|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Hey we need a qb. Teddy is best one in class. Ok he is not luck, but best option. I'm not hung up on what they gave for Trent by previous regime. We got a first this year for him for a reason. For ammo to get a qb.
Actually, we got a first round pick for Trent Richardson because that's what Indy offered. It was a complete shock to me. The front office was in the position to trade him and recoup a first rounder from the debacle and didn't hesitate to do it. It had nothing to do with getting ammo to get a QB.
The trade was made in the 2nd week. You have to come to the conclusion that the front office and HC didn't feel that the QBs on the roster wouldn't be able to do the job this season. We know that's not the case. I'm sure the team was playing for the 4th overall selection so that they could be in the position to trade up to the #1 overall position.
Think about this: If Houston, which is in need of a QB, is willing to trade out of the #1 overall selection and Teddy Bridgewater is what you say he is, why shouldn't they just sit pat and take him? Why even say that they're willing to trade the spot?
The Browns can sit right where they are and still might be able to get Bridgewater if they want him. Even if he's gone, they can draft another capable QB at #4. You don't need the #1 or #2 overall pick for it.
Quote:
If you have any better option to get us one please share. Don't be a politician and just bash other ideas. What you solution? Stay pat at 4 and take one? Fa? What o wise one. Sorry I'm just an idiot. What YOUR best plan?
I've already stated my preliminary opinion about the NFL draft here. In regards to the QB position, it hasn't changed all that much.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 376
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 376 |
My thoughts on the draft for what they are worth are as follows.
Team needs an offensive guard, #66 is not the answer. #72 may need to be reevaluated as well. I think that there are not much difference between the top QB's in the draft this year. I would not draft a QB with the first Browns pick. I would consider one later in the round but even then, I think we have bigger needs. Brandon Weeden was 5 and 10 with a bad offensive line last year. He was not very good this year but only started 5 games. It is conceivable that with a better offensive line and God forbid you are forced to play Weeden as a regular starting QB, you can reasonably expect to win as many games as we did this year. If you draft one of the big named QB's early in the draft, you still have a need for an offensive lineman. I do not believe that there is a QB in the draft that would be so much better than Hoyer or Weeden that we would be a threat to make the post season with them at QB and this offensive line.
Secondly, the LB core is not suited for the 3-4. #52 is not an ILB in the 3-4 defense. If we change back to the 4-3 he is above average but still not an elite MLB at this stage of his career. If there is a LB like they have in Carolina, I forget his name, I would take him at the first pick for the Browns. The defense lost games for us as often as the offense lost games in 2013. I would not mind an offensive upgrade but I see no difference with a rookie QB and a porous defense in 2014.
Voleur
Go Browns!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,187 Likes: 1224
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,187 Likes: 1224 |
This morning I heard some talking head say that Lombardi is interested in running a spread offense and that is why there is interest in Stoops. Of course then they went on to say that there is interest in Manziel.
Talk and speculation at this point. They have to talk about something because they talk football 24/7.
Banner is running this show. More than likely he is thinking of a coach and quarterback as a dynamic duo. I have heard it said that Banner also likes McDaniels.
McDaniels and Mallett seems likely.
Toad:
I have watched a few of the Boyd games. He doesn't do anything spectacular.
Consistent accuracy seems to be a problem. He also seems to pull the ball down and run to early to often. He just seems like an average college quarterback to me.
I want Bridgewater. If the Texans are willing to talk trade I would be all over that.
=====================================================
What I want and what they will do will more than likely never match. I do not have much faith in this group. Haslam is getting hard to even look at for me. I have a problem with liars and thieves.
Banner is a one man band. Lombardi a suck up. But hey, if they can put wins on the board I will cheer.
I have come full circle. I do not care who is charge and what they do. They are going to do as they see fit. They will not ask any of us for our input.
Even though I think McDaniels and Manziel will not work in Cleveland who knows? If they do I will cheer.
Every regime has come in and spewed their vision. They have all been wrong.
Maybe these guys will be so wrong it will work.
I just want to win. WIN!
Sick of losing. Doesn't seem possible that a team can lose this consistently for so long when the league almost prevents that with the designed business model in place. The level of incompetence is mind boggling.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Nice post bro. For all the Teddy Bridewater sycophants out there, digest this. Teddy Bridgewater 'a second-rounder,' AFC scout says. Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors. LOL Seriously, at this point of the process, can there really be smoke & mirrors? The combine doesn't happen until the end of next month and the various pro days won't occur either. So, why get it out there - unless you actually mean it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
Maybe these guys will be so wrong it will work.
Lol bro... I hear ya. If they bring Vinne Testeverde (spelling?) outta retirement, if that is what would "work" - then I am all for it. Although I want neither Manziel or McDaniels.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
Quote:
So basically trading away Trent and an extra third for a possible franchise qb is not worth it?
You also give up the 4th, 5th and 7th that you gave up to move up the one spot to draft Trent Richardson.
So, you would be giving up two 1sts, a 3rd, a 4th, a 5th and a 7th. That's 6 selections for one player. That's blatantly INSANE! If you approve of that, one would only be able to conclude that you are also INSANE!
Wrong. The 4, 5, and 7 are already given up to select a player with the Colts' pick. So, what difference does it make if those picks are being given up for a pick in the 20s or a pick at the top of the draft? And I'm assuming by "two 1sts" you mean both 1st round picks in the 2014 draft. Also wrong because the Browns still have a 1st by trading up. Only one 1st is being given up. It's your math skills that are insane. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Wrong. The 4, 5, and 7 are already given up to select a player with the Colts' pick. So, what difference does it make if those picks are being given up for a pick in the 20s or a pick at the top of the draft? And I'm assuming by "two 1sts" you mean both 1st round picks in the 2014 draft. Also wrong because the Browns still have a 1st by trading up. Only one 1st is being given up. It's your math skills that are insane.
Bwahahahahaha!
Coming from a sane mind, I would say this was an attempt at comedy. Coming from you, I know you actually mean this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 380 Likes: 2
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 380 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
Nice post bro.
For all the Teddy Bridewater sycophants out there, digest this.
Teddy Bridgewater 'a second-rounder,' AFC scout says.
Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors. LOL Seriously, at this point of the process, can there really be smoke & mirrors? The combine doesn't happen until the end of next month and the various pro days won't occur either. So, why get it out there - unless you actually mean it?
There is your grasping at straws comment back at you. Hey teddy is rated number 1 qb by most
If your happy going wr te guard in that order like u said you have a serious problem with evaluation of our qb situation. So you would be happy with rolling with current hoyer and a 3rd round pick as our qb situation next year. Seriously? Tired of third rd qbs. We have a chance to grab top qb in class if Texas wants out.
Why would Texas not want teddy? Well the ol man owner for Texas might want Johnny since he is from Texas and fill the stands. He can have him. Plus honestly the ol man might have a little racism in him and not want a black qb. Hey for once racism would work out for us. Not saying it's so but let them trade that pick. I want the best qb in the class every year the way our qbs have been. We have the ammo. Do it
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
This morning I heard some talking head say that Lombardi is interested in running a spread offense and that is why there is interest in Stoops. Of course then they went on to say that there is interest in Manziel.
One need not listen to talking heads to know where the 'Stooges' hearts lay. They had a pack of Rolo's in their pockets for Chip Kelly so that's all we need to know about what kinda offense they envisioned having. I'm 100% convinced...not 95%, not 97% convinced...that this is all just speculation and blabber. We are after McDaniels and once we put on the horse-and-pony show for the public, the media, and the league mandate of kicking the tires on a minority coach we're gonna come out with McDaniels as our HC. He was all about a QB whose claim-to-fame was running the read-option. Hmmm...
As for the QB's, while Bridgewater is at the top of this class, he's not ideally sized and had open guys all over the field in Louisville. So where am I going with this?
McNair has made it known that Bridgewater is on the auction block IF someone is willing to back up a Brinks truck. Folks, he needs a QB, and the golden child of this draft is sitting right there in his lap. To pry him out of it the cost is going to be STEEP. Don't think for a moment he's going to just drop back to #4 by trading places and taking the 1st we've pulled from the Colts. While that's a nice 1st rounder it's also a late 1st rounder.
Keep going.
Bridgewater would cost us everything of serious value in this draft. IF we managed to pry the pick away from the Texans, our next pick would likely be in the 3rd round. So is he worth that?
That's a VERY tough question to answer right now. Damn Bridgewater for putting on a show in the bowl game.
Referencing my thoughts from a few days ago, I'm warming up to Manziel, God strike me down because I think he's a potential nut-job and he's SMALL. When he goes through the combine I believe more teams than not will fall in love with his moxy and confidence. There will be some that say arrogance, and they might be right, but damnit his teammates absolutely rally around the guy like nothing I've ever seen. His intermediate and short-range accuracy is every bit as good as Bridgewater's. His escapability and ability to improvise to extend the play are like nothing the NFL has seen since a young Vick hit the league. How well he's able to be reigned in so that he doesn't get destroyed is the key here because he's a fragile build.
I'm not as high on Bortles as most but he is a Rottenberger clone. I think his arm-talent is lacking somewhat relative to what I'd want in a top-10 QB but he can extend plays and has ideal size.
It's all fluid right now because it's early. Not too long ago I wasn't sure there was a 1st rounder in this group after Bridgewater and I'm an advocate of building the teams talent level up instead of reaching for a QB. The stock of a few others are rising, and with a second 1st rounder there will be guys like Hundley (I think he'll come out when he hears he has a 1st round grade) Boyd and Carr sitting there. I can't believe that Carr still has as many 1st round grades as he does. That's all based on numbers and measurables. When they dig through the film the flaws are gonna pop out. I've said my peace on Boyd, as he's got some developing to do. Though I think he'll be good in the long run he's a longer odds guy than those in the very top of the 1st.
Bridgewater IS the prized jewel of this class. The question is whether or not we hand over everything of value in this draft for him because that's what it'll take. We can stay put and get a Manziel or Bortles and keep our second 1st round pick, perhaps to use on someone like Sammy Watkins who reminds me alot of a guy I really wanted in Crabtree.
It's a very tough call...give up our entire useful draft for Bridgewater or keep the picks and take a shot at one of the rest of the bunch. I can't see us not taking a QB with our first pick, not in this draft. We'd end up going after the Boyd's, Hundley's, and Carr's of this class.
It's early yet but the picture is getting clearer...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868 |
here's my problem with guys not wanting to reach for QB's.
we are at #4. the only 3 teams that don't need a QB is St. Louis.
Houston's owner has already been saying he would be open to trading the #1 pick. St. louis we all KNOW is gonna do the same.
you guys aren't thinking big here. look at the draft order for the 1st 8 picks.
TEAMS W L T SOS
1 Houston Texans 2 14 0.559
2 St. Louis Rams (WAS) 3 13 0.516
3 Jacksonville Jaguars 4 12 0.504
4 Cleveland Browns 4 12 0.516
5 Oakland Raiders 4 12 0.523
6 Atlanta Falcons 4 12 0.553
7 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4 12 0.574
8 Minnesota Vikings 5 10 1 0.512
there's only TWO teams not needing a QB, St. louis and Atlanta. Jacksonville needs a QB, so they are gonna stay at #3 most likely.
whats going to stop oakland, TB, or minny from trading up with houston or St. louis FIRST and grabbing the QB's we need.
then what? we're stuck with settling AGAIN for a QB this year.
imo, this FO can't be wasting time with these what if's scenarios, because there are a bunch of teams needing a QB this year. if there's a QB the FO absolutely wants, then they need to do whatever it takes to make SURE they get that guy.
or we're gonna have another weedon on our hands.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80 |
Quote:
... if there's a QB the FO absolutely wants, then they need to do whatever it takes to make SURE they get that guy.
I see your point, and while I agree to a certain extent, I'm not selling the farm like the Redskins did for RGIII. To get our guy (early, if that's who they want), I would be OK with giving up our two 1st rounders and throw in a mid-rounder if necessary. ( I believe pretty much that is what BpG stated in an earlier post).
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,686 Likes: 1675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,686 Likes: 1675 |
Quote:
Houston's owner has already been saying he would be open to trading the #1 pick. St. louis we all KNOW is gonna do the same.
I believe there's a reason Houston came it and said they'd be willing to trade the pick now. They want a bidding war for the pick.
You are right that other teams will want to move up. However, other than the Rams, we are the only team with two 1st round picks this year.
I believe that is the ultimate goal for Houston. To receive enough high offers to see if he can get an "RG3 deal" from us. He'll most likely already be getting at least one offer giving up this years first, next years first and a second or third rounder.
But I don't think they'll take such a deal for the #1 unless he can bait us into giving up both 1st's this year and next years first. it's all a chess game up until draft.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
... if there's a QB the FO absolutely wants, then they need to do whatever it takes to make SURE they get that guy.
I see your point, and while I agree to a certain extent, I'm not selling the farm like the Redskins did for RGIII. To get our guy (early, if that's who they want), I would be OK with giving up our two 1st rounders and throw in a mid-rounder if necessary. ( I believe pretty much that is what BpG stated in an earlier post).
That's the rub, though.
When McNair made his statement about being open to trading the pick he might as well been pointing right at Joe Banner because that's who he was talking to.
He doesn't just want our two 1st rounders and a mid-rounder. McNair wants the FARM. He wants an RG3 type deal and we're the only team that can give it to him. It's going to cost quite a bit more.
So we're back to the original issue. Do we give up a treasure trove of picks for Bridgewater or stay put?
Now I don't believe Swish was referencing me when speaking of "reaching" for QB's as that wasn't a direction I was going. Having said that, I disagree that if we stay put we're actually "reaching" with someone like Manziel or Bortles, even though I don't personally believe Bortles is an elite guy. I believe the correct word may be that we'd "settle" for one of these guys. Remember, the great draft that yielded Manning, Rivers, and Rottenberger...those teams didn't necessarily reach. They took the guy that came to them, the horse-trading notwithstanding. The Chargers were fine with Rivers, the Steelers with 'Berger. The Giants paid a big price to get Manning.
I'm also not convinced the Rams are absolutely going to trade the pick. That's a big assumption. They have what many scouts are calling a generational player sitting in their lap in Clowny, and with Jake Long having surgery on a knee, they can take one of the tackles if they so desire. Remember, it takes two teams to make a trade, and some teams may not feel as though a guy like Manziel is so much better than a guy like Hundley or Boyd.
There are no definites right now other than McNair trying to get a monster deal for Bridgewater.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
... if there's a QB the FO absolutely wants, then they need to do whatever it takes to make SURE they get that guy.
I see your point, and while I agree to a certain extent, I'm not selling the farm like the Redskins did for RGIII. To get our guy (early, if that's who they want), I would be OK with giving up our two 1st rounders and throw in a mid-rounder if necessary. ( I believe pretty much that is what BpG stated in an earlier post).
That's the rub, though.
When McNair made his statement about being open to trading the pick he might as well been pointing right at Joe Banner because that's who he was talking to.
He doesn't just want our two 1st rounders and a mid-rounder. McNair wants the FARM. He wants an RG3 type deal and we're the only team that can give it to him. It's going to cost quite a bit more.
So we're back to the original issue. Do we give up a treasure trove of picks for Bridgewater or stay put?
Now I don't believe Swish was referencing me when speaking of "reaching" for QB's as that wasn't a direction I was going. Having said that, I disagree that if we stay put we're actually "reaching" with someone like Manziel or Bortles, even though I don't personally believe Bortles is an elite guy. I believe the correct word may be that we'd "settle" for one of these guys. Remember, the great draft that yielded Manning, Rivers, and Rottenberger...those teams didn't necessarily reach. They took the guy that came to them, the horse-trading notwithstanding. The Chargers were fine with Rivers, the Steelers with 'Berger. The Giants paid a big price to get Manning.
I'm also not convinced the Rams are absolutely going to trade the pick. That's a big assumption. They have what many scouts are calling a generational player sitting in their lap in Clowny, and with Jake Long having surgery on a knee, they can take one of the tackles if they so desire. Remember, it takes two teams to make a trade, and some teams may not feel as though a guy like Manziel is so much better than a guy like Hundley or Boyd.
There are no definites right now other than McNair trying to get a monster deal for Bridgewater.
the reason i said St. louis would be willing to deal that pick, is because the top 8 teams, 6 need QB's, excluding them.
so in theory, and honestly at least the first 4-5 picks, they could trade out of 2 to maybe 4 or 5, and STILL get clowney.
Clowney is the highest rated player in this years draft. the problem is all the top 5 teams picking need QB's. only St. louis, and MAYBE houston, can pick the BPA even with their current QB situation.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
I think STL is in the market for a QB...I think theyre done with Bradford...I would be. He gets injured every year.
This year they can sit still and still get a worthwhile QB.
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 Likes: 1
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
Bridgewater would cost us everything of serious value in this draft
BS. Not even remotely close.
Bridgewater is no Luck. Bortles and Manzel, if they both declare will be right up there top 5.
It won't cost anywhere near what you think.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Im Watching Luck. I'd Give An Entire Draft For A Guy WitH His Skills.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,030
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,030 |
Agreed. Although Bridgewater isn't a once in a generation guy like Luck was, he is probably the best prospect not named Luck to come out in the past five years. I would gladly part with both firsts, steelers third, and the fourth we picked up....no doubt the price is high, but you simply have to have competent QB play to compete
Against logic,the most effective armor is willful ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80 |
Quote:
... they could trade out of 2 to maybe 4 or 5, and STILL get clowney.
Matthews is just as much value-wise, b-p-a, and more of a need. They should be able to trade down like you said and still get Matthews at #4 or 5...
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 380 Likes: 2
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 380 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
Agreed. Although Bridgewater isn't a once in a generation guy like Luck was, he is probably the best prospect not named Luck to come out in the past five years. I would gladly part with both firsts, steelers third, and the fourth we picked up....no doubt the price is high, but you simply have to have competent QB play to compete
This here^ this guys gets it. Is giving both firsts this year a third and a fourth too much? If he is your guy no. And what would that leave us? Teddy in the first. A 2nd 3rd 4th 5th etc left. We wouldn't miss a pick in those rounds. Sounds like a normal year. We are in position to do it without missing a pick in any round still!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Call me crazy but if I'm the Browns I trade to 2 asap. If the Rams are really open for a deal as everyone speculates and not wanting to take a QB(wouldn't cutting Bradford cost A TON?) we could force everyone's hand and get a great deal compared to going to no1. Go to two and leak smoke for the QB we do or don't want(reverse psychology?). If we luck out great if not we either get a great pro prospect or a great prospect for a spread/McDaniels at a minimal price.
We still get a QB argued to go no1 and we give up no where near the bounty. Because we're at 4 were at the perfect spot for them to still get BPA. I would imagine that to be extremely valuable to them. I think our own 3rd and 4th could swap the 2 picks. If we did this early no one could predict who we wanted so teams needing a QB would kill the trade market for that pick. Likely ending up in an RG3 deal.
Why would St Louis? It benefits them to have a QB taken at 1 so the top 3 are all QB landing the Clowney or Mathews in their laps. Everyone assumes Teddy will go 1 after a trade but him and Johnny are very different QBs. It will be interesting to see how it leads up to the draft.
Last edited by predator16; 01/04/14 07:42 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 280
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 280 |
I really believe that teams would rather have our 1st next year rather than the Colts pick this year. Known #21 area for this year's Colt's pick but more likely than not a top 10 pick next year. Even if the BRowns did make the playoffs, how much different would that pick be? I would take that chance if I was trading down.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199 Likes: 267
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199 Likes: 267 |
A bird in the hand is usually worth mote than two in the bush... unless dealing with next year's first pick for the Cleveland Browns.
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Houston's owner has already been saying he would be open to trading the #1 pick. St. louis we all KNOW is gonna do the same.
I believe there's a reason Houston came it and said they'd be willing to trade the pick now. They want a bidding war for the pick.
You are right that other teams will want to move up. However, other than the Rams, we are the only team with two 1st round picks this year.
I believe that is the ultimate goal for Houston. To receive enough high offers to see if he can get an "RG3 deal" from us. He'll most likely already be getting at least one offer giving up this years first, next years first and a second or third rounder.
But I don't think they'll take such a deal for the #1 unless he can bait us into giving up both 1st's this year and next years first. it's all a chess game up until draft.
You're forgetting something. This isn't Tom Heckert or Mike Holmgren making the trade. Joe Banner isn't going to do that. Even if he tried, I think Haslam would but the kibosh on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,466 Likes: 868 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Houston's owner has already been saying he would be open to trading the #1 pick. St. louis we all KNOW is gonna do the same.
I believe there's a reason Houston came it and said they'd be willing to trade the pick now. They want a bidding war for the pick.
You are right that other teams will want to move up. However, other than the Rams, we are the only team with two 1st round picks this year.
I believe that is the ultimate goal for Houston. To receive enough high offers to see if he can get an "RG3 deal" from us. He'll most likely already be getting at least one offer giving up this years first, next years first and a second or third rounder.
But I don't think they'll take such a deal for the #1 unless he can bait us into giving up both 1st's this year and next years first. it's all a chess game up until draft.
You're forgetting something. This isn't Tom Heckert or Mike Holmgren making the trade. Joe Banner isn't going to do that. Even if he tried, I think Haslam would but the kibosh on it.
i hope banner is willing to pull the trigger or something like this.
it's one thing to sit back because you don't like the draft class, its another to sit back because you're cheap and aren't willing to spend to get your guy.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
i hope banner is willing to pull the trigger or something like this.
it's one thing to sit back because you don't like the draft class, its another to sit back because you're cheap and aren't willing to spend to get your guy.
It's yet another thing to think that there are multiple possibilities and to have a desire to explore them all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 Likes: 166
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 Likes: 166 |
If they think bridgewater is far and away better that the other qbs then I hope to he'll they make the trade but I think they sit pat at number 4 and tajes either manziel or clowney depend on which one is on the board
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276 |
This could be the Manning/Rivers/Roth season like Toad said. Or it could end up being the Newton/Locker/Gabbert/Ponder season. Or a mix like Luck/RG3/Tannehill/Weeden/Osweiler.
I think if Bridgewater is your guy you trade whatever it takes to get him. Just historically you have a significantly better chance of success if you get the best QB possible than if you try to make the lesser QBs work for you.
It all depends on the spectrum you evaluate these guys on and how close they really are. I would completely avoid anyone outside of Bridgewater and Manziel. To me the debate is between trading for Bridge or hoping Manziel falls to us.
Last edited by Kingcob; 01/05/14 12:52 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Bridgewater would cost us everything of serious value in this draft
BS. Not even remotely close.
Bridgewater is no Luck. Bortles and Manzel, if they both declare will be right up there top 5.
It won't cost anywhere near what you think.
You're missing half of the picture. It's not just about the skill of the players (though I disagree that Manziel and Bortles will be viewed as equals to Bridgewater). It's about McNair wanting what he wants in order to drop out of the spot which would guarantee him his choice of QB's.
Everyone knows the Texans need a QB. In order to move and assume the risk he's going to want big bucks.
There are two sides to this equation. It's much more than just about one persons perceived value of any given player...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,543 Likes: 986
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,543 Likes: 986 |
Quote:
This could be the Manning/Rivers/Roth season like Toad said. Or it could end up being the Newton/Locker/Gabbert/Ponder season. Or a mix like Luck/RG3/Tannehill/Weeden/Osweiler.
I think if Bridgewater is your guy you trade whatever it takes to get him. Just historically you have a significantly better chance of success if you get the best QB possible than if you try to make the lesser QBs work for you.
It all depends on the spectrum you evaluate these guys on and how close they really are. I would completely avoid anyone outside of Bridgewater and Manziel. To me the debate is between trading for Bridge or hoping Manziel falls to us.
I agree, but I don't think there is much hope Manziel falls to us. He will go 1,2,or 3
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
Call me crazy but if I'm the Browns I trade to 2 asap.
This are a lot of good posts on this thread. I agree w/a lot of things guys are saying and even if I disagree, I see the logic behind many posts.
pred's quote is especially bright. I was thinking about the same thing after reading some of Toad's posts and the questions about whether we should trade up to number 1 or stay put.
I think there are three good QBs in this draft--Teddy, Bortles, and Manziel. I think there are two Dynamic QBs in this draft---Teddy and Manziel. The more I think about it, the more I either want Teddy or Johnny Football.
I think that Teddy is the safest pick. He is so cerebral. He gets rid of it so quick. However, Johnny Football brings something to the table that no one else can. He is a once in a generational type of player. I do think he has some bust potential, but his ceiling is out of this stratosphere.
The Browns [from the team to the media to the fans to its national perception] need energized. Look at all the hate and disappointment that is running rampant on the board. Johnny Football---should he succeed like I think he can---would electrify this downtrodden franchise.
Sorry........I was rambling. Let me get back to moving up to the number 2 spot. It will be a bit cheaper than going to number one. Furthermore, I am really worried about teams jumping us in the draft.
Yes, we are sitting at number four and should get one of our three guys. However, look at the teams right behind us in the draft. They need a qb as desperately as we do. What if they jump us? That is a legitimate concern.
I think moving up to number 2 makes a lot of sense. Less expensive and then we are guaranteed of getting either Teddy or Manziel. Either way we are a winner.
pred, you might be crazy, but that was an excellent suggestion. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
Quote:
Every team in the league has holes ... even the ones with Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers. They are magnified when you don't have a QB who can cover them up.
I will add to that... those QBs are good enough to cover up their own weaknesses AND exploit yours...
I sure do wish we had a QB with these traits you and the person above speak of. I mean, we might have a break-even season then. Or heck, advance into a wild card round or something. o0o let's get nuts here, we could have two back-to-back winning seasons?
What would us Browns fans do if the team had two back-to-back winning seasons? Cleveland heart attack rate would increase
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Quote:
pred, you might be crazy, but that was an excellent suggestion.
Yeah I can accept both of those haha. Like I said to you before I don't usually chime in unless it's radical, unheard of or opposing. Thank you. I really think it makes the most sense. As I continue to study these top 3 guys I really see those two as extremely different but nearly equal just as you said. I fully believe if we don't move up the QBs will go 1,2,3.
Value wise I think between trading for 1 and 2 could mean keeping both our high end picks(Colts and 2nd). I would love to see Lombardi prove me wrong and trade a future 2nd to land the 2nd overall spot only to trade our 3rd for a future 2nd essentially landing a Franchise QB for a 3rd round pick. That is drafting genius.
Last edited by predator16; 01/05/14 10:44 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,577 Likes: 8
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,577 Likes: 8 |
Quote:
What would us Browns fans do if the team had two back-to-back winning seasons?
No idea - it hasn't happened since I was 8 and 9 years old (1988 and 1989, respectively).
That's not depressing.
"If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college"
GO ROCKETS
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Quote:
Quote:
What would us Browns fans do if the team had two back-to-back winning seasons?
No idea - it hasn't happened since I was 8 and 9 years old (1988 and 1989, respectively).
That's not depressing.
Want more depressing? I wasn't even conceived until after the 89' season. Never even witnessed real Browns football.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,187 Likes: 1224
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,187 Likes: 1224 |
This from Bud Shaw's column:
" In 2010, a prominent media voice came to the defense of McDaniels, writing a column chastising the Denver Broncos for their decision to change directions.
“Firing McDaniels 28 games into his tenure as the head coach is bad for both parties,” the critic wrote for NFL.com. “It wasn't enough time for the team to be fully developed, or enough time for McDaniels to grow into the job.”
The author? Mike Lombardi.
Coaching an underdeveloped team for an organization that purposely delayed gratification in the 2013 draft, Chudzinski was fired 16 games into his first season. He was probably gone after the Jets' game, if truth were told.
Time to grow? Banner referenced research of failed first-year head coaches who don't succeed in their second year and used that to fire Chudzinski.
OK. But McDaniels' record in Denver over two seasons must be part of the evidence used to doom Chudzinski, no?
In 2011, when McDaniels ran the offense in St. Louis, Lombardi told radio station 810 WHB in Kansas City that McDaniels couldn't be held accountable for the horrid Rams. Lombardi said he wasn't sure "Knute Rockne could do better."
He didn't stop there, saying McDaniels would top his list of head coaching candidates. Well, now, here we are."
=====================================================
I am in total agreement McDaniels will be the guy. Manziel would not be my choice. He was a exciting act to watch in college. Like a magic show, but I have concerns with him in the NFL especially in Cleveland and the AFC North.
But if he wears a orange helmet and wins games I will be cheering him on.
Reading this gives me some hope:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000...-afc-scout-says
But in the end if the Texans put up the For Sale sign They will take the highest bid. I like Bridgewater a lot and would be willing to give up a big chunk to get him (this years second first rounder and next years first rounder). Hard to say what others would be willing to offer if the Texans who are starving for quarterback are willing to pass him up.
The Browns other needs RB, WR, OL, etc. could be had in free agency and later in this draft.
I believe Bridgewater is a true franchise quarterback. He is more of a pure quarterback and more NFL ready than Griffin was coming out.
Haslam, Banner, Lombardi (HBL) and McDaniels will most likely go another direction and Maziel would not surprise me in the least.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Can we have one thread that is not about the FO? Please? Just one?
That information about Lombardi has been posted many, many times.
Just one thread that isn't about how stupid the FO is? Please?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136 |
J/C...Vers n I are well lets just say not buddy buddy...but when we both agree on something usually its correct.
Manziel is probably the best choice for us after Teddy is gone and we all can more than Assume he is the overall #1 pick.
Now the question is, is Manziel worth a top 5 pick? If you think he is THE GUY he probably is. Also the NFL has a history of bias against short QBs. Rodgers dropped, Brees Dropped, Wilson Dropped, Flutie Dropped, who would be incredible btw in these new offenses.
How far would Manziel drop? Bortles I will be honest I haven't seen the kid AT ALL...to remotely accuarately evaluate him. I hope he gets all the hype and that the Jags go and take him.
Rams...ya really believe they will spend a top pick to compete with Bradford...They just want another teams to give them 3 first round picks again. Btw Redskins are up a creek as they need a lot of talent to make RG3 relevant and cannot get it.
I would like for us to stand pat and possibly "REACH" for Manziel at our pick and throw to the wind the normal NFL Bias. btw, the kid has impressive big hands which is necessary for Nov.,Dec. football in Cleveland.
From what I hear Manziel will not get past the Vikings pick.
Now there is the strong possibility that McDaniels is the next coach - and with that a strong possibility he and Lombardi will want Mallet here to run his offense. If we do not give up more than a 2nd rounder for him it could turn out OK although not my personal choice...I can Assume he is better than Weeden n Campbell. I liked his technique coming in. He has had to be humbled a bit being a Back up.
This way we could utilize both our first round picks - maybe even be the guys to drop back (to the Vikings spot) Especially if the Jags take Bortles after us will be several teams wishing for the next QB and we could get an Armada of picks...less that what the Rams would be asking. I am not a draft a WR high guy but this would give us an opportunity to take Sammie Watkins with our first pick...and get back whatever we gave for Mallet plus maybe a bit more. I would love to pick up late first with the Colts pick Richardson (Baylor OT projected for OG) or Yawkey (sp? Stanford) OG Then let Lava, Pink n Greco fight it out for RG - I also think a not thought of high RT might convert to RG and become a darn good one from FA??? and continue to make our OL better and a force?
I mean we have to get into the reality of a Dumb Ass move by our FO and make the lemonade and go forward. This team again has a great foundation to build on, that no matter how dumb the move will be, we still can become a great team and make these guys look like heroes regardless! 
The subject would be a little easier to assess if we had continuity and knew our Offense and our coaching staff, etc.
Will 2014 be a season for assessing like 2013 was to be? Or will the new HC really have limited power (as opposed to what Haslam had painted in our goal?)
The wild card will be Hoyer - however how little data we had on him from last year is almost erased cause that was data from Norv's offense. So who knows. So much we just have to wait and see starting with our HC. But this FO has been pretty obvious - just like they pretended there was a search for a GM...why lie to us like we cannot figure it out. Now I would be SHOCKED if McD was not our HC from the get go. One has to just read that article with Lombardi quotes in 2010 to know who his choice of a HC is.
as always JMHO and at this stage without a lot of facts JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
If they think bridgewater is far and away better that the other qbs then I hope to he'll they make the trade but I think they sit pat at number 4 and tajes either manziel or clowney depend on which one is on the board
Where is Anthony Barr in all these discussions? We need more help at LB than we need at DE.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
I like Barr, but think he's a better fit as 43 DE than 34 OLB. He'll struggle in space...
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Which QB Going Forward? (Next
Year)
|
|
