height at 6'3 but doesn't have elite size as he only goes 215. He reminds me very much of Matt Hasselbeck in terms of how he moves his feet, makes his reads, and delivers the ball. He isn't one that can come in and start immediately. He's got some bad habits which need to be taught out of him. Still, there's a ton of upside there in terms of moving around, making plays, being a leader, and working a pro-style offense.
If I'm after a QB without reaching badly for one, I go after Cousins.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
Quote: Osweiler looks awfully unathletic. He looks big and lumbering and slow, and what's worse, he pushes the ball from a weird angle, effectively negating his height advantage (if what he has can even be considered an "advantage.")
I have to say I've never seen an NFL QB over 6'5 more athletic than Osweiler. He's not slow by any stretch of the imagination. If you want to see lumbering see DA and his size 18 feet. Osweiler was a forward for the ASU basketball team.
I have to believe you hit your head on something hard recently.....
Take a look at this every play cut up against USC.
Feel free to say he has awful mechanics above the waist throwing the football but if you say he's big, lumbering and slow then you're just plain wrong. Sorry.
He does lumber a bit. He may have been a basketball player, but when he goes to take off running he almost looks like a guy who has to wind it up deep to make a throw. He really doesn't have any burst at all.
He's not DA in that regard ....... and it's not the end of the world for a guy that he can't run ...... but this guy is hardly an example of a nimble QB.
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: He looks big and lumbering and slow, and what's worse, he pushes the ball from a weird angle, effectively negating his height advantage (if what he has can even be considered an "advantage.")
This is the time of year, when fans & GM's need to remember, Does this kid look good on paper and in a tee shirt or is this kid a football player, lets not forget about what these kids did in the fall, and maybe not rely on the stop watch or the tape measure so much in February.
Quote: Take a look at this every play cut up against USC.
Watching that helped me form my opinion over the last few days. I also watched other games.
The man is slow and lumbering. There's nothing quick about him in terms of football acceleration. He has some straight-line speed for a guy his size but that's it. He only looks like he can move around more because of the spread he operated out of in college. Get him into the NFL and defenders are going to eat him up. Tractor Traylor played forward in college and you wouldn't call him athletic on a football field.
Osweiler is a future statue who might as well be anchored to the pocket in the NFL. Yes, he has more athletic ability than any QB his size, but in terms of that making a difference in the NFL, he's below-average when compared to most NFL QB's. He's going to go several rounds higher than he should.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
