CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Then they draft Clowney and sign Freeman as a FA, them use the second 1st rounder, the later one, on a top RB. I don't see the problem Yeah . . . that'll fix 'em right up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Has anyone considered the possibility that CLE has first hand knowledge of Richardson being nothing special and may have robbed IND by being able to wrangle their 1st rounder for him? Anything is possible, but that seems very unlikely. Besides the Browns don't have a very good history of smart moves in the front office (yes I know these are new guys, but if this is an example of their brilliance I am not impressed). yeah, cause Freeman is a franchise QB. I think they would draft a QB with that 2nd 1st round pick. Exactly, what is the use of this trade if we don't get a franchise QB in 2014 draft. Toss out a talented RB to add more on defense? They drafted Mingo and he won't even start this year. The Defense is aleady pretty good and a blue chip pass rusher isn't going to help the offense one bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 yeah, cause Freeman is a franchise QB. I think they would draft a QB with that 2nd 1st round pick. You don't think Freeman can be at least the equal of a QB they would get at the bottom of round 1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Anything is possible, but that seems very unlikely. Besides the Browns don't have a very good history of smart moves in the front office (yes I know these are new guys, but if this is an example of their brilliance I am not impressed). Exactly, what is the use of this trade if we don't get a franchise QB in 2014 draft. Toss out a talented RB to add more on defense? They drafted Mingo and he won't even start this year. The Defense is aleady pretty good and a blue chip pass rusher isn't going to help the offense one bit. CAR did pretty well with Peppers at DE and Delhomme at QB. Don't underestimate either Clowney or the impact he can make. He's not Mingo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Anything is possible, but that seems very unlikely. Besides the Browns don't have a very good history of smart moves in the front office (yes I know these are new guys, but if this is an example of their brilliance I am not impressed). How's Ingram doing in NO, and that with a premier passing game to create wider rushing lanes? Think NO would take a 1st rounder for him right now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Mark me down as one that thinks the Browns front office has continued their streak of catostrophic blunders. Can you imagine if the Browns pick a RB in the first round with the pick they got from the Colts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 CAR did pretty well with Peppers at DE and Delhomme at QB. Don't underestimate either Clowney or the impact he can make. He's not Mingo. The point is, we are being told this move is done to add picks so we can acquire that franchise QB. If that player is not the top QB selected, or at least a top 5 pick, and instead they draft another defensive player and maybe a QB in the bottom third of round 1 they are not improving the offense enough, especially considering what we gave up with TRich. Not saying Mingo is as good or similar to Clowney (don't follow college ball much so I don't know). But they made a big deal of the Mingo draft (top 10 pick), and then we find out he'll only be a backup at OLB behind Kruger and Jabaal Sheard. Even before he was injured he was not slated to be a starter. Brilliant move by the front office, and another reason that the fans don't really trust this new regime already. Hard for me to be truly objective at this point, just too pissed. But to those telling Browns fans this is a good trade, most of us are not buying it. We had a good player, and traded him for the chance to draft another good player (but not as good as him, now with a 1st round pick in 15-25 range). So if we don't get a franchise QB early in round 1, it was a complete waste. Or maybe they'll draft their defensive guys then blow up that side of the ball too, maybe Haden doesn't work in this system either or some other nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Making a play for Johnny Football. New slogan: Heeeeeeerreeeeeees Losing For Johnny!™ Edited September 19, 2013 by Chief Dick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aggiebones Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 OK, so draft a kid for a 2013 no.3 over all pick. Then train him for a few years and sell him for a low first round pick. Now that's some fine business. With that approximately no.25 overall pick, maybe they can draft someone like Weeden.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Oh, and the track record for Heisman-winning QBs in the NFL is not very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coordi88 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 You guys realize manzel isn't even viewed as a first round option at the moment and the #1 QB prospect is bridgewater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 You think about these kind of trades . . . Walker, Dickerson, Faulk, and now Richardson . . . crazy that the Colts have been involved in three of them . . . and all those backs went on to have successful careers with their new teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 You think about these kind of trades . . . Walker, Dickerson, Faulk, and now Richardson . . . crazy that the Colts have been involved in three of them . . . and all those backs went on to have successful careers with their new teams. Walker: didn't do squat for the Vikes (or anyone else) and DAL laughed all the way to the bank Dickerson: 2 good yrs with the Colts (I wouldn't call 2 yrs a "career") Faulk: absolutely Richardson: nobody knows yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) PS this does look great initially for the Colts (in a flashy kinda way), but I have to wonder about it from several possible angles. First the one of CLE knowing something most of the rest of the world doesn't (medical or otherwise) as it's impossible to really say how good he is or isn't likely to be yet with just one uneven year under his belt. Also, was this really the right move for the Colts? Ballard was doing fine, will be back next year (ACL tears aren't the long-term, lingering thing they used to be) and despite the coaches' desire otherwise, this is a pass-first league, and with a guy like Luck of all things they need to drill that into their thick heads. I'm all for some balance, but the days of a "power running" team are pretty much over. Basically this gets down to what's better: - Ballard/Bradshaw + that #1 pick next year (keep in mind this being a "late" 1st rounder is far from a lock) - Richardson (and whoever will play that #1 pick's position instead) Again impossible to say until (at least) next year when we have seen what Richardson does w/the Colts, and what they could've likely otherwise had in the draft. Not saying this is good or bad, just saying it's not a lock either way. Edited September 19, 2013 by BeeR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthrax1 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Mark me down as one that thinks the Browns front office has continued their streak of catostrophic blunders. Can you imagine if the Browns pick a RB in the first round with the pick they got from the Colts? They've already said they're going to go after a QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Walker: didn't do squat for the Vikes (or anyone else) and DAL laughed all the way to the bank Walker had 7,378 rushing/receiving yards and 50 TD's in the six and a half years after being traded. He also had another 3,138 return yards and two more TD's after being traded. So . . . 10,516 all purpose yards and 52 touchdowns is . . . "squat"? Edited September 19, 2013 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Dickerson: 2 good yrs with the Colts (I wouldn't call 2 yrs a "career") He had 1459 yards and 6 TD's in 1987. He had 2036 yards and 15 TD's in 1988. He had 1522 and 8 TD's in 1989. His final four years in the league he had 2,537 yards and 10 TD's. 7,239 yards and 38 more TD's post-trade isn't a good career? God you are stupid. That's two pretty good "careers" even if you only go by post-trade numbers. Edited September 19, 2013 by CaptainHook 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 They've already said they're going to go after a QB. He is talking about the pick they got from the Colts, not their own (top5) pick. They'll probably bundle picks to move up for the best QB, but good luck with that if JAX/OAK are in front of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Beer seems overly pessimistic about this trade. All the talk about the Browns knowing something about Richardson that nobdoy else does is hilarious. They know nothing, TRich is not a bust, or a locker room cancer, or a mediocre talent, injury prone, etc. They fleeced the Browns, and now people are spinning it to try and look good for the Browns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Lombardi should a stuck to broadcasting. This was not what Cleveland fans meant when they said they wanted to see a Lombardi come to Cleveland. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Beer seems overly pessimistic about this trade. All the talk about the Browns knowing something about Richardson that nobdoy else does is hilarious. They know nothing, TRich is not a bust, or a locker room cancer, or a mediocre talent, injury prone, etc. They fleeced the Browns, and now people are spinning it to try and look good for the Browns. Explain to me why it is so implausible that Richardson is no better than average. I see Richardson as a guy who put out the same kind of production as Peyton Hillis did during his 2 years there, and nobody was beating down Hillis' door to sign a big contract this year because he is an NFL über-RB. Richardson to date looks ordinary, no more. What evidence do you have to the contrary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Explain to me why it is so implausible that Richardson is no better than average. I see Richardson as a guy who put out the same kind of production as Peyton Hillis did during his 2 years there, and nobody was beating down Hillis' door to sign a big contract this year because he is an NFL über-RB. Richardson to date looks ordinary, no more. What evidence do you have to the contrary? The eye test . . . club record for rushing yards by a rookie . . . 11 rushing TD's . . . Edited September 19, 2013 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Explain to me why it is so implausible that Richardson is no better than average. I see Richardson as a guy who put out the same kind of production as Peyton Hillis did during his 2 years there, and nobody was beating down Hillis' door to sign a big contract this year because he is an NFL über-RB. Richardson to date looks ordinary, no more. What evidence do you have to the contrary? Hillis was a plodder and bruiser, had no speed and mostly racked up numbers because the Browns had nothing else working. I've watched every Browns game over the years, TRich has the skills to be a top RB. He can get away from a defender, or run them over. His numbers have not been great because there is little else there, and the D can focus on him. Plus he played with some nagging injuries. Heck Adrian Peterson said he has the skills to be a HOF RB (just read that again earler today). I'd ask why do you (and so many others) think he is average? Mostly stats, and very little watching him play. To CH's point, while the record breaking rookie season (most rushing yards by a Browns rookie, breaking Jim Brown's record) and 11 TDs was nice, the record he broke was 950 yards in 12 games, it took him a 16 game season (he played in 15) to do that. Not that impressive to me, but combined with his almost 600 yards receiving, 1500 yards combined and 11TDs for a rookie who missed all of pre-season was pretty good (with limited talent around him). Time will tell, but I have little doubt he will be immensely successful in the NFL, and it won't be just because he's on a team with a passing threat. Everybody who is calling him a bust or average are doing it to support their opinion that this is a good trade for the Browns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Has anyone considered the possibility that CLE has first hand knowledge of Richardson being nothing special and may have robbed IND by being able to wrangle their 1st rounder for him? Yes, I thought of this too. See: I realize he's still a kid, but is it possible that the Browns know something about Richardson that nobody else does? Maybe he's not the future stud everybody wants to think he is? He had decent fantasy number last year by they were strictly volume based - his peripheral stats were mediocre last year (and this year) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) The eye test . . . club record for rushing yards by a rookie . . . 11 rushing TD's . . . Trent's rushing yards came through volume, not particularly special play Lendale white had 15 TDs one year, so what? I'm just saying, there is some validity to the thought process that maybe the Browns staff has seen enough of Richardson to decide he's, say, 'ordinary'. Edited September 19, 2013 by nelsosi 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.