tazinib1 Posted March 2, 2012 Author Share Posted March 2, 2012 . PS and I like McCoy. AHA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Never got these comparisons. That only makes sense if this year was the only one they had to worry about. But do you want McCoy, Blackmon etc or Griffin and whoever knowing that you can more likely pick up a stud WR either via FA or in another draft vs a stud QB? Basically Griffin gives your team more overall upside, at least on paper. If you're leery about Griffin not living up to the hype, that's something else. PS and I like McCoy. The post I made was relative to people talking about the immediate improvement that the Browns would have if they drafted RG3. Long term they may be beter, if he is the stud QB many believe he is. I personally think McCoy can be a good QB in the NFL, stud probably not, but a good starter, as good as Romo, Matt Ryan, and several others. Will RG3 be a true elite QB (Rodgers, Brees, Brady level) maybe, but there's no gaurantee, and plenty of examples of "can't miss" guys that fell flat. I just feel the Browns are better off now and probably in the future with filling many holes, instead of giving up so much to get RG3 now. I'm hearing talk now of both first round picks (1.04 and 1.22) plus our 2nd (2.04) and some early picks in 2013. That is too much IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 The post I made was relative to people talking about the immediate improvement that the Browns would have if they drafted RG3. Long term they may be beter, if he is the stud QB many believe he is. I personally think McCoy can be a good QB in the NFL, stud probably not, but a good starter, as good as Romo, Matt Ryan, and several others. Will RG3 be a true elite QB (Rodgers, Brees, Brady level) maybe, but there's no gaurantee, and plenty of examples of "can't miss" guys that fell flat. I just feel the Browns are better off now and probably in the future with filling many holes, instead of giving up so much to get RG3 now. I'm hearing talk now of both first round picks (1.04 and 1.22) plus our 2nd (2.04) and some early picks in 2013. That is too much IMO. You may be right about that being too much, but i don't think Mccoy's the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Got this link from a friend today after discussing the Browns trying to get RG3 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1081805-cleveland-browns-why-robert-griffin-iii-is-the-only-option-at-qb After getting more info and digesting it I guess I'd be ok with them drafting him if it doesn't cost much more than 1.04 & 1.22. If they have to include other 1st or 2nd round picks I think we're overpaying. Its a big risk, and if he is isn't successful for some reason, we're screwed for several more years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 13ers Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Not to get off topic, but I've actually heard a fellow Packer fan talk about signing Flynn long term and trading Rodgers for top picks. I just about crashed my car when I heard that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Not to get off topic, but I've actually heard a fellow Packer fan talk about signing Flynn long term and trading Rodgers for top picks. I just about crashed my car when I heard that! This is the time of year in Wisconsin when the brandy flows like water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 This is the time of year in Wisconsin when the brandy flows like water. I wonder what Rodgers value would be on the open market? Would it be 5 first round draft choices? More? I mean after the first year one might presume that any future choices would be fairly low in the round as he would have that team playing to a good to great record. If Palmer was woth 2 first rounders and if RGIII is worth the suppositions being bandied about one might speculate Rodges is worth 6 years of first rounders. The above posting was specualtion only, mental masturbation as it were. I neither think it will ever happen nor do I advocate it. I do note, however, that at some point of compensation that anything can happen. What if Cleveland offered the Joe Thomas, the Packers choice of any one person from their defense, both of their first rounders this year, Colt McCoy to be a backup, and their first rounders for the next 3 or 4 years. A deal like that would have to at least be analyzed rather than dismissed out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I wonder what Rodgers value would be on the open market? Would it be 5 first round draft choices? More? I mean after the first year one might presume that any future choices would be fairly low in the round as he would have that team playing to a good to great record. If Palmer was woth 2 first rounders and if RGIII is worth the suppositions being bandied about one might speculate Rodges is worth 6 years of first rounders. The above posting was specualtion only, mental masturbation as it were. I neither think it will ever happen nor do I advocate it. I do note, however, that at some point of compensation that anything can happen. What if Cleveland offered the Joe Thomas, the Packers choice of any one person from their defense, both of their first rounders this year, Colt McCoy to be a backup, and their first rounders for the next 3 or 4 years. A deal like that would have to at least be analyzed rather than dismissed out of hand. Joe Thomas D'Qwell Jackson or Joe Haden Colt McCoy and 5-6 first rounders? No. Because Flynn is not a franchise QB that carries you on his back. The window is wide open for championships now, and you never do something to close the window in any way. I'd rather roll with the best player in the league at QB on a stout team as is. Aaron Rodgers in my mind is as untradable as any player in the league has ever been. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I would at least give thought to the offer. The Packers would be able to release Clifton and his salary so they could pay Wells. They would also have Sherrod and Newhouse to back up the O-line giving them clearly the dominating O-line in football. They could draft Richardson giving them a ridiculously credible running game even if they did not have the best o-line in football. They could also release the salary of Grant. Obviously with Rodgers gone they could also release Driver and his salary. Flynn, unlike Rodgers, probably can't take full advantage of 5 recieving options on a play. They would then have Flynn, who is well coached in their system and who has shown flashes playing with a far more credible running game and getting far less pressure when passing than Rodgers had been. On defense the Packers would get to add not just Jackson, but they would be able to add the Browns second first rounder and their own first rounder this year to the defense. That could mean an impact D.T. and a very credible corner or safety. I would at least think about the above situation, particuylarly because the Packers would still be getting first rounders for the next three years or more. I think that would be a formidible team. Of course I happen to think Flynn is going to be at least a top half of the league Q.B. Rodgers is great. he is the league MVP and will be again sans injury, but you are talking about keeping a lot of eggs in one basket . If he gets hurt the Packers are done. If he doesn't get hurt he is going to demand and get a crippling portion of the packers salary cap at his next contract, and finally, in the end, there will be that Montanna, Namath, Favre, Manning, moment where the parting will be terrible. All of the above remains, of course, devil's advocacy. I love Rodgers and I want to take the full ride with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I love Rodgers and I want to take him. Ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Ok. I might object to you putting words in my mouth, but fair is fair, and frankly putting words in my mouth is among the less objectionable things you might try to put in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I would at least give thought to the offer. The Packers would be able to release Clifton and his salary so they could pay Wells. They would also have Sherrod and Newhouse to back up the O-line giving them clearly the dominating O-line in football. They could draft Richardson giving them a ridiculously credible running game even if they did not have the best o-line in football. They could also release the salary of Grant. Obviously with Rodgers gone they could also release Driver and his salary. Flynn, unlike Rodgers, probably can't take full advantage of 5 recieving options on a play. They would then have Flynn, who is well coached in their system and who has shown flashes playing with a far more credible running game and getting far less pressure when passing than Rodgers had been. On defense the Packers would get to add not just Jackson, but they would be able to add the Browns second first rounder and their own first rounder this year to the defense. That could mean an impact D.T. and a very credible corner or safety. I would at least think about the above situation, particuylarly because the Packers would still be getting first rounders for the next three years or more. I think that would be a formidible team. Of course I happen to think Flynn is going to be at least a top half of the league Q.B. Rodgers is great. he is the league MVP and will be again sans injury, but you are talking about keeping a lot of eggs in one basket . If he gets hurt the Packers are done. If he doesn't get hurt he is going to demand and get a crippling portion of the packers salary cap at his next contract, and finally, in the end, there will be that Montanna, Namath, Favre, Manning, moment where the parting will be terrible. All of the above remains, of course, devil's advocacy. I love Rodgers and I want to take the full ride with him. I think your plan is imaginative, but would create some immediate and future cap issues of immense proportions. The key to the success given the parity in the NFL is recognizing what the league regulations are to determine where your team should be strongest, optimizing those strengths, minimizing your weaknesses, and then promoting stability. GB is doing that as well as any team in the league right now. While what you are suggesting may provide some great speculative fun, it also would not work, IMNSHO, as a business model in this league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I think your plan is imaginative, but would create some immediate and future cap issues of immense proportions. The key to the success given the parity in the NFL is recognizing what the league regulations are to determine where your team should be strongest, optimizing those strengths, minimizing your weaknesses, and then promoting stability. GB is doing that as well as any team in the league right now. While what you are suggesting may provide some great speculative fun, it also would not work, IMNSHO, as a business model in this league. BB with the buzzkill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 4, 2012 Author Share Posted March 4, 2012 Ok. I might object to you putting words in my mouth, but fair is fair, and frankly putting words in my mouth is among the less objectionable things you might try to put in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) I heard this on the local Cleveland news last night, see linked story below The Browns are NOT willing to give up picks 1.04 and 1.22 to move up to the 1.22. The Redskins are willing to offer their first round pick (1.06) and next year's first round pick but not their 2nd round pick this year. It seems that all this talk of 2 first rounds and multiple other picks was a bit off, or else the talk I'm hearing now is posturing, or maybe its all posturing. Either way, it makes me wonder if the perceived value of RG3 has gone done. Or maybe the needs of both teams to fill other holes now is seen as more important than drafting RG3. http://www.ohio.com/...o-rams-1.268553 Couple of additional items after talking with a coworker who follows the local Cleveland sports news a lot - the Browns have been approached by the Pats with interest in 1.22, CLE would bet Pats 1st and 2nd round picks, that is a big reason why they don't want to trade it, since they can turn it into 2 good picks - local sports radio guy said while we were talking "the only way I trade 1.04 and 1.22 is to get Luck". Then they started talking about the Peyton Manning throwing video, which I presume has been discussed in another thread. Edited March 5, 2012 by stevegrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.