PDA

View Full Version : RGIII Trade Rumors Begin Already


BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 12:29 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/17/the-first-robert-griffin-to-browns-trade-rumor-emerges/

It's never too early to start speculating.

With the Colts almost certainly taking Luck, the Rams not needing a QB at #2 and such a steep drop from Griffin to the next tier of QBs, it looks like that pick being traded is inevitable.

Cleveland kicks off the rumor mill. They have the most ammunition and Griffin will provide a spark to that very, very dull offense.

DraftSavant
01-17-2012, 12:32 PM
Cleveland just makes too much sense. "The time has come," the Walrus said. They moved out of that 5 spot last year to procure the necessary ammo to trade up this year for their franchise QB. If they don't do it, the trade down last year will have largely went to waste.

I think Washington will throw big bucks at Flynn this offseason. Shanny and Snyder won't have the patient to go in and develop a rookie QB - they're going to want to plug somebody in who can come and run that system immediately, and Flynn can do that.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 12:36 PM
Colt McCoy sure as hell isn't leading them anywhere. His 5.9 YPA is 2nd worst in the league only behind Gabbert. Even if you adjust for the (lack of) supporting talent, that's horrific.

Griffin at least would bring you the chance to "Cam Newton" his way to a few victories. He'd bring a little bit of dynamism to the offense.

ElectricEye
01-17-2012, 12:39 PM
Hmm. I don't know. I might be tempted to call the Rams bluff if I'm the Browns. No way they would seriously move forward with Griffin with the type of resources they have invested in Bradford. If the price is right, I could see them pulling the trigger to be safe though.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 12:44 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

DraftSavant
01-17-2012, 12:47 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

Because you're unsold about RG3? Think McCoy can be a decent starter? Or because you'd rather have the "value" of more players?

I dunno, I wouldn't want McCoy starting a game for my team, ever, no matter how much talent is around him. WR and RB are both ridiculously deep and the FA class at WR will be pretty loaded, too.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 12:48 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

Yeah, no. The easiest way to win in the NFL right now is with a great QB. McCoy isn't even adequate. His ceiling and floor are about an inch apart.

You're better served going all in for a chance at someone who may become an elite QB than to doom yourself to mediocrity with one you know isn't.

There's the off chance that in like 7 years with a really, really good rest of the team meticulously built through years of careful drafting that a mediocre QB could become Alex Smith.

But do you really want to wait?

No. Go for the potentially elite QB. McCoy is awful.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 12:51 PM
Because you're unsold about RG3? Think McCoy can be a decent starter? Or because you'd rather have the "value" of more players?

A combination of all of those to be honest.

Ever since guys like Big Ben, Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco were sooo amazing in their rookies seasons, apparently nobody wants to give a QB a chance to develop. Add in the fact that all of those teams were exponentially more talented than the Browns and I think it's fair to give McCoy another shot with legitimate, NFL caliber playmakers.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 12:53 PM
Yeah, no. The easiest way to win in the NFL right now is with a great QB. McCoy isn't even adequate. His ceiling and floor are about an inch apart.

You're better served going all in for a chance at someone who may become an elite QB than to doom yourself to mediocrity with one you know isn't.

There's the off chance that in like 7 years with a really, really good rest of the team meticulously built through years of careful drafting that a mediocre QB could become Alex Smith.

But do you really want to wait?

No. Go for the potentially elite QB. McCoy is awful.

If McCoy isn't the answer, that's fine, I know he most likely isn't. However, I would rather trade my 2013 and 2014 first rounders to move up for a QB next year after acquiring talent to help them succeed. That's how I think a team should be built.

gpngc
01-17-2012, 12:54 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

The best part about this post is what it says about the state of Browns fans.

Regardless of which group of players they'll roll with, fear the elf is automatically assuming that he's going to have to take his lumps... lol

He didn't say "I think we'd be better off with..." or "we have a better chance to win with..." No. He already knows the team is going to suck so he's just choosing guys based on who he wants to see suffer.

I'm sorry, Cleveland.

H.O.O.D
01-17-2012, 12:55 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/17/the-first-robert-griffin-to-browns-trade-rumor-emerges/

It's never too early to start speculating.

With the Colts almost certainly taking Luck, the Rams not needing a QB at #2 and such a steep drop from Griffin to the next tier of QBs, it looks like that pick being traded is inevitable.

Cleveland kicks off the rumor mill. They have the most ammunition and Griffin will provide a spark to that very, very dull offense.

Cleveland also makes the most sense from the Rams perspective.

-The Rams could sit at 4 and while Kalil is most likely gone, can choose between Claiborne and Blackmon (trading with Washington, Miami or further down would likely take them out of contention for both of those players), and allow them to get the top prospect at a critical position of need for them.

The 2nd pick could be WR/CB or OL (or perhaps even another area of need) as there should be good talent still available at those spots when the pick comes up. they would also have 3 new players to try and plug in to the lineup from the top 40.

PoopSandwich
01-17-2012, 01:24 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

There is this amazing thing called free agency and a ton of good players in it this year.

I also doubt we would have to give up the ATL first round pick to move up two spots, probably only our second rounder and maybe a future third.

RG3 + Wright + (insert random free agent receiver out of the million that will be there) + (insert Hillis or one of the random free agent running backs out of the million that will be there) > McCoy + anything

Babylon
01-17-2012, 01:31 PM
Colt McCoy sure as hell isn't leading them anywhere. His 5.9 YPA is 2nd worst in the league only behind Gabbert. Even if you adjust for the (lack of) supporting talent, that's horrific.

Griffin at least would bring you the chance to "Cam Newton" his way to a few victories. He'd bring a little bit of dynamism to the offense.

Not sure i see the weapons there on offense to "Cam Newton" anyone. Besides Griffin has a long way to go to be in Cam's class but that's probably just me.

On the other hand the Browns defense kept them in near every game so i guess any improvement at the QB position would result in more wins going forward.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 01:39 PM
There is this amazing thing called free agency and a ton of good players in it this year.

I also doubt we would have to give up the ATL first round pick to move up two spots, probably only our second rounder and maybe a future third.

RG3 + Wright + (insert random free agent receiver out of the million that will be there) + (insert Hillis or one of the random free agent running backs out of the million that will be there) > McCoy + anything

Condescension is not going to help convince me. I'm aware of the existence of free agency, thanks though, WB.

Assuming we are active in free agency, I would still rather roll with McCoy this year and move up (if needed) in the 2013 draft for a QB if needed.

I prefer not to bring a rookie QB into the worst offense since the team came back in '99. Get some pieces at other positions this year, go after Tyler Wilson next year.

SuperPacker
01-17-2012, 01:39 PM
The Browns have two firsts and a early second so if they trade #5 and #37 to the Rams they would still be able to get weapons for Griffin if they got him. They could even trade up again and get Richardson if he falls to about #10. If not they can get Kendall Wright (which would be best case scenario) or Michael Floyd, Sanu or Jeffery. Plus there are some top WR free agents so they could get Richardson by trading a 2013 1st round pick and get a Vincent Jackson in free agency.

Now an offense of:

Griffin - Richardson - V.Jackson - Little

The Browns offense would be explosive then! And this is a very possible situation as well.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 01:42 PM
The best part about this post is what it says about the state of Browns fans.

Regardless of which group of players they'll roll with, fear the elf is automatically assuming that he's going to have to take his lumps... lol

He didn't say "I think we'd be better off with..." or "we have a better chance to win with..." No. He already knows the team is going to suck so he's just choosing guys based on who he wants to see suffer.

I'm sorry, Cleveland.

It is sad, but 2 winning seasons since 1999 coupled with one of the worst offenses in that time will do that. I think without a huge influx of talent at the skill positions and an upgrade at RT this team will have to rely on the defense to win every game, which it just isn't equipped to do yet.

RaiderNation
01-17-2012, 01:45 PM
I think Cleveland goes after Matt Flynn, especially since Holmgren isn't afraid to take on QB's to be starters(Hasselbeck part 2?). Holmgren then could go Richardson/Blackmon at 4 then go Miller/Jeffery at 21

Complex
01-17-2012, 01:55 PM
We will see where Matt Flynn goes in free agency.Free agency starts in March, the browns have plenty of cap room well they should. It's not like they have a lot of high paid players.

PoopSandwich
01-17-2012, 02:01 PM
Condescension is not going to help convince me. I'm aware of the existence of free agency, thanks though, WB.

Assuming we are active in free agency, I would still rather roll with McCoy this year and move up (if needed) in the 2013 draft for a QB if needed.

I prefer not to bring a rookie QB into the worst offense since the team came back in '99. Get some pieces at other positions this year, go after Tyler Wilson next year.

I just see no benefit in sticking with McCoy. He has no deep ball, poor accuracy and a small frame. I like him as a person and hes tough as hell but he isn't any good.

This team could be an 8 win team next year if we are active in free agency as Heckertt said we would be and get a good quarterback whether it be Matt Flynn or RG3.

I would love to see this team grow a sack and do something to get some playmakers. Flynn Blackmon Stevie Johnson and Little would be 10x better than what we have right now. Get over the whole Hillis bull **** and bring him back then go out and get a right tackle and RDE and we would be light years ahead of where we are.

Lots to do, but we have a ridiculously large amount of cap space and there really is no reason not to go wild in this free agent class.

SolidGold
01-17-2012, 02:03 PM
The Matt Flynn sweepstakes will clear up some of the QB questions. Compelling cases can be made for both Cleveland and Washington to go after Flynn.

Cleveland - the GB Holmgren connection/same type of offense. They can sign Flynn as a young veteran QB and draft some offensive playmakers/o-line.

Washington - the probably short leash Shanahan will be on this year may not allow him to develop a rookie QB so he will need a veteran. The Redskins are a huge wildcard at this point (it's very early in the process...I realize this): They can sign Peyton if he is cleared to play and released by Indy, Sign Flynn, Trade up for Luck or Griffin, stay at 6 and get Tannehill (or possibly trade down).

I don't think Griffin compares to Newton though, I would label Griffin a Vick like prospect with less athleticism but a better command of the passing game.

bigbuc
01-17-2012, 02:21 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.


And the second you see RG3 roll out, out run T Suggs or Woodley for a 22 yard gain you'll be in love.

Raiderz4Life
01-17-2012, 02:23 PM
Cmon Oakland make it happen....give up a 1st and a 2nd for him

Oh wait...

bigbuc
01-17-2012, 02:32 PM
Cmon Oakland make it happen....give up a 1st and a 2nd for him

Oh wait...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha,

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 02:49 PM
Cmon Oakland make it happen....give up a 1st and a 2nd for him

Oh wait...

Now there's the rumor out there that, with Hue out, Palmer could play the "trade me or I retire" card again.

You could have just traded a 1st and 2nd round pick for half a season of a guy throwing more INTs than TDs.

Think about that. Trading for Carson Palmer may very well turn out to be the worst trade in the history of the NFL, with Herschel Walker being the only other one I can think of.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-17-2012, 02:55 PM
When you have to rebuild, you rebuild. Staying in limbo is the worst possible move

Look at Carolina last year. We had an aging Steve Smith coming off a bad season and no one else going into the offseason for a QB to throw to. By far the worst offense in the NFL. But we took Cam anyway and added two TEs along with the 4th and 6th string WRs from the Chargers

Worked out pretty well.

RGIII could bust. So could Tyler Wilson or whoever you eventually pick. But the sooner you figure that out the better. McCoy has had 2 seasons, that's long enough for a guy of his pedigree and physical limitations

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 02:57 PM
When you have to rebuild, you rebuild. Staying in limbo is the worst possible move

Look at Carolina last year. We had an aging Steve Smith coming off a bad season and no one else going into the offseason for a QB to throw to. By far the worst offense in the NFL. But we took Cam anyway and added two TEs along with 4th and 6th string WRs from the Chargers

Worked out pretty well.

RGIII could bust. So could Tyler Wilson or whoever you eventually pick. But the sooner you figure that out the better. McCoy has had 2 seasons, that's long enough for a guy of his pedigree and physical limitations

Can you believe, that once upon a time (around this time last year), there were people who wanted you to give Clausen another chance and take someone other than Newton?

How does your franchise's outlook feel now?

Raiderz4Life
01-17-2012, 03:00 PM
Now there's the rumor out there that, with Hue out, Palmer could play the "trade me or I retire" card again.

You could have just traded a 1st and 2nd round pick for half a season of a guy throwing more INTs than TDs.

Think about that. Trading for Carson Palmer may very well turn out to be the worst trade in the history of the NFL, with Herschel Walker being the only other one I can think of.

I don't wanna think about it =(

SchizophrenicBatman
01-17-2012, 03:01 PM
I couldn't believe it at the time and still can't now

I just figured most people suggesting we stick with Clausen hadn't watched a single game of ours that year. Which I can't really blame them for...

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 03:20 PM
I couldn't believe it at the time and still can't now

I just figured most people suggesting we stick with Clausen hadn't watched a single game of ours that year. Which I can't really blame them for...

I (unfortunately) watched several and...Clausen was a fish out of water on an NFL field. His existence is the only reason why Blaine Gabbert isn't the worst QB I've ever seen.

Colt McCoy isn't THAT bad, but he's got no ceiling. Maybe, MAYBE if you surrounded him with elite talent all over the place, he could be on the level of a post-9000 shoulder surgeries Chad Pennington. Maybe. But that's too much work for not enough payoff.

Go for Griffin. It's easier for a great QB to make the team around him look better than it is to build enough of a cast to support a mediocre QB.

rawdawg
01-17-2012, 03:24 PM
I think GB pulls a Patriots and franchises Flynn. Then I think they trade him to the highest bidder. I think Cleveland would rather trade for Flynn than draft another McCoy, Quinn, or Couch. I know it's a new regime than the one that made those picks, but I think if you can get an experienced QB for a similar package than you would a rookie....you go for experience. The Browns may be able to get Flynn giving up the Falcons pick and a future #1, if that.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 03:27 PM
I think GB pulls a Patriots and franchises Flynn. Then I think they trade him to the highest bidder. I think Cleveland would rather trade for Flynn than draft another McCoy, Quinn, or Couch. I know it's a new regime than the one that made those picks, but I think if you can get an experienced QB for a similar package than you would a rookie....you go for experience. The Browns may be able to get Flynn giving up the Falcons pick and a future #1, if that.

Ehhhh, doubtful. Flynn has two career starts to the 15 Cassel had at the time.

Also, Flynn's cap number would be ridiculous and would likely hurt them in keeping some other guys like Finley until he's unloaded.

...even IF he's unloaded. The franchise number would be the starting point of the salary with a new team, and it's possible no one would want him for that much, leaving the Packers stuck with a $14 million backup QB.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 03:28 PM
I think GB pulls a Patriots and franchises Flynn. Then I think they trade him to the highest bidder. I think Cleveland would rather trade for Flynn than draft another McCoy, Quinn, or Couch. I know it's a new regime than the one that made those picks, but I think if you can get an experienced QB for a similar package than you would a rookie....you go for experience. The Browns may be able to get Flynn giving up the Falcons pick and a future #1, if that.

I hate that idea. I'd rather draft RGIII (if we can get him at #4, not trading up) than trade TWO firsts for Flynn.

Babylon
01-17-2012, 03:30 PM
I think Cleveland goes after Matt Flynn, especially since Holmgren isn't afraid to take on QB's to be starters(Hasselbeck part 2?). Holmgren then could go Richardson/Blackmon at 4 then go Miller/Jeffery at 21

That would be his M.O., go for the veteran backup like he did with Hasselbeck.The Walrus has always been pretty consistant about not taking QBs who come out early. I'd also expect Seattle to get in on that Matt Flynn bidding war also.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 03:39 PM
I (unfortunately) watched several and...Clausen was a fish out of water on an NFL field. His existence is the only reason why Blaine Gabbert isn't the worst QB I've ever seen.

Colt McCoy isn't THAT bad, but he's got no ceiling. Maybe, MAYBE if you surrounded him with elite talent all over the place, he could be on the level of a post-9000 shoulder surgeries Chad Pennington. Maybe. But that's too much work for not enough payoff.

Go for Griffin. It's easier for a great QB to make the team around him look better than it is to build enough of a cast to support a mediocre QB.

I don't see it; not on this team. The supporting cast (on offense) isn't even mediocre, it's atrocious.

Who is going to block for him? We have essentially swinging saloon doors manning the right side of the OL.

Who will catch the ball? Little is the only guy worth mentioning. We have a decent TE and a good pass catching #2 TE, but we refuse to use them.

Who will run it? Everyone thinks Hillis is gone.

If we trade up to #2 and draft Griffin, it will cost the #22 pick (according to the value chart). So we basically need to sign the entire free agent class to give him any weapons at all. Maybe there's a guy at the top of R2 that could help, but that's not the situation I want to put my new franchise QB in. He's bound to have his career destroyed, a la Tim Couch.

djp
01-17-2012, 03:42 PM
see it more likely that the Rams just take Kalil now that they have Jeff Fisher, not wanting to leave him to Minnesota at #3 after trading down. Minnesota can then use the #3 pick as the hot spot and still get Morris Claiborne/whoever a few picks later. Cleveland would want to move up, not wanting Washington/Miami to get the pick in front of them, risking being left at the altar.

That is, if the Btrowns really like RG3 that much. And I realize that this benefits my team, so take it with a grain of salt.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 03:43 PM
I don't see it; not on this team. The supporting cast (on offense) isn't even mediocre, it's atrocious.

Who is going to block for him? We have essentially swinging saloon doors manning the right side of the OL.

Who will catch the ball? Little is the only guy worth mentioning. We have a decent TE and a good pass catching #2 TE, but we refuse to use them.

Who will run it? Everyone thinks Hillis is gone.

If we trade up to #2 and draft Griffin, it will cost the #22 pick (according to the value chart). So we basically need to sign the entire free agent class to give him any weapons at all. Maybe there's a guy at the top of R2 that could help, but that's not the situation I want to put my new franchise QB in. He's bound to have his career destroyed, a la Tim Couch.

Plenty of guys enter far worse than that.

You also need to think like a GM. Building a good team is part of it but so is keeping asses in the seats.

If you just stick with such a horrifically boring offense, fan support is going to wane. You need to bring in stars and the Browns currently have...zero?

You're basically make the argument that Falcons fans did when they didn't want Matt Ryan and instead wanted Glenn Dorsey. Or the Lions fans who wanted a LT or...ugh...Aaron Curry...over Stafford. Or the Rams fans who wanted Suh over Bradford.

All are significantly better off. Add a good QB and the rest becomes easier to flesh out.

rawdawg
01-17-2012, 03:44 PM
Ehhhh, doubtful. Flynn has two career starts to the 15 Cassel had at the time.

Also, Flynn's cap number would be ridiculous and would likely hurt them in keeping some other guys like Finley until he's unloaded.

...even IF he's unloaded. The franchise number would be the starting point of the salary with a new team, and it's possible no one would want him for that much, leaving the Packers stuck with a $14 million backup QB.

Not true. Cassel was franchised for 14Mil and only got 6 years for 63Mil, 10Mil per season on average. I don't think they bring Finley back anyway. Don't see them franchising him and if they can get a 1 for Flynn, they can take another TE early.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 03:46 PM
Not true. Cassel was franchised for 14Mil and only got 6 years for 63Mil, 10Mil per season on average. I don't think they bring Finley back anyway. Don't see them franchising him and if they can get a 1 for Flynn, they can take another TE early.

The franchise money becomes the guaranteed money. Once the player's name is on that contract, it becomes fully guaranteed. So when the new deal is worked out, that is, at minimum, the starting point for the guaranteed total.

rawdawg
01-17-2012, 03:47 PM
I hate that idea. I'd rather draft RGIII (if we can get him at #4, not trading up) than trade TWO firsts for Flynn.

I don't think 2 1st would be what it takes. Just pointing out what Cleveland could do since they have an extra 1st and still have top 5 pick (Blackmon). I think GB would take the Falcons pick and a 3rd.

rawdawg
01-17-2012, 03:48 PM
The franchise money becomes the guaranteed money. Once the player's name is on that contract, it becomes fully guaranteed. So when the new deal is worked out, that is, at minimum, the starting point for the guaranteed total.

Ok. It's not like he isn't going to get 14Mil guaranteed anyway if he becomes a FA? Cassel got 28Mil guaranteed.

MURPHMAN
01-17-2012, 03:49 PM
see it more likely that the Rams just take Kalil now that they have Jeff Fisher, not wanting to leave him to Minnesota at #3 after trading down. Minnesota can then use the #3 pick as the hot spot and still get Morris Claiborne/whoever a few picks later. Cleveland would want to move up, not wanting Washington/Miami to get the pick in front of them, risking being left at the altar.

That is, if the Btrowns really like RG3 that much. And I realize that this benefits my team, so take it with a grain of salt.

I'm kind of seeing it this way also. I think the Rams will want too much for #2 because they want to protect their franchise QB with a franchise LT and other teams would have to pay handsomely to take that away from them. Minny could be in the catbirds seat if there are 3-4 teams below them wanting RGIII badly enough.

Grizzlegom
01-17-2012, 03:52 PM
Jeff Ireland is a Baylor alum. just sayin'

keylime_5
01-17-2012, 03:54 PM
I think Matt Flynn plays a large role in the RGIII sweepstakes. If Cleveland signs him then obviously you don't have to jump into the top 4 picks to get Griffin. You'd probably have to jump in front of Washington though, and Washington might want to trade up to secure him (much like people are talking about the Browns doing right now), but how high would be high enough? The Dolphins are the other threat, but of course they'd have to pay the most being farther down in the order.

If Flynn goes to Washington then you'd think that Cleveland would be much more likely to call the Rams/Vikings bluff and let RGIII slide to them without a trade up. Miami would have to give up a boatload to move up into the top 3 picks.

I also look at it like this:

-There are really 3 elite players the Rams could use at the top of the draft: Kalil, Claiborne, and maybe Blackmon.
-Kalil and Claiborne you have to figure at this point are going to be their top 2 targets (I think Claiborne will be considered BPA over Blackmon on most teams' boards).
-If they trade down to #4 then they should get one of those guys.
-If they have to trade down to #6 or #8/9 then they'll have to settle for a 2nd tier guy like Kirkpatrick, Coples, or someone else.

I think the top 5 picks are a lot more valuable in this draft than say picks 6-10 for a lot of teams. There really is Luck/Kalil/Claiborne/Griffin then Blackmon/Kirkpatrick/Coples/Richardson and then a bit of a gap right now it seems. This factor might make the Browns not have to pay so much to trade with the Rams compared to Miami or Washington. Then again someone like Kirkpatrick could really rise and screw this theory up, there's a lot of time between now and late April.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 03:54 PM
Plenty of guys enter far worse than that.

You also need to think like a GM. Building a good team is part of it but so is keeping asses in the seats.

If you just stick with such a horrifically boring offense, fan support is going to wane. You need to bring in stars and the Browns currently have...zero?

You're basically make the argument that Falcons fans did when they didn't want Matt Ryan and instead wanted Glenn Dorsey. Or the Lions fans who wanted a LT or...ugh...Aaron Curry...over Stafford. Or the Rams fans who wanted Suh over Bradford.

All are significantly better off. Add a good QB and the rest becomes easier to flesh out.

I think Holmgren knows that the best way to keep asses in the seats is by building a winning team. If he and Heckert think RGIII is the best way to do that, I'm OK with it (not that anyone gives a ****), but it better not be to generate some temporary excitement.

And I think it's worth pointing out that all of the QB's you mention have studs to lean on: White and Turner in ATL, Megatron in DET, and Jackson in STL. Again, the Browns don't have any established stars on offense that can take the pressure off of a young QB.

BeerBaron
01-17-2012, 03:56 PM
I think Holmgren knows that the best way to keep asses in the seats is by building a winning team. If he and Heckert think RGIII is the best way to do that, I'm OK with it (not that anyone gives a ****), but it better not be to generate some temporary excitement.

And I think it's worth pointing out that all of the QB's you mention have studs to lean on: White and Turner in ATL, Megatron in DET, and Jackson in STL. Again, the Browns don't have any established stars on offense that can take the pressure off of a young QB.

You're not going to budge on this, fine.

But those guys also didn't have a Joe Thomas or Alex Mack. Protect a QB with elite potential and weapons will emerge.

fear the elf
01-17-2012, 03:59 PM
You're not going to budge on this, fine.

But those guys also didn't have a Joe Thomas or Alex Mack. Protect a QB with elite potential and weapons will emerge.

LOL, you're not budging either BB :) I'm not going to be mad if it happens like you suggest, I just would rather it not.

Brown Leader
01-17-2012, 04:10 PM
see it more likely that the Rams just take Kalil now that they have Jeff Fisher, not wanting to leave him to Minnesota at #3 after trading down. Minnesota can then use the #3 pick as the hot spot and still get Morris Claiborne/whoever a few picks later. Cleveland would want to move up, not wanting Washington/Miami to get the pick in front of them, risking being left at the altar.

That is, if the Browns really like RG3 that much. And I realize that this benefits my team, so take it with a grain of salt.

The sticking point. Steve Wyche? C'mon. Guy's a tool as an analyst.

OzTitan
01-17-2012, 07:17 PM
I think I'd rather take my lumps with

McCoy, Trent Richardson, Kendall Wright and Little, OR...
McCoy, Lamar Miller, Justin Blackmon and Little

than RGIII, Hardesty, Little, and Massaquoi. I don't see that as wasting the trade down as Savant suggests.

In today's NFL, I don't think any RB prospect is worth taking over any 1st round QB prospect if your teams needs a QB, and the Browns need a QB.

Same for WR except maybe some leniency on the quality of prospect - I don't know if Blackmon is that, though.

For a team lacking much success in recent years, the Browns have ignored taking a QB early way too much. Since 99, they've done it once (in 99) and it's not like they weren't in positions to try it.

ArkyRamsFan
01-17-2012, 07:24 PM
Then again someone like Kirkpatrick could really rise and screw this theory up, there's a lot of time between now and late April.

Speaking of screwing up; just read that Dre Kirkpatrick was arrested in Florida for possession of weed.

This clown has some 'splainin' to do now...

Or, maybe he can try the Seargent Schultz defense. "I know nothing!"

JRTPlaya21
01-17-2012, 07:39 PM
We have an entire thread on Dre already actually.

holt_bruce81
01-17-2012, 07:44 PM
Rams/Browns trade just makes to much sense.

Browns get their Franchise guy. Rams get their #1 receiver and more picks.

gpngc
01-17-2012, 07:53 PM
see it more likely that the Rams just take Kalil now that they have Jeff Fisher, not wanting to leave him to Minnesota at #3 after trading down. Minnesota can then use the #3 pick as the hot spot and still get Morris Claiborne/whoever a few picks later. Cleveland would want to move up, not wanting Washington/Miami to get the pick in front of them, risking being left at the altar.

That is, if the Btrowns really like RG3 that much. And I realize that this benefits my team, so take it with a grain of salt.

Mike Holmgren loves Seneca Wallace more than his parents and RG3 is like Seneca Wallace x1000 on steroids.

LonghornsLegend
01-17-2012, 08:24 PM
Let's say Washington scoops up Flynn in FA, who does Cleveland have to be afraid of to jump them in that scenario? STL or Minnesota won't take RGIII, and
Miami is the only team with an even remote shot at getting up there, but the cost will be much steeper, and will STL or Minn want to move down that far and miss out on Kalil or Blackmon?


I mean, maybe they trade up because when your talking about your franchise QB for the next 13 years why risk it, but if Washington gets out of the picture I'm not sure they have to jump up those 2 spots.

H.O.O.D
01-18-2012, 09:03 AM
I also doubt we would have to give up the ATL first round pick to move up two spots, probably only our second rounder and maybe a future third.


Are you forgetting the Washington Redskins, Miami Dolphins & Seattle Seahawks ? Not to mention another team who could surprise and sneak into the mix ? If the Browns want RG3 they are going to have to compete with other teams looking to get up to 2 or 3. So that 2nd first rounder will possibly need to be in play (or a 2013 first rounder). Why would St. Louis trade back with you for 4, 37 & a future 3rd if one of those other teams is offering this years 1 & 2 + a future #1 ?

Lots to do, but we have a ridiculously large amount of cap space and there really is no reason not to go wild in this free agent class.

Reason A : Washington Redskins.

Reason B : Philadelphia Eagles and the so called dream team.

Spending wildly in free agency doesn't equal wins. Spending wisely is the ticket. Look at my 49ers as an example of wise spending in free agency...we had a need at corner, so we spent a 3rd on Culliver and a couple bags of flaming hot cheetos on Rodgers. Philly traded for DRC and spent the cost of a small tropical island on Aso.

Cleveland should use some of that cap room giving extensions to players of merit and look to add pieces from the free agent market that are of good value and fit in with the scheme and vision of this team. Perhaps you splurge on a player or two....depending on who they are.

I think Matt Flynn plays a large role in the RGIII sweepstakes. If Cleveland signs him then obviously you don't have to jump into the top 4 picks to get Griffin. You'd probably have to jump in front of Washington though, and Washington might want to trade up to secure him (much like people are talking about the Browns doing right now), but how high would be high enough? The Dolphins are the other threat, but of course they'd have to pay the most being farther down in the order.

If Flynn goes to Washington then you'd think that Cleveland would be much more likely to call the Rams/Vikings bluff and let RGIII slide to them without a trade up. Miami would have to give up a boatload to move up into the top 3 picks.

I also look at it like this:

-There are really 3 elite players the Rams could use at the top of the draft: Kalil, Claiborne, and maybe Blackmon.
-Kalil and Claiborne you have to figure at this point are going to be their top 2 targets (I think Claiborne will be considered BPA over Blackmon on most teams' boards).
-If they trade down to #4 then they should get one of those guys.
-If they have to trade down to #6 or #8/9 then they'll have to settle for a 2nd tier guy like Kirkpatrick, Coples, or someone else.

I think the top 5 picks are a lot more valuable in this draft than say picks 6-10 for a lot of teams. There really is Luck/Kalil/Claiborne/Griffin then Blackmon/Kirkpatrick/Coples/Richardson and then a bit of a gap right now it seems. This factor might make the Browns not have to pay so much to trade with the Rams compared to Miami or Washington. Then again someone like Kirkpatrick could really rise and screw this theory up, there's a lot of time between now and late April.

I said something along these lines earlier.

However, the Rams need to play it close to the chest and they likely will. They will likely try to get the most out of Cleveland that they possibly can and use other offers on the table to their advantage/as leverage.

Let's say Washington scoops up Flynn in FA, who does Cleveland have to be afraid of to jump them in that scenario? STL or Minnesota won't take RGIII, and
Miami is the only team with an even remote shot at getting up there, but the cost will be much steeper, and will STL or Minn want to move down that far and miss out on Kalil or Blackmon?


I mean, maybe they trade up because when your talking about your franchise QB for the next 13 years why risk it, but if Washington gets out of the picture I'm not sure they have to jump up those 2 spots.

Seattle is a threat to trade up. They sit outside the top 10 yes, but it is not out of the realm that they sacrifice a bunch of picks to get ahead of Cleveland. Last offseason they made there attempts to fix the line, get a #1 receiver and add another tight end...once they resign Lynch all that remains on offense is to get a QB. I could see them dipping back into the free agent market to add depth and some defensive pieces and move all their chips in to landing RG3. It may have to be by way of Minnesota as St.Louis may not want to assist them in landing a QB.

But if Cleveland sits still at 4 they could get screwed by Miami or Seattle making that move. Then they get stuck with a lesser prospect.

TT Gator
01-18-2012, 12:57 PM
The Browns have two firsts and a early second so if they trade #5 and #37 to the Rams they would still be able to get weapons for Griffin if they got him. They could even trade up again and get Richardson if he falls to about #10. If not they can get Kendall Wright (which would be best case scenario) or Michael Floyd, Sanu or Jeffery. Plus there are some top WR free agents so they could get Richardson by trading a 2013 1st round pick and get a Vincent Jackson in free agency.

Now an offense of:

Griffin - Richardson - V.Jackson - Little

The Browns offense would be explosive then! And this is a very possible situation as well.

It's sooo very unlikely that'll happen though. Just about every team in the league will be willing to give Vincent Jackson the big money if he decides to leave the Chargers and I doubt he'd pick the Browns out of all them. Specally since he's 99% likely to be signed before the Draft. Anytime you count on stocking your roster up with big time free agents your doomed to fail cuz it's unpredictable not to mention that sometimes even when you DO win in free agency it can work out completely different from how you expected (for examples ask the Eagles this year or the Redskins who've depended on FA for years and never got anywhere). Not saying the Browns shouldn't pick RG3 but they need to be smart so they can load up on talent later in the Draft. I mean honestly I think Washington will pick up their franchise QB in free agency since their not afraid to throw money around (Matt Flynn or POSSIBLY Peyton Manning) and i'm not sold that Seattle and Miami are convinced they need a QB bad enuff to give a kings ransom for one even RG3 so Cleveland may be able to sit at #4 and get RG3 if this offseason works out just right for them.

bucfan12
01-18-2012, 01:02 PM
I don't understand how there can be trade rumors already for this guy even before Free Agency.

Remember, FA changes a lot of what teams can do in the draft. If Cleveland gets Matt Flynn, for example, there phone will ring off the hook.

Also, I'm not really buying into the hype of RG III. He had a magnificant college football season, but already so many people are rushing to compare him to Mike VIck.

Guys, Mike Vick is not a great NFL QB. Griffen is a very risky pick in my opinion. Very small, 6'2 220. Has been in a spread offense, that makes easy reads and throws.

There is too much hype surrounding him. Before him winning the Heisman, he was a 16-25 pick range. Now he's a top 5 lock?

keylime_5
01-18-2012, 01:38 PM
6'2"/220 isn't that small. That's pretty average. Andy Dalton is that. Aaron Rodgers was that when he came out of Cal. The thing is Griffin is listed at that but in reality might be 6'2" or shorter and closer to 210. Whatever he is, he's skinny at that weight and can stand to add a few pounds so he can be more durable. Vick was a very raw passer coming out of college. Elite speed and athleticism, cannon arm, there really weren't any athletes like him at QB. He was never a pocket passer or viewed as one. Griffin I think can be a pocket passer like Donovan McNabb with his skills as a passer coming out of college. Incredible accuracy on downfield throws, has a great arm and is a little taller than Vick, more of a polished passer (though still raw). Vick never threw for 4000 yards in college like Griffin either, granted his offensive system wasn't nearly as stat friendly as the one Art Briles uses.

LonghornsLegend
01-18-2012, 06:12 PM
I don't understand how there can be trade rumors already for this guy even before Free Agency.

Remember, FA changes a lot of what teams can do in the draft. If Cleveland gets Matt Flynn, for example, there phone will ring off the hook.

Also, I'm not really buying into the hype of RG III. He had a magnificant college football season, but already so many people are rushing to compare him to Mike VIck.

Guys, Mike Vick is not a great NFL QB. Griffen is a very risky pick in my opinion. Very small, 6'2 220. Has been in a spread offense, that makes easy reads and throws.

There is too much hype surrounding him. Before him winning the Heisman, he was a 16-25 pick range. Now he's a top 5 lock?



Where have you seen RGIII compared to Vick? If you can find just one place I'd love to see it.

SRK85
01-18-2012, 11:46 PM
Why would the Browns take him? Give McCoy another year. If he sucks then draft a QB in 2013 the QB class is deeper next year anyways.

Wrathman
01-18-2012, 11:55 PM
Why would the Browns take him? Give McCoy another year. If he sucks then draft a QB in 2013 the QB class is deeper next year anyways.

The decision is already in on McCoy. He's not the answer. If they like RG3, then they should try to get him now. Who knows what the circumstances will be when the Browns are on the clock next year.

WCH
01-19-2012, 05:46 AM
If he sucks then draft a QB in 2013 the QB class is deeper next year anyways.

People say this every year.

TheSlinger
01-19-2012, 06:25 AM
People say this every year.

And they're right 50% of the time!

bam bam
01-19-2012, 06:51 AM
but 50% of the time, they are wrong every time

fear the elf
01-19-2012, 08:32 AM
The decision is already in on McCoy. He's not the answer. If they like RG3, then they should try to get him now. Who knows what the circumstances will be when the Browns are on the clock next year.

Once McCoy is cut, replaced, or Holmgren/Heckert/Shurmur say it, I will believe it, but let's not pretend like we know wtf is going on when we obviously do not.

We are all entitled to give our opinions, but presenting your opinion as fact is asinine.

Iamcanadian
01-19-2012, 01:14 PM
Condescension is not going to help convince me. I'm aware of the existence of free agency, thanks though, WB.

Assuming we are active in free agency, I would still rather roll with McCoy this year and move up (if needed) in the 2013 draft for a QB if needed.

I prefer not to bring a rookie QB into the worst offense since the team came back in '99. Get some pieces at other positions this year, go after Tyler Wilson next year.

The trouble with this theory is that by adding supporting talent, you don't necessarily get to draft top 5, you can never guarantee 4 wins and 6 wins takes you to possibly #10 in the draft and trading down from there becomes much more difficult and far more expensive. Your saying, waiting till next year which could cost them the #10 pick vs this year which may only cost them a 2nd rounder or the 22nd pick in round 1, makes sense. I see no sense in it.

Even if a rookie QB has success in year 1, it usually takes 3 to 4 years before they can be called a finished product capable of taking a team all the way to the Super Bowl, every year you put off drafting a potential franchise QB, you are adding a year to that 3 or 4 year period, that's an awful long wait for us Cleveland fans.

Then there is the strong possibility that if the Browns gamble on McCoy and he fails, that Holmgren and the whole management team is fired within a few years and I doubt our management team is willing to take that risk unless they are absolutely positive that McCoy is the answer. You have to remember that continual losing does lead to empty stadiums and a huge loss in revenue and few owners ever put up with that fact.

The coaching staff will make the decision on McCoy not another year of playing, if they believe strongly that he can develop into a solid starter, you won't hear about Cleveland moving up for a QB, but if they turn thumbs down on McCoy, then they trade up at whatever the cost or sign Flynn. They aren't going to stand pat unless their belief in McCoy is absolute.

fear the elf
01-19-2012, 01:43 PM
The trouble with this theory is that by adding supporting talent, you don't necessarily get to draft top 5, you can never guarantee 4 wins and 6 wins takes you to possibly #10 in the draft and trading down from there becomes much more difficult and far more expensive. Your saying, waiting till next year which could cost them the #10 pick vs this year which may only cost them a 2nd rounder or the 22nd pick in round 1, makes sense. I see no sense in it.

I feel like we have this discussion every year in the team forum (since our QB always sucks). I disagree; in my opinion, you build the team first so you can place a young QB in a situation that gives him every opportunity to succeed. It's hard enough being a young QB on a good team, let alone a team like ours.

Just look at how many "good" QBs there are in this league...maybe 15? And that's with the dozen or so graduating each year. If there are 15 "good" QBs out of hundreds that try, it must be pretty freaking hard...why not make it as easy as possible?

If we get the talent in place this season and we are just a QB away for the 2013 draft, then trade the #1, #2, and a future #1 and get that **** done. Until we get to that point, I'd rather avoid another Tim Couch situation.

Even if a rookie QB has success in year 1, it usually takes 3 to 4 years before they can be called a finished product capable of taking a team all the way to the Super Bowl, every year you put off drafting a potential franchise QB, you are adding a year to that 3 or 4 year period, that's an awful long wait for us Cleveland fans.

I agree, it can take 3 or 4 years, yet we want to be done with Colt after 2. Again, he has very little support around him, and I'm not saying he's the answer, but until there is a WR with legitimate NFL talent and somebody that blocks on the right side, what's the point in bringing in someone else? So they can have their confidence destroyed when they are leveled by T-Sizzle and Harrison/Woodley while their WRs drop the most passes in the NFL?

Then there is the strong possibility that if the Browns gamble on McCoy and he fails, that Holmgren and the whole management team is fired within a few years and I doubt our management team is willing to take that risk unless they are absolutely positive that McCoy is the answer. You have to remember that continual losing does lead to empty stadiums and a huge loss in revenue and few owners ever put up with that fact.

The stadium keeps filling up every season for the past decade+ of misery and ineptitude, why would next year be the tipping point? No way do we turn over the entire FO unless we go 2-14 or worse.

The coaching staff will make the decision on McCoy not another year of playing, if they believe strongly that he can develop into a solid starter, you won't hear about Cleveland moving up for a QB, but if they turn thumbs down on McCoy, then they trade up at whatever the cost or sign Flynn. They aren't going to stand pat unless their belief in McCoy is absolute.

I don't agree with that. If it makes sense to make a move they will, but they won't just draft or sign somebody that they don't believe in just because they aren't sold on McCoy. You don't go out and say, "hey, I don't really like Flynn/RGIII, but lets bring him in because I don't like Colt either." What sense does that make?

Iamcanadian
01-19-2012, 02:26 PM
I feel like we have this discussion every year in the team forum (since our QB always sucks). I disagree; in my opinion, you build the team first so you can place a young QB in a situation that gives him every opportunity to succeed. It's hard enough being a young QB on a good team, let alone a team like ours.

Well, no NFL GM's agree with your theory, they all go by the 'Golden Rule', never pass on a potential franchise QB when you have an opportunity to get one. Miami didn't follow this rule and Atlanta got Ryan. Atlanta has made the playoffs 4 years in a row and where is Miami?

Just look at how many "good" QBs there are in this league...maybe 15? And that's with the dozen or so graduating each year. If there are 15 "good" QBs out of hundreds that try, it must be pretty freaking hard...why not make it as easy as possible?

See the above quote. Look at Miami and you see the results of putting it off. Look at all the teams with the 1st pick in the draft who got their franchise QB's and have won Super Bowls recently.
Detroit was 0-16 with zero talent but took Stanford #1 in the draft and now are a serious Super Bowl contender for years to come. You don't wait, you strike while the iron is hot.

If we get the talent in place this season and we are just a QB away for the 2013 draft, then trade the #1, #2, and a future #1 and get that **** done. Until we get to that point, I'd rather avoid another Tim Couch situation.

So how is the 2nd rounder this year or the 22nd pick get us that much closer, giving up the bundle you are suggesting would put us in a position where we have practically zero talent around a QB with little hope to contend even with a solid QB.
San Diego failed with Leaf and drafted Rivers, Indy failed with George and drafted Peyton and I could go on and on. If a team fails when drafting a QB, you simply draft another one till you get it right no matter how many times you fail. There is simply no other way to be successful in the NFL.


I agree, it can take 3 or 4 years, yet we want to be done with Colt after 2. Again, he has very little support around him, and I'm not saying he's the answer, but until there is a WR with legitimate NFL talent and somebody that blocks on the right side, what's the point in bringing in someone else? So they can have their confidence destroyed when they are leveled by T-Sizzle and Harrison/Woodley while their WRs drop the most passes in the NFL?

Again, the coaches aren't fools, they can tell pretty quickly if a QB has the ability or not. I'm not saying McCoy doesn't have it, if the coaches absolutely believe in McCoy then they won't draft another QB, they don't need another season to decide. That is just what fans think but coaches and GM's know if a player has the talent just by watching him in practice, that's why Quinn never got a shot with Crennel.


The stadium keeps filling up every season for the past decade+ of misery and ineptitude, why would next year be the tipping point? No way do we turn over the entire FO unless we go 2-14 or worse.

So did Detroit's fans but there is a limit to every team's fan. They have to have at least some hope or eventually or they just give up and stop attending.
Lerner has NEVER show a lot of patience with his manegent teams, he panics quickly and was quick to turn over his last 2 decision makers, thats why we have stunk so long.
One of the main reasons why GM's get fired besides long losing streaks is loss of revenue and Holmgren and his hand picked people have to produce ticket sales to survive, waiting another 4-6 seasons isn't in the cards for this management team unless they can give their fans real hope by drafting a QB, that is why they must be absolutely sure about McCoy.



I don't agree with that. If it makes sense to make a move they will, but they won't just draft or sign somebody that they don't believe in just because they aren't sold on McCoy. You don't go out and say, "hey, I don't really like Flynn/RGIII, but lets bring him in because I don't like Colt either." What sense does that make?

RG111 is a consensus top 5 pick in this year's draft, he isn't just somebody. GM's and scouts believe strongly in this guy or he wouldn't be up there that high. Now if he sinks down team's boards out of the top 10 or further, then I would agree that we have no choice but to wait a year and pray for better luck, but if he remains in the top 5, he will be our pick provided that they have come to the conclusion that McCoy isn't the answer, or they sign/trade for Flynn, whichever one they believe in more strongly.

Cudders
01-19-2012, 02:43 PM
As has been stated numerous times in this thread, a good amount can change between now and late April. Thereís a lot of moving parts involved in the draft process and rumors at this point are pure speculation.

That said, Iíll explain this one from a Browns perspective. This team needs a quarterback in the worst way. I understand the desire to protect stockpiled picks and pardon Colt McCoy on the condition of working with no talent, but the latter just simply isnít possible for me. The Browns are one of the least talented offenses in the NFL. That much is true. It doesnít entirely excuse Coltís poor play this past season though. Certain things a quarterback does are independent of his supporting cast. For example, his ball placement has regressed and he hasnít lived up to his billing as an accurate passer. If Colt canít be accurate in the short-to-intermediate range, heís got a slim chance of surviving as a starting quarterback because his marginal arm strength leaves him little room for error. Also, heís not throwing the ball with anticipation or throwing his receivers open. Heís still throwing to targets instead of spots. And while the receiving department needs a talent infusion, there were still times they broke free of coverage and werenít rewarded with the ball. Honestly, Colt still looks shocked at the speed of the game, which isnít a promising sign for a young quarterback. He doesnít look comfortable in the pocket and just waits for a wide-open read before hitting his check-down. Separation in college and the pros are vastly different concepts. Colt still has the college concept ingrained in him and is scared to pull the trigger on what would be a stick throw. But the ability to complete stick throws is a required trait at this level. As it stands, the two professional qualities that Colt has shown in spades are intangibles and work ethic. Even still, those arenít strong enough indicators for me to ignore the weaker parts of his game and feel comfortable moving forward with him as a long-term answer. Until the quarterbacking improves, this offense is doomed to dismal production.

Thatís the reason the Browns should make a push for Robert Griffin III. He has a tantalizing skill set and the potential to be a solution for a problem this team has had since their return. Do I have some questions and reservations regarding RGIII? Yeah, I sure do. But, overall, I like the package I see. Heís got a big-time arm that can drive the ball downfield and should be able to cut through the inclement weather that rolls in from Lake Erie. I think heís got nice touch as a passer, too. His deep ball is underrated. Itís one of the best I saw in college football. With the NFL gravitating toward vertical explosiveness, thatís a big plus for him. And thatís without mentioning the dual-threat dimension he brings to an offense. When coordinators have a gifted athlete that can also pass, it adds a lot of multiplicity to an offense. To me, that package warrants enough confidence to select him in the top five. The most pressing questions around him will be answered at the NFL Combine and individual team workouts. Does he have a natural football aptitude? Can he digest a more pro-oriented offense after growing accustomed to a variant of the run-and-shoot? Can he continue to develop at diagnosing defenses? Will he put forth the effort required to quicken his progressions and streamline mechanical issues? His response in that environment will determine how a team views him because the raw tools are there to be cultivated.

Now, while Iím on-board with drafting RGIII, I think the Browns war room should be prepared to call the Rams on their bluff. Because, to me, St. Louis isnít the prime trading partner for Cleveland. First off, the Rams arenít a contender for his services given their investment in Sam Bradford and Fisherís preference for traditional quarterbacks. Itís plausible, I suppose. But itís a longshot. Plus, if St. Louis tried to strike deals with Washington or Miami, the Rams would be left picking from that second-tier of prospects. Given their expected interest in prospects like Blackmon, Claiborne, and Kalil, Iím not sold St. Louis removes themselves from a position to pick from the lot of them. And, in addition, thereís a chance Washington and Miami pass on St. Louis at two because Griffin will be available at three and can be had at a cheaper price. Odds are the market thins out before then, too. If Matt Flynn lands in any of these three cities, the other two are only competing against the other. Backtracking to the original premise, I would still consider moving up to two in order to grab Griffin, but twenty-two wouldnít be the centerpiece of that deal, which is what I think St. Louis is banking on.

JoeJoeBrown
01-19-2012, 02:55 PM
No matter whom is QBing, the Browns desperately need to shore up the right side of the line. Whether that is done later in the first round or earlier, I don't care. They need a RT and RG desperately.

I don't know if RGIII is the answer or not. I'm leaning towards "not". He's a freak athlete, but is he really a QB that can make the laser-like throws that the elite QBs need to make? I don't think so.

He could go the Cam Newton route, but he's not the biggest dude in the world and would end up getting beaten down with that pathetic right side of the line in Cleveland.

Luck would definitely be the answer. I think Barkley next year could be an answer.

My strategy would be to attack the line, RB, and WR this year on O and LB and DB on D (with maybe a DL or two). Both through FA and the draft.

Betting the farm to move up some slots to get RGIII is a bad idea, IMO.

A guy like Larry Grant would be a great FA pickup for the Browns LB corp.

fear the elf
01-19-2012, 02:55 PM
Well, no NFL GM's agree with your theory, they all go by the 'Golden Rule', never pass on a potential franchise QB when you have an opportunity to get one. Miami didn't follow this rule and Atlanta got Ryan. Atlanta has made the playoffs 4 years in a row and where is Miami?

Immediate contradiction. Where is our Roddy White or Michael Turner? It simply isn't true that rookie QBs turn franchises around without help. Who on this team is capable of providing any help whatsoever? Hillis [gone], Hardesty [injured], Little [maybe], Watson [concussions], etc.


See the above quote. Look at Miami and you see the results of putting it off. Look at all the teams with the 1st pick in the draft who got their franchise QB's and have won Super Bowls recently.
Detroit was 0-16 with zero talent but took Stanford #1 in the draft and now are a serious Super Bowl contender for years to come. You don't wait, you strike while the iron is hot.

Again, I don't see Megatron on this team. Where are the playmakers?


So how is the 2nd rounder this year or the 22nd pick get us that much closer, giving up the bundle you are suggesting would put us in a position where we have practically zero talent around a QB with little hope to contend even with a solid QB.
San Diego failed with Leaf and drafted Rivers, Indy failed with George and drafted Peyton and I could go on and on. If a team fails when drafting a QB, you simply draft another one till you get it right no matter how many times you fail. There is simply no other way to be successful in the NFL.

In regards to your first paragraph, I'm proposing getting young talent in this draft. If the FO thinks they have the pieces in place, then next year they can make the big splash for the QB. Either way you are giving up high value picks.

Again, Rivers had talent around him. He sat for his first two seasons. In 2006 he became the starter with Tomlinson, Gates, a young VJax and a good OL. AGAIN, Peyton had Marvin Harrison and Marshall Faulk. We don't have any future HOF players, sans Thomas (and one guy on the OL isn't going to cut it, no matter how good).


Again, the coaches aren't fools, they can tell pretty quickly if a QB has the ability or not. I'm not saying McCoy doesn't have it, if the coaches absolutely believe in McCoy then they won't draft another QB, they don't need another season to decide. That is just what fans think but coaches and GM's know if a player has the talent just by watching him in practice, that's why Quinn never got a shot with Crennel.

Coaches are never wrong about players...got it...that's brilliant...


So did Detroit's fans but there is a limit to every team's fan. They have to have at least some hope or eventually or they just give up and stop attending.
Lerner has NEVER show a lot of patience with his manegent teams, he panics quickly and was quick to turn over his last 2 decision makers, thats why we have stunk so long.
One of the main reasons why GM's get fired besides long losing streaks is loss of revenue and Holmgren and his hand picked people have to produce ticket sales to survive, waiting another 4-6 seasons isn't in the cards for this management team unless they can give their fans real hope by drafting a QB, that is why they must be absolutely sure about McCoy.

A nice draft and FA class will bring fans back this year in CLE; it always does.

RG111 is a consensus top 5 pick in this year's draft, he isn't just somebody. GM's and scouts believe strongly in this guy or he wouldn't be up there that high. Now if he sinks down team's boards out of the top 10 or further, then I would agree that we have no choice but to wait a year and pray for better luck, but if he remains in the top 5, he will be our pick provided that they have come to the conclusion that McCoy isn't the answer, or they sign/trade for Flynn, whichever one they believe in more strongly.

OK, so all GMs evaluate talent exactly the same...again, brilliant...smh

fear the elf
01-19-2012, 02:57 PM
My strategy would be to attack the line, RB, and WR this year on O and LB and DB on D (with maybe a DL or two). Both through FA and the draft.

Betting the farm to move up some slots to get RGIII is a bad idea, IMO.

Obviously, I 100% agree with all of this.

Iamcanadian
01-19-2012, 03:24 PM
Obviously, I 100% agree with all of this.

Obviously, you agree with him that RG111 isn't a top 5 prospect because I know he doesn't like RG111, time will tell if you are both dead wrong or right. Way too early in the draft process to tell for sure.
IMO, the Browns will draft RG111 or trade for Flynn whoever they strongly believe is the better prospect, they aren't going wait no matter what you believe they should do unless McCoy is the QB they are staking the team's future and their jobs on. You can bet money on their decision on McCoy, they are either fully committed to him or they are going in another direction, only time will tell their conclusion on McCoy.
I had these same arguments with a # of Lion's fans over Stafford.

keylime_5
01-19-2012, 03:47 PM
I don't know if trading up to get Griffin is the right choice or not. I do know that the Browns shouldn't and probably won't sit on their hands this year instead of aggressively pursuing a potential franchise QB. Holmgren has repeatedly alluded to how it took him 5 years to get to the super bowl in Green Bay and 5 years to get there in Seattle - once he found his franchise QB (Hasselbeck). If they don't bring in someone this year (Flynn? Griffin?) then it will set the franchise back another year and it will be another year added to when the Browns feel they can compete for a championship.

Griffin I think is obviously a top 5 caliber QB in any draft. He has enough size, he has the arm, he can throw an accurate ball, he is mobile and athletic, he has the intangeables and is very smart. Most QBs come with some kind of risk, you can't find a star franchise QB without taking some kind of risk. The only question remaining I think is do the Browns like Griffin enough to the point where they would trade multiple quality picks to ensure that they get him?

fear the elf
01-19-2012, 04:00 PM
Just because I think this has gotten lost in the discussion: I'm not against RGIII, I'm against giving up picks to go up and get him.

If he were still there at #4 and we already signed (for example) Stevie Johnson and we can get a RB and RT at #22 and #37, then I'm all for it. But as of now, in our current situation, trading #22 to go get him would be irresponsible as he would have no young talent (outside of Little) to grow with.

That's my $0.02 worth...yes, I realize at this point it's more like $20.00 worth...

JoeJoeBrown
01-19-2012, 04:10 PM
Just because I think this has gotten lost in the discussion: I'm not against RGIII, I'm against giving up picks to go up and get him.

If he were still there at #4 and we already signed (for example) Stevie Johnson and we can get a RB and RT at #22 and #37, then I'm all for it. But as of now, in our current situation, trading #22 to go get him would be irresponsible as he would have no young talent (outside of Little) to grow with.

That's my $0.02 worth...yes, I realize at this point it's more like $20.00 worth...

Obviously I agree 100%. I don't dislike RGIII at all. I just don't think he's worth giving up a 1st rounder for to move up a couple of slots to get. If he falls to Cleveland, awesome, if not, get Trent Richardson a couple of FA WRs and draft a right tackle later in the round.

Iamcanadian
01-19-2012, 04:11 PM
I don't know if trading up to get Griffin is the right choice or not. I do know that the Browns shouldn't and probably won't sit on their hands this year instead of aggressively pursuing a potential franchise QB. Holmgren has repeatedly alluded to how it took him 5 years to get to the super bowl in Green Bay and 5 years to get there in Seattle - once he found his franchise QB (Hasselbeck). If they don't bring in someone this year (Flynn? Griffin?) then it will set the franchise back another year and it will be another year added to when the Browns feel they can compete for a championship.

That's why Flynn may be the choice, Holmgren has a track record of trading for his franchise QB with a lot of success, although Flynn will be a tough sign competing with the Redskin owner.

Griffin I think is obviously a top 5 caliber QB in any draft. He has enough size, he has the arm, he can throw an accurate ball, he is mobile and athletic, he has the intangeables and is very smart. Most QBs come with some kind of risk, you can't find a star franchise QB without taking some kind of risk. The only question remaining I think is do the Browns like Griffin enough to the point where they would trade multiple quality picks to ensure that they get him?

The only remaining question is, does he suit a west coast offense and who else can they obtain. Fortunately, we'll know before the draft who gets Flynn, if it's Washington, I think a trade up for RG111 is a foregone conclusion.

keylime_5
01-19-2012, 04:52 PM
I'm not terribly caught up onto the "does fit a WCO?" talk. Shurmur himself said great QBs fit into any kind of offense. There are some guys who can play only in a west coast system, but guys like Rivers, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning, etc. can play in any system in the league. You have to be able to complete more than 60% of your passes on a yearly basis to be a really good QB in the NFL these days. If a guy can do that then he can play anywhere. Brees and Rivers don't even have great arms and they play in offenses where they throw the ball down the field a lot. Griffin has a great arm. it has yet to be seen if he can fit it into tight windows like the good ones do, but if he can't then he'll be mediocre at best no matter what system you put him in.

It is still a decent point though. If a team doesn't think a guy is a good fit in this offense then obviously they aren't sold on him enough as a surefire franchise QB to trade up for him. Obviously the Browns wouldn't trade up for a guy who they think will be more like Joe Flacco accuracy wise.

Rosebud
01-19-2012, 05:56 PM
I'm with the elf on this one and admittedly it may be because I'm just not sold enough on Griffin, but the Browns sucks pretty fearcily so sticking a young stud out there with no additional help will elave with a similar situation to the one the Rams find themselves in where their young QB's gotten banged up and hasn't gotten to attack down the field. Yes they're much better off with Bradford than without him, but I believe in Bradford and they didn't need to give up premium picks to get him. It's one thing if you already have young pieces and give up multipl top 40 picks to get yourself the guy to make us of them. It's a completely different things to give up multiple picks and expect some kid to turn your **** into gold. Even Cam Newton got to play for a team with a revitalized steve smith, good running backs and decent OL.

That's why the Browns need to sit still and pray that Griffin slides or the Rams/Vikings are cool with trading down for just a third and conditional 2/3 next year. I mean the best plausible scenario for the Browns really is the Redskins getting Flynn or Peyton, the Rams being dead set on getting Claiborne or Kalil and the Vikings not really finding what they want and so taking the extra couple of picks to draft Claiborne or Kalil one spot later. But giving up both of their firsts and another good pick to move up 2 spots is excessive to me. Again this all changes if they think Griffin's going to be a great QB and are really sold on him being a guy who will be talked about as a potential hall of famer when he retires. If they think that's who he is, than of course you're willing to trade more, but I'm not sold that he'll even be Donovan McNabb yet.

The worst case scenario that's getting described for the Browns really isn't that bad, if their picks this year turn out great enough to move them out of range for a top QB prospect than they have the young core that lets you trade away a lot of picks for the right guy to lead them. And while next year's stock of QBs always look better a year before they're getting analyzed, there's still almost always a guy or two who can be a franchise guy and they can sell out for that guy.

keylime_5
01-19-2012, 09:09 PM
I'm kinda leery on trading all that just to move up two spots as well. If we trade an extra first to get Griffin, he better damn well be a franchise QB. I'm not too worried about him not having a ton of weapons early in his career. You can address that problem later. It's better to have a young QB with no weapons for a year than it is to keep passing on QBs just to build the rest of the team first. We can draft Griffin this year and draft some stud WRs in the next few years. Patience is required in that regard. Until the Browns solve their problem at QB it will continue to seem as if the entire team is headed nowhere.

LonghornsLegend
01-19-2012, 10:39 PM
I hear the same argument on this site every year, for some reason people think that you need the entire line to be elite, a franchise RB, #1 WR, and elite pass catching TE before you can draft a TE. How often does that happen? Even though it never happens like that. Guys lose their jobs like that.


You just can't continually suck, draft in the top 5 over and over picking weapons and support until you have everything in place. If you have a shot at a franchise QB, you take him then draft those weapons and help later on.


What would Cleveland look like if they passed on RGIII, he went on to look like Cam Newton, but at least Cleveland had a bunch of picks right? That argument never made any sense. If you don't have a franchise QB(which Cleveland doesn't), you need to be trying to get one.


Nobody has the kind of time, or luxury to draft weapons and help year after year after year and win 4-5 games every season in the process.

Rosebud
01-19-2012, 11:22 PM
I hear the same argument on this site every year, for some reason people think that you need the entire line to be elite, a franchise RB, #1 WR, and elite pass catching TE before you can draft a TE. How often does that happen? Even though it never happens like that. Guys lose their jobs like that.


You just can't continually suck, draft in the top 5 over and over picking weapons and support until you have everything in place. If you have a shot at a franchise QB, you take him then draft those weapons and help later on.


What would Cleveland look like if they passed on RGIII, he went on to look like Cam Newton, but at least Cleveland had a bunch of picks right? That argument never made any sense. If you don't have a franchise QB(which Cleveland doesn't), you need to be trying to get one.


Nobody has the kind of time, or luxury to draft weapons and help year after year after year and win 4-5 games every season in the process.

I don't think anyone's saying Cleveland shouldn't pick Griffin if he's available at their pick. What's being debated is cleveland giving up anything more than their second round pick to move up to #2 for him.

Brown Leader
01-19-2012, 11:44 PM
I don't think anyone's saying Cleveland shouldn't pick Griffin if he's available at their pick. What's being debated is cleveland giving up anything more than their second round pick to move up to #2 for him.

I am. Cam Newton he is not. If he's available at #4 I'd prefer we force a team like Was or Mia/Sea/KC to trade up for him and stock more picks, then reach for either Osweiler or Tannehill at some point in the first.

And as for Matt Flynn. Holmgren has already stated that he doesn't see the Browns addressing the QB position this year through free agency-and he's been pretty straight with the media since he arrived.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 07:56 AM
Interesting thought: There have been some very low key rumors that Indy could be looking at Oregon HC Chip Kelly for their head coaching position.

A lot of times, when college head coaches are interviewing for potential pro head coaching jobs, they try to stay as under the radar as possible so they don't drive away recruits or upset their school. This would explain why it's not generating a lot of buzz if it is happening.

Anyway...does anyone think that the Colts could possibly consider Griffin in this situation? He seems like the better fit for Kelly's offensive system.

Just an interesting side note to keep in the back of your mind.

bruschis4all
01-20-2012, 08:18 AM
I'm kinda leery on trading all that just to move up two spots as well. If we trade an extra first to get Griffin, he better damn well be a franchise QB. I'm not too worried about him not having a ton of weapons early in his career. You can address that problem later. It's better to have a young QB with no weapons for a year than it is to keep passing on QBs just to build the rest of the team first. We can draft Griffin this year and draft some stud WRs in the next few years. Patience is required in that regard. Until the Browns solve their problem at QB it will continue to seem as if the entire team is headed nowhere.

I forget which analyst said it. It's probably just an old NFL saying. But, there are two types of teams out there. Those who have a quarterback. And, those who are looking for a quarterback. It's really that simple.

brat316
01-20-2012, 08:32 AM
I would stay put if I were the Browns...for now. Who is going to move up that much and give away that much?

Redskins finally have draft picks to work with so they can't throw them away for once.

Dolphins might move up from 8/9.

Seahawks from 11 as well.

But either way those 2 teams will have to give up an arm and leg, to trade with the Vikings.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 08:41 AM
An arm and a leg is worth it in a league where you simply must have a quality QB.

hockey619
01-20-2012, 08:42 AM
Interesting thought: There have been some very low key rumors that Indy could be looking at Oregon HC Chip Kelly for their head coaching position.

A lot of times, when college head coaches are interviewing for potential pro head coaching jobs, they try to stay as under the radar as possible so they don't drive away recruits or upset their school. This would explain why it's not generating a lot of buzz if it is happening.

Anyway...does anyone think that the Colts could possibly consider Griffin in this situation? He seems like the better fit for Kelly's offensive system.

Just an interesting side note to keep in the back of your mind.


eh i still think theyd go luck but if they liked what they say from griffin maybe theyd be more inclined to trade back and stock pile a fortune of picks for the team going forward.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 08:49 AM
eh i still think theyd go luck but if they liked what they say from griffin maybe theyd be more inclined to trade back and stock pile a fortune of picks for the team going forward.

I don't think there's any chance they'd trade out of it and potentially lose out on both. They're taking one #1 overall. 99% Luck, 1% Griffin for now. Although if Kelly gets the job...who knows.

brat316
01-20-2012, 08:56 AM
I don't think there's any chance they'd trade out of it and potentially lose out on both. They're taking one #1 overall. 99% Luck, 1% Griffin for now. Although if Kelly gets the job...who knows.

Luck could play in the spread, he just wouldn't run the option. But who in the NFL really runs the option play, save Tebowzzz.

That reminds me with how well tebow is doing running the option, you think we'll see more of it from Cam Netwon next year? He also is another big Qb, that once in the secondary no Db really wants to hit him.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 09:08 AM
Tebow ran it well...until teams got a 2nd crack at stopping him. The Chiefs and Patriots both shut the option down completely in their 2nd meetings.

It was just such an usual thing that tripped NFL defenses up at first. But with more tape and time to study it, it will be shut down just as the Wildcat once was.

brat316
01-20-2012, 09:13 AM
Tebow ran it well...until teams got a 2nd crack at stopping him. The Chiefs and Patriots both shut the option down completely in their 2nd meetings.

It was just such an usual thing that tripped NFL defenses up at first. But with more tape and time to study it, it will be shut down just as the Wildcat once was.

Those are nice wrinkles to have in your playbook to run in the game for or 2 plays. You can't base your offense around gimmick plays. Like Newton's fumble rooski, its nice to have that play, but you can't run your offense from that formation all the time.

Cudders
01-20-2012, 10:37 AM
I would like to stress that there is no such thing as giving up too much value if it means acquiring a worthwhile quarterback. Do I want this management team to do their best to protect our second first-rounder? Yeah, in an ideal world, I sure do. But, if push comes to shove, whatever could be had with Atlantaís pick pales in comparison to the trickle-down effect a good quarterback has on a team. Thatís not even debatable. Theyíre the biggest difference-makers in football. They elevate an offense and rise above the limitations of supporting cast. They make average players look good and good players look great. They donít need breathtaking talent all over the field to be successful.

In fact, letís take a quick look at the Browns roster and examine skill sets. For starters, Hillis is a starting-caliber back. Yes, heís a free agent and got banged up last season, but heís a well-rounded runner that can anchor a ground game. Greg Little showed a lot of encouraging signs for a raw wide out and possesses the trademark skill set of a chain-mover. Heís a fearless receiver with deceptive athleticism that finishes runs after the catch. Mohamed Massaquoi flashed as a capable deep threat as a rookie when Derek Anderson was willing to drive the ball downfield. Heís got adequate straight-line speed, good length, and the tools to fight for the ball when itís in the air. Heís not special at all in that regard. But, like I said, he flashed. Since Colt and Delhomme have assumed the reins, the deep balls have dwindled to the point where even shot opportunities are being neglected. And what about the wrinkle de jour of NFL offenses with the two-tight end set? Well, Cleveland has two pass-catching tight ends in Ben Watson and Evan Moore. Cribbs can even be a valuable weapon in the field position game and a little gadget on offense.

Now, for the record, Iím not advocating to retain all of the above or argue them as irreplaceable. Iím strictly talking skill sets here. For example, Massaquoi is far too inconsistent for me to feel comfortable with and I would actively attempt to upgrade that spot this off-season. But he has a skill set thatís favorable to one thing and Colt has ignored that one thing. A good quarterback wouldnít do that. A good quarterback would utilize what he has at his disposal. And Iím not contending this could be one of the best offenses in the entire NFL. Just that it could be middle-of-the-road instead of anemic if it had a better quarterback. Also, protection issues are becoming overrated. Football is changing. Quarterbacks are just as responsible for their protection as the linemen in front of them. Granted, it canít be a turnstile on a particular side, but itís impossible to expect five All-Proís.

Taking a step back, look at the offensive positions being suggested as alternatives to quarterback. Running back. On a draft-to-draft basis, running back is a deep position. You can piece together an effective ground game with mid-round picks. Wide receiver. The most team-dependent position in the sport. And another position that still features talented athletes outside of the premium picks. Right guard and right tackle. Traditional mid-rounders. The supporting elements of an offense can be filled out with free agents and later draft picks. Finding a quarterback is the toughest and most paramount part of team-building.

The obvious caveat is the faith in RGIII to become that quarterback. And Iíll even admit that Iím not 100% sold. But, from what I see on the field, Iím sold enough to take that chance. That said, I maintain the final assessment for Griffin is going to come down to how he responds in individual workouts. Thatís when teams see a prospect work the whiteboard and can challenge him one-on-one. Find out what offensive concepts heís familiar with, what packages he likes running, how he processes defensive formations and reads at the line, how he absorbs a wealth of information in a short amount of time, how dedicated he is to watching film, etc. Those are the questions that will determine Griffinís true upside. And those are questions we wonít have an answer to because we arenít in that room. But thatís where coaching staffs, scouting departments, and decision-makers earn their keep.

DraftSavant
01-20-2012, 11:00 AM
Interesting thought: There have been some very low key rumors that Indy could be looking at Oregon HC Chip Kelly for their head coaching position.

A lot of times, when college head coaches are interviewing for potential pro head coaching jobs, they try to stay as under the radar as possible so they don't drive away recruits or upset their school. This would explain why it's not generating a lot of buzz if it is happening.

Anyway...does anyone think that the Colts could possibly consider Griffin in this situation? He seems like the better fit for Kelly's offensive system.

Just an interesting side note to keep in the back of your mind.

That'd actually be an interesting and good hire.

I'd much rather them go with Morhinwhig.

IrishBrowns
01-20-2012, 11:16 AM
If McCoy isn't the answer, that's fine, I know he most likely isn't. However, I would rather trade my 2013 and 2014 first rounders to move up for a QB next year after acquiring talent to help them succeed. That's how I think a team should be built.

well said, sir

holt_bruce81
01-20-2012, 11:44 AM
For those saying get talent around the Quarterback first and then pick up your franchise guy.

What if Griffin is your franchise guy? What if none of your scouts give any other Quarterback in the next five years as high of a grade as they gave RG3? You really want to settle for your #2 option because you don't want your Quarterback playing with no talent around him? Tons of Quarterbacks play with no talent around them, why else would that team that selected them have a top five selection.

You could draft RG3 and by the time he has elite weapons around him he could have the NFL down and be a stud.

Complex
01-20-2012, 01:07 PM
Interesting thought: There have been some very low key rumors that Indy could be looking at Oregon HC Chip Kelly for their head coaching position.

A lot of times, when college head coaches are interviewing for potential pro head coaching jobs, they try to stay as under the radar as possible so they don't drive away recruits or upset their school. This would explain why it's not generating a lot of buzz if it is happening.

Anyway...does anyone think that the Colts could possibly consider Griffin in this situation? He seems like the better fit for Kelly's offensive system.

Just an interesting side note to keep in the back of your mind.

Stanford HC said that Luck runs a 4.5

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 01:39 PM
Stanford HC said that Luck runs a 4.5

He's more athletic than given credit for. A 4.5 on a track wouldn't completely surprise me. I don't think he plays that fast, but he plays fast enough.

fear the elf
01-20-2012, 01:52 PM
Again, I'd like to point out that I'm not against drafting RGIII at #4 if available, but I am against giving up picks to move up when the talent around him is among the worst supporting cast in the league.

Cudders, I think you are being far too kind in your evaluation of our current roster and, as you mentioned, there is no guarantee that Hillis (arguably the most talented skill player) will even be back.

I guess I'm a little confused by those that say "give up whatever it takes" to get yourself a (possible) franchise QB. Are you making these comments keeping in mind the current offensive talent on this roster or in a vacuum? I ask because I feel like people think that a rookie QB is going to magically elevate the play of the offense somehow. We are talking about a rookie, not some 5 year vet...

Just look at the list of "franchise" QBs and the help they had in their first year as a starter (first year as a starter mind you, not as a rookie; so some of these guys had a chance to watch and learn). I indicated All-pros (AP), Pro Bowls (PB), and yardage for anybody who you wouldn't think is anything special (ex., Selvin Young and Travis Henry):

QB, 1st Yr as Starter

Manning, 1998
Harrison
Faulk

Brady, 2001
Troy Brown (PB)

Brees, 2002
Tomlinson (PB)

Vick, 2002
Dunn

Roethlisberger, 2004
Bettis (PB)/Staley (comb. 1770 yds)
Ward (PB)
Burress
OL (2 AP's & 1 PB)

Manning, 2005
Barber (AP)
Shockey (PB)
Burress (1200 yds)

Rivers, 2006
Tomlinson (AP)
Gates (AP)

Romo, 2006
Owens
Witten (PB)
Terry Glenn (1000 yds)

Cutler, 2007
Marshall
Young/Henry (combined 1400 yds)

Schaub, 2007
Johnson
Daniels

Rodgers, 2008
Driver
Jennings
Grant (1200 yds)

Ryan, 2008
Turner (AP)
White (PB)

Stafford, 2009
Johnson

So the guys that got the "least" help where probably Brady, Brees, Vick, and Stafford, right? So I guess if we trade up using our #22 pick to get RGIII we can expect him to elevate the play of his team if he's a HOFer and possible GOAT (Brady); a HOFer (Brees), a mediocre QB that goes to jail, gets signed by a much more talented team, and rides the bench for a year (Vick); or has a Decepticon (and probable HOFer at this rate) at WR (Stafford). [/sarcasm]

Almost nobody does it on their own, you need talent around a young QB. Anybody that thinks this team is talented enough to just trade away a 1st RD pick and insert RGIII into the lineup and he's going to succeed isn't facing the facts. This offense is bereft of NFL caliber starters at the skill positions.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 01:56 PM
This is dumb as hell. You sound like the Lions fans who pissed and moaned wanting Smith/Curry over Stafford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Rams fans who wanted Suh over Bradford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Falcons fans who wanted Dorsey over Ryan because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB."

You get the QB when you can get the QB. You do not succeed in the NFL without one and any year you don't have one is a wasted year.

End discussion, figurative lock thread.

fear the elf
01-20-2012, 01:57 PM
My apologies. Here I thought topics were open for discussion on these discussion boards.

keylime_5
01-20-2012, 02:40 PM
This is dumb as hell. You sound like the Lions fans who pissed and moaned wanting Smith/Curry over Stafford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Rams fans who wanted Suh over Bradford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Falcons fans who wanted Dorsey over Ryan because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB."

You get the QB when you can get the QB. You do not succeed in the NFL without one and any year you don't have one is a wasted year.

End discussion, figurative lock thread.

Truth. I always find the arguments to be comical for lack of a better word that say don't pick a QB b/c the offensive line is bad or there are no weapons. The Lions O-Line was a big issue when they took Stafford. I guess they should have taken Curry or Smith.

No doubt you need talent up front and at WR for a QB to succeed - but if you don't have a QB to start with what's the point? Get your franchise QB and BUILD AROUND him. That's what they mean by that saying.

Rosebud
01-20-2012, 03:38 PM
This is dumb as hell. You sound like the Lions fans who pissed and moaned wanting Smith/Curry over Stafford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Rams fans who wanted Suh over Bradford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Falcons fans who wanted Dorsey over Ryan because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB."

You get the QB when you can get the QB. You do not succeed in the NFL without one and any year you don't have one is a wasted year.

End discussion, figurative lock thread.

Most people aren't arguing they should pass on him but rather that they should make damn sure he's going to be great before they give up their draft for him. If he makes it to #4 almost everyone agrees they should take him. And one guy who doesn't agree shouldn't take the conversation off of the much more interesting discussion of what the risk of Griffin not falling to 4 is worth to the Browns.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 03:42 PM
Most people aren't arguing they should pass on him but rather that they should make damn sure he's going to be great before they give up their draft for him. If he makes it to #4 almost everyone agrees they should take him. And one guy who doesn't agree shouldn't take the conversation off of the much more interesting discussion of what the risk of Griffin not falling to 4 is worth to the Browns.

As a QB elitist, there are 2 QBs I like in this draft. One is Luck who there is a 99% chance of him going #1.

I am of the mindset that you do what you have to do to get a franchise caliber QB. Griffin has the tools to be that and has the athleticism to bring a Newton-esque spark to any offense.

I would unquestionably move up to the #2 and guarantee that I get him if I am Cleveland. Otherwise, you're left to sift through the ashes later in the first and...most of those guys have no business being anywhere near the first round.

LonghornsLegend
01-20-2012, 09:39 PM
This is dumb as hell. You sound like the Lions fans who pissed and moaned wanting Smith/Curry over Stafford because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB." Or the Falcons fans who wanted Dorsey over Ryan because "they couldn't protect or help a rookie QB."



Yep. Same arguments I always hear on this site, always. Some fans are so afraid to get a franchise QB they want to suck forever until they get every single position filled out top to bottom on the entire team.

ATLDirtyBirds
01-20-2012, 10:10 PM
Yep. Same arguments I always hear on this site, always. Some fans are so afraid to get a franchise QB they want to suck forever until they get every single position filled out top to bottom on the entire team.

I think the big fear is failing on a top QB, period. That can set you back years, especially if your staff deems said player the "franchise QB" year after year.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 10:12 PM
I think the big fear is failing on a top QB, period. That can set you back years, especially if your staff deems said player the "franchise QB" year after year.

It's better to roll the dice. If you want to be a perennial contender, you must have a quality QB.

This is simply the way of the league right now. Miss on a QB and it might set you back a few years...HIT on a QB and you're set for a decade.

LonghornsLegend
01-20-2012, 10:16 PM
I think the big fear is failing on a top QB, period. That can set you back years, especially if your staff deems said player the "franchise QB" year after year.


I get that. But what part of that would be any different then what Cleveland has been the past 10 years?

PoopSandwich
01-20-2012, 10:18 PM
I get that. But what part of that would be any different then what Cleveland has been the past 10 years?

Yeah, instead we decide to take third rounders, people from other teams practice squads, a quarterbacks with huge question marks in the first round.

Our only legit #1 QB we have taken was Couch and he had literally nothing around him year one.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 10:29 PM
Yeah, instead we decide to take third rounders, people from other teams practice squads, a quarterbacks with huge question marks in the first round.

Our only legit #1 QB we have taken was Couch and he had literally nothing around him year one.

Well that was an expansion team too. No matter how poorly you think of your current surrounding cast, they're 1000x better than any expansion roster.

ATLDirtyBirds
01-20-2012, 10:50 PM
It's better to roll the dice. If you want to be a perennial contender, you must have a quality QB.

This is simply the way of the league right now. Miss on a QB and it might set you back a few years...HIT on a QB and you're set for a decade.

I get that. But what part of that would be any different then what Cleveland has been the past 10 years?


I don't disagree at all. But imagine being a fan of a team that drafted someone like Joey Harrington, JaMarcus, and dare I say Blaine, with a top pick. It's very scary to think your franchise will be ****** a few more years. That's not what teams/fans invision with the number one pick.

BeerBaron
01-20-2012, 10:53 PM
But you have to keep trying. Just because the last one didn't work out doesn't mean you should stop drafting QBs.

ATLDirtyBirds
01-20-2012, 10:58 PM
But you have to keep trying. Just because the last one didn't work out doesn't mean you should stop drafting QBs.

Franchises don't work like that unfortunately. They don't want to admit they failed. Imagine drafting a Gabbert and sticking with him for at least 3+ years. That's scary as ****, and what most fans fear when picking early.

LonghornsLegend
01-20-2012, 11:05 PM
Franchises don't work like that unfortunately. They don't want to admit they failed. Imagine drafting a Gabbert and sticking with him for at least 3+ years. That's scary as ****, and what most fans fear when picking early.

Well if you don't want a QB until an Andrew Luck came around you'd be rolling with old stop gap veteran QB's forever. How often do you get a sure fire, can't miss QB? A ton of Lions fans didn't want Stafford, a ton. As good of a prospect he was we heard the same arguments. There is always going to be risk attached, that goes without saying. You can try and build the line up with early picks on lineman that fail too.

armageddon
01-20-2012, 11:05 PM
I can't believe the browns fans are worried about giving up the 4th and 22nd pick for rg3. Who cares about the 22nd pick. Rg3 is going to be special

ATLDirtyBirds
01-20-2012, 11:09 PM
Well if you don't want a QB until an Andrew Luck came around you'd be rolling with old stop gap veteran QB's forever. How often do you get a sure fire, can't miss QB? A ton of Lions fans didn't want Stafford, a ton. As good of a prospect he was we heard the same arguments. There is always going to be risk attached, that goes without saying. You can try and build the line up with early picks on lineman that fail too.



That's what I'm saying. It's much more comforting thinking you can go 7-9, 8-8 with (insert vet QB here) as opposed to thinking you are doomed to 3-12 through 5-11 for 3+ years with a ****** QB. Fans have way too much confidence in GMs saying 2 years in, "I ****** up, it's time to move on." or building year after year until you finally find that QB.

Inspector71
01-20-2012, 11:39 PM
Yeah, instead we decide to take third rounders, people from other teams practice squads, a quarterbacks with huge question marks in the first round.

Our only legit #1 QB we have taken was Couch and he had literally nothing around him year one.

You do realize that as a Franchise we have only taken 3 QB's in the 1st round since the merger in 1970 right? It's only 2 if you don't count Kosar in the supplemental draft.

The fans of Cleveland are so scared of drafting a bust that they want to get a Franchise QB on the cheap. They constantly bring up the once in a decade stories like Brady in the 6th and Warner as an UDFA. I bet if you polled Cleveland fans on where is the best place to get a Franchise QB, the 1st round would come in last.

On theOBR, there is a HUGE group of Fans that want a RIGHT TACKLE with pick #4. I am not joking! The want Riley Reif or Kalil to fall to us.

So all you non-Browns fans have to understand what the thinking is of the average Browns Fan is:

1. QB's are not the reason Teams get better. It's the player surrounding them. No QB in the History of the League has risen the play of his teammates. he is COMPLETELY dependent on his surrounding cast.

2. Left Tackle is BY FAR and away the MOST IMPORTANT position i nall of sports, not just football. Who cares that we have the best LT in Football and our Offense averages a 29th rank since he's been here.

3. Marginal QB's (like Colt Mccoy) can win if given a 1st round pick at all 5 O-line positions and an all pro at all other offensive positions. But, all those All-Pro's need to be 4th rounders atg the highest. UDFA's are preferred.

4. Defense wins Championships!!

5. Free Agents all want to come to Cleveland. With our great weather, party life and phenomonal schools. Who wouldn't want to raise their children here and spend the offseason here?

BeerBaron
01-21-2012, 12:04 AM
That's what I'm saying. It's much more comforting thinking you can go 7-9, 8-8 with (insert vet QB here) as opposed to thinking you are doomed to 3-12 through 5-11 for 3+ years with a ****** QB. Fans have way too much confidence in GMs saying 2 years in, "I ****** up, it's time to move on." or building year after year until you finally find that QB.

If a guy drafts a Gabbert type and he's a **** up, then that guy won't be around to draft the next QB.

You HAVE to take the chance. You HAVE to. Ideally, your team wouldn't be ******** enough in the first place to take someone like Gabbert, but it happens. When that guy proves to be a bust and the GM/coaching staff are rightfully shown the door, the next staff needs to get right on taking the next QB.

Cudders
01-21-2012, 02:07 AM
Again, I'd like to point out that I'm not against drafting RGIII at #4 if available, but I am against giving up picks to move up when the talent around him is among the worst supporting cast in the league.

Like I said, a lot of things still have to unfold before late April. Both Miami and Washington could remove themselves from the quarterback market with free agent signings and clear the path for Cleveland. But, if the front office is sold on Griffin and prepared to draft him at four, then it isnít some kind of unmitigated disaster if the Browns move up to secure his services for the next decade. It just isnít. Weíre talking about a quarterback with big-time talent. Those donít come cheap, but if you find one, they become invaluable assets for your franchise. Compared to that, everything else is secondary. Everything.

And I doubt it would cost multiple picks to move up a couple spots. It would surprise me if the Rams got that kind of ransom. Right now, I believe St. Louis is looking to add an extra selection and still land one of their top targets. Cleveland is the sole team that meets their criteria unless Dre Kirkpatrickís stock settles around a fringe top five pick. Then Washington becomes a stronger contender. Again, I doubt it involves Atlantaís first-rounder, too. That would be a steep asking price. I know it. You know it. Holmgren and Heckert know it. In all likelihood, weíre talking about surrendering a second-rounder. At that point, the Browns can either call the Rams on their bluff and hope Griffin slides or postpone addressing quarterback. And for what? On the risk that a back like Lamar Miller or David Wilson might be there? I like both runners quite a bit, but no thanks. Not if it means passing on RGIII.

Cudders, I think you are being far too kind in your evaluation of our current roster and, as you mentioned, there is no guarantee that Hillis (arguably the most talented skill player) will even be back.

I donít think I am. Iím talking skill sets, not on-field production. Itís clear the latter is lackluster. No one is going to argue that.

But, if weíre just examining skill sets, I think I was fair in those assessments. Little was at the top of that second-tier of receivers for me and I donít see what I said that isnít true. Heís raw, but heís built in the mold of a starting-caliber possession receiver. Big-bodied, deceptive short-area athlete, aggressive runner after the catch, compensates for his lack of blistering speed with a strong underneath game. All of those things are in his scouting report. He still needs more seasoning, but I believe he can ball in this league. As for Massaquoi, he has the tools to be a capable deep threat. Adequate straight-line speed, long arms, large hands, explosive leaper, and has shown heís able to adjust in midair. Those are NFL traits for a vertical receiver and Massaquoi has them. Now, I wasnít attempting to paint him into a stud. The point I was making is that Massaquoi has a specific skill set thatís tailored to filling a certain role and Colt never took advantage of that, so he has been a forgotten miscast when a better quarterback mightíve made more use for him. I even mentioned that I would be looking for an upgrade due to the fact that heís been inconsistent his whole career and still has maddening lapses of concentration too often. What is there to disagree about with Cribbs? First and foremost, heís a special team weapon that can flip the field, as heís proven time and again. After that, he has some gadget potential and home-run hitting abilities as a fourth or fifth receiver. Thatís not glowing over him.

As for our tight ends, I donít think people would disagree with labeling them as pass-catchers. Watson is a gifted athlete for that position. Granted, heís got his issues with drops, but heís still a solid outlet. And, to me, Moore should be featured more in the offense. Heís got plus athleticism and his length makes him a tough cover for linebackers and safeties. He can even split out wide, too.

Yeah, Hillis might not be back. Running games can be manufactured though. There are a lot of talented athletes in the college ranks that can run in this league. High-profile backs arenít a requirement for productive, respectable rushing attacks.

I guess I'm a little confused by those that say "give up whatever it takes" to get yourself a (possible) franchise QB. Are you making these comments keeping in mind the current offensive talent on this roster or in a vacuum? I ask because I feel like people think that a rookie QB is going to magically elevate the play of the offense somehow. We are talking about a rookie, not some 5 year vet...

First off, all prized quarterback prospects are just possible franchise quarterbacks. Doesnít matter if itís this draft or the next or the draft after that. When the time comes for the Browns to draft one, thereís going to be risk involved and thereís no getting around that.

Also, I never stated the Browns should gut their entire draft to grab Griffin. I said the price of a second-rounder (because Iím unconvinced it would cost Atlantaís first) is justified given the value of a quarterback if it appears the Dolphins or Redskins are prepared to pounce. Thatís all Iíve maintained.

With regards to the question, I donít prescribe to the same belief that a complete team needs to be in-place for a quarterback to succeed. Itís as simple as that. Itís much easier to find a running back, a pair of wide receivers, and a right side of the line than a franchise quarterback. If Griffin passes the test, thereís no reason to pass on him.

For example, letís operate under the alternative method of team-building for a minute. Letís assume the Rams wonít budge on their request and insist that Atlantaís first-rounder is included in the deal. As a result, the Browns bow out of the sweepstakes and a team leapfrogs them to take Griffin. So, sitting at four, Cleveland takes Trent Richardson to give their eventual quarterback a beast workhorse. But, in the time it takes to find that quarterback, Richardson accumulates a ton of wear and tear on his tires because a bad offense must ride him to be mediocre. Suppose Cleveland takes Blackmon instead to give their eventual quarterback a top-flight, go-to receiver. Well, Blackmon isnít guaranteed to become that. These are unknown commodities weíre dealing with. What if he busts? Do the Browns have to wait around and draft another receiver with a top five pick before targeting a quarterback?

And I donít expect a rookie to step into the huddle with a firm command of the offense. Or expect him to elevate an offense to prolific heights with a string of superhuman efforts. I just expect him to set a direction on that side of the ball and progress from there. If the front officeís scouting is sharp, then surrounding him with talent he can elevate is the easier of the two steps.

So the guys that got the "least" help where probably Brady, Brees, Vick, and Stafford, right? So I guess if we trade up using our #22 pick to get RGIII we can expect him to elevate the play of his team if he's a HOFer and possible GOAT (Brady); a HOFer (Brees), a mediocre QB that goes to jail, gets signed by a much more talented team, and rides the bench for a year (Vick); or has a Decepticon (and probable HOFer at this rate) at WR (Stafford). [/sarcasm]

Except it isnít even close to the Ďthis or thatí proposition itís being made out to be here.

If the Browns trade up to draft RGIII second overall, thereís nothing stopping them from improving the rest of the team elsewhere. In all likelihood, it would cost the Browns one pick. That still leaves the rest of the draft and free agent additions. If itís the second-rounder, that leaves them Atlantaís first-rounder to work with. If his stock doesnít soar, and it wouldnít surprise me if it does, Kendall Wright could still be available. Heís an explosive target thatís a perfect compliment to Little and it pairs Griffin with his college teammate. And the Browns have enough cash to be an active spender this off-season. It is more than plausible Cleveland could sign both a receiver and running back to ease the stress on their rookie quarterback. Even if itís just a reliable, zone-busting slot receiver and a check-down option out of the backfield.

Almost nobody does it on their own, you need talent around a young QB. Anybody that thinks this team is talented enough to just trade away a 1st RD pick and insert RGIII into the lineup and he's going to succeed isn't facing the facts. This offense is bereft of NFL caliber starters at the skill positions.

And almost no team has the time to stack all of the cupboards with premium talent. A quarterback is the most important ingredient of offensive success. The fixings after that improve the flavor. The fact is that this teamís biggest need is at quarterback. Period. It has gone unaddressed for a decade and the team has been a perennial cellar-dweller as a result. Blackmon or Richardson isnít going to reverse that trend either.

Digressing from specifics to generalities, the new rookie cap structure makes it easier to move on from underwater quarterback situations. Their contract is guaranteed in full, but the deal is shorter and the number is lower. Therefore, bad decisions in the quarterback department arenít as crippling to a franchise. So it would stun me if Blaine Gabbert survives another season without the Jaguars picking a quarterback, former top ten pick or not. The NFL is too quarterback-driven to ignore the position and put your team behind the eight ball.

Bulldogs
01-21-2012, 02:13 AM
Like I said, a lot of things still have to unfold before late April. Both Miami and Washington could remove themselves from the quarterback market with free agent signings and clear the path for Cleveland. But, if the front office is sold on Griffin and prepared to draft him at four, then it isnít some kind of unmitigated disaster if the Browns move up to secure his services for the next decade. It just isnít. Weíre talking about a quarterback with big-time talent. Those donít come cheap, but if you find one, they become invaluable assets for your franchise. Compared to that, everything else is secondary. Everything.

And I doubt it would cost multiple picks to move up a couple spots. It would surprise me if the Rams got that kind of ransom. Right now, I believe St. Louis is looking to add an extra selection and still land one of their top targets. Cleveland is the sole team that meets their criteria unless Dre Kirkpatrickís stock settles around a fringe top five pick. Then Washington becomes a stronger contender. Again, I doubt it involves Atlantaís first-rounder, too. That would be a steep asking price. I know it. You know it. Holmgren and Heckert know it. In all likelihood, weíre talking about surrendering a second-rounder. At that point, the Browns can either call the Rams on their bluff and hope Griffin slides or postpone addressing quarterback. And for what? On the risk that a back like Lamar Miller or David Wilson might be there? I like both runners quite a bit, but no thanks. Not if it means passing on RGIII.



I donít think I am. Iím talking skill sets, not on-field production. Itís clear the latter is lackluster. No one is going to argue that.

But, if weíre just examining skill sets, I think I was fair in those assessments. Little was at the top of that second-tier of receivers for me and I donít see what I said that isnít true. Heís raw, but heís built in the mold of a starting-caliber possession receiver. Big-bodied, deceptive short-area athlete, aggressive runner after the catch, compensates for his lack of blistering speed with a strong underneath game. All of those things are in his scouting report. He still needs more seasoning, but I believe he can ball in this league. As for Massaquoi, he has the tools to be a capable deep threat. Adequate straight-line speed, long arms, large hands, explosive leaper, and has shown heís able to adjust in midair. Those are NFL traits for a vertical receiver and Massaquoi has them. Now, I wasnít attempting to paint him into a stud. The point I was making is that Massaquoi has a specific skill set thatís tailored to filling a certain role and Colt never took advantage of that, so he has been a forgotten miscast when a better quarterback mightíve made more use for him. I even mentioned that I would be looking for an upgrade due to the fact that heís been inconsistent his whole career and still has maddening lapses of concentration too often. What is there to disagree about with Cribbs? First and foremost, heís a special team weapon that can flip the field, as heís proven time and again. After that, he has some gadget potential and home-run hitting abilities as a fourth or fifth receiver. Thatís not glowing over him.

As for our tight ends, I donít think people would disagree with labeling them as pass-catchers. Watson is a gifted athlete for that position. Granted, heís got his issues with drops, but heís still a solid outlet. And, to me, Moore should be featured more in the offense. Heís got plus athleticism and his length makes him a tough cover for linebackers and safeties. He can even split out wide, too.

Yeah, Hillis might not be back. Running games can be manufactured though. There are a lot of talented athletes in the college ranks that can run in this league. High-profile backs arenít a requirement for productive, respectable rushing attacks.



First off, all prized quarterback prospects are just possible franchise quarterbacks. Doesnít matter if itís this draft or the next or the draft after that. When the time comes for the Browns to draft one, thereís going to be risk involved and thereís no getting around that.

Also, I never stated the Browns should gut their entire draft to grab Griffin. I said the price of a second-rounder (because Iím unconvinced it would cost Atlantaís first) is justified given the value of a quarterback if it appears the Dolphins or Redskins are prepared to pounce. Thatís all Iíve maintained.

With regards to the question, I donít prescribe to the same belief that a complete team needs to be in-place for a quarterback to succeed. Itís as simple as that. Itís much easier to find a running back, a pair of wide receivers, and a right side of the line than a franchise quarterback. If Griffin passes the test, thereís no reason to pass on him.

For example, letís operate under the alternative method of team-building for a minute. Letís assume the Rams wonít budge on their request and insist that Atlantaís first-rounder is included in the deal. As a result, the Browns bow out of the sweepstakes and a team leapfrogs them to take Griffin. So, sitting at four, Cleveland takes Trent Richardson to give their eventual quarterback a beast workhorse. But, in the time it takes to find that quarterback, Richardson accumulates a ton of wear and tear on his tires because a bad offense must ride him to be mediocre. Suppose Cleveland takes Blackmon instead to give their eventual quarterback a top-flight, go-to receiver. Well, Blackmon isnít guaranteed to become that. These are unknown commodities weíre dealing with. What if he busts? Do the Browns have to wait around and draft another receiver with a top five pick before targeting a quarterback?

And I donít expect a rookie to step into the huddle with a firm command of the offense. Or expect him to elevate an offense to prolific heights with a string of superhuman efforts. I just expect him to set a direction on that side of the ball and progress from there. If the front officeís scouting is sharp, then surrounding him with talent he can elevate is the easier of the two steps.



Except it isnít even close to the Ďthis or thatí proposition itís being made out to be here.

If the Browns trade up to draft RGIII second overall, thereís nothing stopping them from improving the rest of the team elsewhere. In all likelihood, it would cost the Browns one pick. That still leaves the rest of the draft and free agent additions. If itís the second-rounder, that leaves them Atlantaís first-rounder to work with. If his stock doesnít soar, and it wouldnít surprise me if it does, Kendall Wright could still be available. Heís an explosive target thatís a perfect compliment to Little and it pairs Griffin with his college teammate. And the Browns have enough cash to be an active spender this off-season. It is more than plausible Cleveland could sign both a receiver and running back to ease the stress on their rookie quarterback. Even if itís just a reliable, zone-busting slot receiver and a check-down option out of the backfield.



And almost no team has the time to stack all of the cupboards with premium talent. A quarterback is the most important ingredient of offensive success. The fixings after that improve the flavor. The fact is that this teamís biggest need is at quarterback. Period. It has gone unaddressed for a decade and the team has been a perennial cellar-dweller as a result. Blackmon or Richardson isnít going to reverse that trend either.

Digressing from specifics to generalities, the new rookie cap structure makes it easier to move on from underwater quarterback situations. Their contract is guaranteed in full, but the deal is shorter and the number is lower. Therefore, bad decisions in the quarterback department arenít as crippling to a franchise. So it would stun me if Blaine Gabbert survives another season without the Jaguars picking a quarterback, former top ten pick or not. The NFL is too quarterback-driven to ignore the position and put your team behind the eight ball.

Great post. For the record I'm in favour of taking a QB first and foremost. I was begging for Glenn Dorsey, and am glad Thomas Dimitroff chose to go the other way with Matt Ryan. Let's not forget Roddy White had only had one good season up to that point, and there were serious questions about our O-Line and how Michael Turner would do as a full-time back.

Bulldogs
01-21-2012, 02:17 AM
I also don't think the offense is as bad as fear the elf makes it out to be. You have two studs on the O-Line in Alex Mack and Joe Thomas. Greg Little is a high draft pick that has shown some potential. If you retain Peyton Hillis you have your workhorse back. Montario Hardesty hasn't been fantastic but he's still a serviceable back. Mohamed Massaquoi was a hasn't done well yet, but he's a 2nd round pick that has the ability to be a solid possession receiver. He has no QB to get him the ball. To really get the ball rolling you need that quarterback, there is no position even close to as valuable in the NFL.

Burger
01-21-2012, 02:26 AM
If a guy drafts a Gabbert type and he's a **** up, then that guy won't be around to draft the next QB.

You HAVE to take the chance. You HAVE to. Ideally, your team wouldn't be ******** enough in the first place to take someone like Gabbert, but it happens. When that guy proves to be a bust and the GM/coaching staff are rightfully shown the door, the next staff needs to get right on taking the next QB.

If you know someone like Gabbert has too high of a chance to bust... Then don't take them. I do not like Robert Griffin, because he plays in a wide open offense. He will not have half of his abilities when he has to throw the ball into a tight spot, and it's something he hardly had to do at Baylor. I would develop a team then draft a real elite QB.

Bengalsrocket
01-21-2012, 06:03 AM
As a Bengals fan, I really hope the Browns don't get RG3. It's bad enough the Ravens are so good with a questionable quarterback, I don't want Cleveland to have a chance at a franchise QB :P

That being said, I think it would be rather foolish for the Browns to not take a chance on him. Sure he could be a bust, as could any other player in the draft. But if he's any better than McCoy then they're instantly competitive in any game they play with that defense.

Brown Leader
01-21-2012, 09:25 AM
Everyone tends to agree that Griffin is good enough to take a chance on top 5. I'm a huge fan of the guys he keeps getting spuriously compared to-Vick-Newton-McNabb-but when I look at him I see more questions then anything else.

Pros -
Accuracy
Improved every year
Blazing straight line speed

Cons -
Awkward footwork
Inconsistent pocket awareness-not special at extending plays
Inconsistent velocity-probably byproduct of his footwork
Poor running style-not elusive and takes big hits
Inflated stats

He's obviously made strides this season but I guess I just can't get his play before this season, like last year's Texas Bowl (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wlcptXDg5ic) out of my head.

Like Cudders said it's really about how his workouts and interviews go from here on out and once I see and hear about these perhaps I can shake my doubts. If he gets lights out reviews then I'd be more prepared to be on board but as of now I don't think it's worth moving up to get him. I just don't see such an enormous gap between him and the 3rd or 4th rated guys.

Complex
01-21-2012, 11:12 AM
According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, "a handful of NFL scouts" prefer Baylor QB Robert Griffin III to presumptive No. 1 overall pick Stanford QB Andrew Luck. - rotoworld

BeerBaron
01-21-2012, 11:13 AM
- rotoworld

Idiots, all of them. I like Griffin but only if there's not a shot in hell of getting Luck.

FUNBUNCHER
01-21-2012, 12:46 PM
Mike Shanahan and Jeff Fisher are allegedly butt buddies.

Don't be surprised to see Fisher and the Rams give the Redskins a draft pick friendly deal to move up to #2 that doesn't involve anal lubrication.

BTW, in the new rookie salary cap era, even if a top pick like Newton or even Luck looks like a bust after a couple seasons, these guy can be cut outright without gutting a team's salary cap.

No team nowadays is handcuffed to a top draft pick because they owe him $50+ mil guaranteed in a backloaded contract.

Iamcanadian
01-21-2012, 12:57 PM
You do realize that as a Franchise we have only taken 3 QB's in the 1st round since the merger in 1970 right? It's only 2 if you don't count Kosar in the supplemental draft.

The fans of Cleveland are so scared of drafting a bust that they want to get a Franchise QB on the cheap. They constantly bring up the once in a decade stories like Brady in the 6th and Warner as an UDFA. I bet if you polled Cleveland fans on where is the best place to get a Franchise QB, the 1st round would come in last.

On theOBR, there is a HUGE group of Fans that want a RIGHT TACKLE with pick #4. I am not joking! The want Riley Reif or Kalil to fall to us.

So all you non-Browns fans have to understand what the thinking is of the average Browns Fan is:

1. QB's are not the reason Teams get better. It's the player surrounding them. No QB in the History of the League has risen the play of his teammates. he is COMPLETELY dependent on his surrounding cast.

2. Left Tackle is BY FAR and away the MOST IMPORTANT position i nall of sports, not just football. Who cares that we have the best LT in Football and our Offense averages a 29th rank since he's been here.

3. Marginal QB's (like Colt Mccoy) can win if given a 1st round pick at all 5 O-line positions and an all pro at all other offensive positions. But, all those All-Pro's need to be 4th rounders atg the highest. UDFA's are preferred.

4. Defense wins Championships!!

5. Free Agents all want to come to Cleveland. With our great weather, party life and phenomonal schools. Who wouldn't want to raise their children here and spend the offseason here?

Well not all Cleveland fans think that way, there are 3 or 4 posting in this debate who understand the importance of a QB and understand that you just keep drafting them till you get it right.

Those who don't believe in the 'Golden Rule' will never be convinced of its validity whether it is Cleveland or some other suffering city, they simply don't get it and never will. Fortunately, I believe Holmgren gets it and we'll see RG111 in a Cleveland uniform next season, making all these arguments rather mute.

PoopSandwich
01-21-2012, 01:05 PM
I honestly don't think NFL is anything like other sports when it comes to location on where to play. Money speaks more so in NFL than any other sport, if you can offer a good contract and your facility is impressive and the staff makes a good impression then you can normally get free agents.

Also, there are some very nice cities in the Cleveland area... I know the weather isn't incredible but football is played in the fall/winter, when the players are done they can go wherever they want to train, and then get to do camp/ota in Ohio in Summer, which is much better than doing that stuff in Florida at that time of the year.

Iamcanadian
01-21-2012, 01:19 PM
I honestly don't think NFL is anything like other sports when it comes to location on where to play. Money speaks more so in NFL than any other sport, if you can offer a good contract and your facility is impressive and the staff makes a good impression then you can normally get free agents.

Also, there are some very nice cities in the Cleveland area... I know the weather isn't incredible but football is played in the fall/winter, when the players are done they can go wherever they want to train, and then get to do camp/ota in Ohio in Summer, which is much better than doing that stuff in Florida at that time of the year.

There are a very large # of FA's who are looking to join a contender, they won't sign with a chronic loser unless nobody else wants them or the money is so far above everybody else that they cannot resist it.
So Cleveland must either overpay considerably for a solid FA or accept that he won't come to Cleveland.
We can of course, sign FA's looking for a last payday before retiring and who aren't really interested in putting out a whole lot for a loser but just want to go through the motions before hanging up their cleats.

FUNBUNCHER
01-21-2012, 01:25 PM
Cleveland needs to win before it can hope to attract top level FAs. If the money is roughly equal, most players would rather play for a contender instead of turning a perennial struggling franchise into a playoff team.

keylime_5
01-21-2012, 03:42 PM
why would top level free agents want to come to cleveland?

on the flipside, why would we spend money on veteran players when we aren't close to competing yet? free agents should be guys you sign to put your team over the hump, not guys you sign to try and build a team.

when the browns start winning more games, then they'll be in position to sign free agents, and concurrently free agents will start wanting to come to help put the browns over the top and win.

PoopSandwich
01-21-2012, 03:46 PM
There are a very large # of FA's who are looking to join a contender, they won't sign with a chronic loser unless nobody else wants them or the money is so far above everybody else that they cannot resist it.
So Cleveland must either overpay considerably for a solid FA or accept that he won't come to Cleveland.
We can of course, sign FA's looking for a last payday before retiring and who aren't really interested in putting out a whole lot for a loser but just want to go through the motions before hanging up their cleats.

We were able to sign Bentley and Baxter when they were two of the biggest free agents in their class. They looked to be solid signings until they blew their leg out.

If we start to build a winner and convince players of a goal it won't be that difficult to sign free agents. This free agency will be a huge indicator of whether or not we can get free agents because we have many areas of need and there are large pools of players at a few of those specific needs.

Inspector71
01-22-2012, 02:02 PM
We overpaid BIG TIME for Baxter and Bentley signed here because he grew up here and it was hsi dream to play for the Browns.

We couldn't get Big time Free Agents to sign here to play with Lebron James, so I don't see them coming to play with Colt Mccoy anytime soon. :)

BeerBaron
01-22-2012, 02:21 PM
We overpaid BIG TIME for Baxter and Bentley signed here because he grew up here and it was hsi dream to play for the Browns.

We couldn't get Big time Free Agents to sign here to play with Lebron James, so I don't see them coming to play with Colt Mccoy anytime soon. :)

THANK YOU.

And besides them, that one year, Cleveland gets nobody. You basically get to pick through other team's trash.

DeepThreat
01-22-2012, 02:48 PM
THANK YOU.

And besides them, that one year, Cleveland gets nobody. You basically get to pick through other team's trash.

Eric Steinbach?

BeerBaron
01-22-2012, 02:51 PM
Eric Steinbach?

Meh, decent. So you're total of high level FA signings is now up to 3 in the past, like, decade at least.

PoopSandwich
01-22-2012, 02:58 PM
I don't believe we have actively pursued in free agency lately. We traded for Corey Williams and Sean Rogers and actually had spent a bunch of money around the time of 2007-2009, and Mangini didn't really look in free agency actively for whatever reason.

This year will prove whether or not we can get guys.

DeepThreat
01-22-2012, 03:05 PM
Meh, decent. So you're total of high level FA signings is now up to 3 in the past, like, decade at least.

Any team that tries hard enough will sign free agents. The money is all that matters.

holt_bruce81
01-22-2012, 03:18 PM
I can't believe the browns fans are worried about giving up the 4th and 22nd pick for rg3. Who cares about the 22nd pick. Rg3 is going to be special

Says a rams fan lol

rfc17
01-22-2012, 04:17 PM
I honestly don't think NFL is anything like other sports when it comes to location on where to play. Money speaks more so in NFL than any other sport....

Exactly so thats why you sign a deal with a team located in a state with little or no state income tax.

fear the elf
01-22-2012, 04:24 PM
Hmm, it's frustrating that people continue to think that I'm against drafting RGIII, or that I think Colt is the answer to our QB concerns, etc.

If we make enough moves in FA to grab a quality starting RB, WR, and RT, then absolutely trade whatever to make sure we get RGIII. He will have the players around him to protect him as he grows.

But my arguments continue to be in the context of:
1. no FA signings of consequence (prior history indicates this is a definite possibility)
2. Hillis being gone (all but guaranteed by the local media)
3. having to trade the #22 pick to move to #2 to draft RGIII

In that scenario, I think he busts out because I believe that as a QB, your situation dictates success as much as your talent level. But, yes, I fully understand that without a QB, this franchise is going nowhere.

I think it's worth noting that this offense scored one (1) more point than the expansion team in 1999. One. More. Point.

JoeJoeBrown
01-23-2012, 03:44 PM
Hmm, it's frustrating that people continue to think that I'm against drafting RGIII, or that I think Colt is the answer to our QB concerns, etc.

A sizable portion of posters on this site lack basic reading comprehension skills.

Inspector71
01-23-2012, 09:24 PM
Hmm, it's frustrating that people continue to think that I'm against drafting RGIII, or that I think Colt is the answer to our QB concerns, etc.

If we make enough moves in FA to grab a quality starting RB, WR, and RT, then absolutely trade whatever to make sure we get RGIII. He will have the players around him to protect him as he grows.

But my arguments continue to be in the context of:
1. no FA signings of consequence (prior history indicates this is a definite possibility)
2. Hillis being gone (all but guaranteed by the local media)
3. having to trade the #22 pick to move to #2 to draft RGIII

In that scenario, I think he busts out because I believe that as a QB, your situation dictates success as much as your talent level. But, yes, I fully understand that without a QB, this franchise is going nowhere.

I think it's worth noting that this offense scored one (1) more point than the expansion team in 1999. One. More. Point.



So then by your estimation the Colts shouldn't take Andrew Luck correct? Because that team is in SHAMBLES.

Do you realize that the Colts we 28th in scoring to our 30th? And Reggie Wayne is 33 and he and Garcon are both Free Agents. The Run Offense and O-line is TERRIBLE. They may lose Mathis also.

I guess Luck will not have success because the situation is much worse than that of the Browns.

fear the elf
01-24-2012, 08:36 AM
So then by your estimation the Colts shouldn't take Andrew Luck correct? Because that team is in SHAMBLES.

Do you realize that the Colts we 28th in scoring to our 30th? And Reggie Wayne is 33 and he and Garcon are both Free Agents. The Run Offense and O-line is TERRIBLE. They may lose Mathis also.

I guess Luck will not have success because the situation is much worse than that of the Browns.

There's a few key differences:

1. Andrew Luck (in the opinion of many) is one of the best QB prospects to enter the draft in 20 years. He is safer and more NFL ready than RGIII.
2. The Colts aren't giving up extra picks to move up and draft Luck.
3. You conveniently left out their best weapon, Dallas Clark. Dallas Clark >>>> all Browns WRs/TEs
4. By the estimation of nearly every Cleveland media outlet, Hillis (our "best" playmaker) is as good as gone. The Colts still have Addai (although I don't care for him) and a promising back in Delone Carter.
5. Garcon is pretty decent, although he tends to drop too many balls. At this point in their careers, he's much more established than Greg Little.

Is that enough? I'm tired of this discussion. Let me say it again, I'm fine if we draft RGIII at #4. He's a great talent that could be a great NFL QB someday. However, in my opinion, giving up the #22 pick to move up and get him would be a mistake as the offense has no playmakers to support his development. Situation + Talent = Success. Right now, the situation is ****. That's my opinion on the matter. Please stop making this into, "OMG, FtE hates Griffin. Doesn't he know that you need a QB to win?"

fear the elf
01-24-2012, 08:40 AM
A sizable portion of posters on this site lack basic reading comprehension skills.

Lol, apparently...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to JoeJoeBrown again.

tjsunstein
01-24-2012, 09:26 AM
What would your best possible scenario for the Browns be if RGIII and Luck are both gone at #4? Just out of curiosity, I'm not backtracking this whole thread....

Sloopy
01-24-2012, 10:38 AM
What would your best possible scenario for the Browns be if RGIII and Luck are both gone at #4? Just out of curiosity, I'm not backtracking this whole thread....

I'm not a Browns fan but I would assume Trent Richardson.

Brothgar
01-24-2012, 10:57 AM
What would your best possible scenario for the Browns be if RGIII and Luck are both gone at #4? Just out of curiosity, I'm not backtracking this whole thread....

Blackmon falls to them at 4 would be the best case scenario in that instance. Otherwise trade the Lions in an Atlanta esque trade for Kalil.

DiG
01-24-2012, 11:27 AM
5. Garcon is pretty decent, although he tends to drop too many balls. At this point in their careers, he's much more established than Greg Little.


I'm not sure Garcon is a reasonable argument at this point. Pretty sure he's a free agent and I've read that he is interested in testing the market. Colts could lose Reggie Wayne and Garcon and Tamme.

IrishBrowns
01-24-2012, 12:14 PM
I hope we don't take RG3 at 4, and it will be a travesty if we move up to 2 for him. and guess what? It's not gonna happen. Holmgren takes QB's later and hopes to hit on one. He has said this multiple times. Sam Bradford, is an extreme exception because he absolutely loved him. I don't see the Browns mov ingup to 2 to draft RG3

stlouisfan37
01-25-2012, 03:55 AM
I'm glad I found this thread. As a Rams fan, I have been wanting to discuss the possibility of trading down and adding some pieces, as we have a lot of needs. After reading a lot here, I would like to add my own $.02.

Mike Holmgren is a borderline egomaniac. I live in Seattle and saw how he built the Seahawks. He was actually stripped of his GM duties because it was overwhelming him. I do think he can build a good team, but he will require a lot of time and it will be dependent on whether or not ownership has enough patience.

Holmgren actually inherited a pretty talented offensive team in Seattle. The big holes were on defense. However, Holmgren admittedly knows little about defense. So rather than beefing up the defense to be competitive now, he completely dismantled the offense and started over with his own guys. Holmgren would rather lose with his own guys than with with a team that someone else assembled. Which, I guess, would make Cleveland the perfect spot for him.

There has been a lot of talk here about signing players through free agency, especially Matt Flynn. First and foremost, if the Matt Flynn we saw in the season finale is who he really is as a player, then Joe Philbin knows it and it would seem a foregone conclusion that he would follow him to Miami. No offense to Browns fans; personally I would prefer to live in the birthplace of pro football, but to most players around the league South Florida is a much more desirable place to play.

Cleveland is in an Easter basket that someone conveniently crapped in, along with a handful of other teams - St. Louis, Arizona, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Washington, Minnesota - that no one really wants to play for. There are some very nice places among these teams, but they all have one thing in common: they lack direction and are consistently changing coaches and systems. Arizona had the Super Bowl a few years back and seems to be working its way out. Detroit seems to be out for now, but it remains to be seen whether or not they are for real for good. In any case, if you have your choice between a contender and a wanna-be, you are going to choose the contender every time. These teams will not attract great free agents until the team shows it can win, unless said team overpays up the kazoo. (See Washington). It's a double edged sword; we need the players to become legitimate, but we can't get the players until we are legitimate, because no one believes that we are really going to be serious this time, and probably rightly so.

Another thing to consider is that the Browns' WCO is more traditional than most and is becoming obsolete in the eyes of many. There was a time when no one could defend it, but now it is old hat. It is not dynamic or exciting, although it can still be effective. Still, who really wants to go be a part of that? If I'm a big time FA receiver like Vincent Jackson or Desean Jackson it doesn't excite me a whole bunch.

I think that Browns fans are totally underestimating the amount of interest that there will be in RGIII, and if I am correct, then the cost of such a trade goes up significantly. Washington will almost certainly be a big player, as Mike Shanahan's job depends on him doing SOMETHING NOW. Kansas City has a lot of talent and a very mediocre QB. Seattle and Arizona both need QB's, although a trade within the division seems unlikely. If Flynn were to go to one of those two teams then Miami becomes a player. I would be surprised if the trade goes down for much less than a pair of 1's and another early round pick. I'm not saying that it is worth that on the value chart; but when the bidding war is on, it's on. I think one thing that has been lost on RGIII is that he very well could be the Michael Vick that everyone had HOPED he would become...the dynamic playmaker with a cannon arm who can kill you with accuracy and destroy you on the ground. While he is a completely different player than Luck, this guy is almost certainly stirring the imaginations of many an offensive coordinator.

keylime_5
01-25-2012, 10:45 AM
Tom Heckert does the drafting in Cleveland. It's Holmgren's organization as he hired the coach, hired the GM, decided that they would run a 4-3 and a west coast offense like he had in Seattle and Green Bay, and he has some pull in bringing in guys like Colt McCoy and Seneca Wallace...but the draft picks have been on Heckert. Mostly been used on defense the first two years they've been there with Joe Haden, TJ Ward, Phil Taylor, and Jabaal Sheard being the top picks. Both Holmgren and Heckert have built winning organizations. Holmgren is using his philsophy, Heckert is using his talent at acquiring personnel, I think that combination can work if they get the players, which will take time.

The thing about the Browns offense being simple isn't just that they installed it in a shortened offseason with players who were young and didn't know it, but also with a first year head coach that doubled as playcaller on a team with no talent offensively. I think once the Browns get some top tier talent on offense and hire an offensive coordinator (which they are doing this offseason) then they'll be headed in the right direction and they will be in position to sign free agents.


As far as RGIII goes, it certainly seems like he will be the #2 pick in the draft. The price will probably be hefty if there is a bidding war between the Browns and Redskins (assuming Flynn signs with Miami). It will be a matter of who wants the kid more and who will be more willing to surrender future young players for a young QB.

Iamcanadian
01-25-2012, 11:46 AM
As far as RGIII goes, it certainly seems like he will be the #2 pick in the draft. The price will probably be hefty if there is a bidding war between the Browns and Redskins (assuming Flynn signs with Miami). It will be a matter of who wants the kid more and who will be more willing to surrender future young players for a young QB.

I don't think the cost will be prohibitive for Cleveland in a trade down with St.Louis or Minny, those teams want to stay in the top 5 when they draft, which limits trading partners, and Cleveland can offer them that while Washington, Miami and other teams cannot.
The real question remains, does Holmgren believe in drafting QB's in round 1 or does he prefer to bring in a veteran or trade for one. Holmgren's past suggest the possibility of a trade to get a new QB. He saw it work in Green Bay when they acquired Favre and in Seattle when he acquired Hasselbech.

keylime_5
01-25-2012, 12:15 PM
Holmgren tried to trade up for Sam Bradford two years ago. I don't think it will be a problem. He knows how valuable a QB is and that it is very hard to find one outside of the draft. He was lucky enough to find young QBs he liked in trades.

The Browns are in a better spot to trade up if they want to (only 2 spots down for St.Louis in the draft order, they have higher picks in each round plus the #22 overall pick), but if Washington wants Griffin as badly as some people think they do, then I think they might give up 2 firsts plus a second and maybe a 3rd/4th - which is a ransom for moving up just a few spots. I don't think the Browns would be willing to trade that much. The most I would think is an extra first and maybe some change. I don't see the Browns being as willing to sell the farm for RGIII as the Redskins will be. Washington is in desperate, win-now mode while the Browns are in full blow rebuild mode and are hell bent on doing so with draft picks.

Iamcanadian
01-25-2012, 01:51 PM
Holmgren tried to trade up for Sam Bradford two years ago. I don't think it will be a problem. He knows how valuable a QB is and that it is very hard to find one outside of the draft. He was lucky enough to find young QBs he liked in trades.

The Browns are in a better spot to trade up if they want to (only 2 spots down for St.Louis in the draft order, they have higher picks in each round plus the #22 overall pick), but if Washington wants Griffin as badly as some people think they do, then I think they might give up 2 firsts plus a second and maybe a 3rd/4th - which is a ransom for moving up just a few spots. I don't think the Browns would be willing to trade that much. The most I would think is an extra first and maybe some change. I don't see the Browns being as willing to sell the farm for RGIII as the Redskins will be. Washington is in desperate, win-now mode while the Browns are in full blow rebuild mode and are hell bent on doing so with draft picks.

I'm not so sure we aren't in a desperate move mode as well. Say what you want but 2 more 4-6 win seasons and I doubt Lerner sticks with his current management team.

Lerner isn't know for his patience and the Cleveland fans are getting restless, another couple of losing seasons, and I doubt we will continue to see a sold out stadium. There is a limit even for the most loyal and ardent fans.

This team needs a potential hero to reinvigorate the fan's moral and nothing works faster than a rookie QB who is drafted high.

It is my experience that if a rebuilding mode hasn't shown significant success after 3 years, it never will, this is Holmgren's 2nd draft and you have to expect at least 2 seasons before a rookie QB gets the job done, so if he wants real improvement in 3 years, he absolutely has to get the QB now. We are never going to have the ammunition available to us in this draft again, so IMO, it is now or never for this management team.

keylime_5
01-25-2012, 02:11 PM
I don't disagree, but the undertones of Heckert and Holmgren and Shurmur in their press conferences sure doesn't make it sound like they are very giddy about the idea of trading a bunch of draft picks for a QB. I could be wrong, b/c they wanted to do exactly that for Sam Bradford, but I just get the sense that there is a limit on the ammount of picks they would give up to move up 2 spots. I do believe that they are going to aggressively pursue a young franchise QB this year though without a doubt.

Inspector71
01-27-2012, 01:14 AM
There's a few key differences:

1. Andrew Luck (in the opinion of many) is one of the best QB prospects to enter the draft in 20 years. He is safer and more NFL ready than RGIII.
2. The Colts aren't giving up extra picks to move up and draft Luck.
3. You conveniently left out their best weapon, Dallas Clark. Dallas Clark >>>> all Browns WRs/TEs
4. By the estimation of nearly every Cleveland media outlet, Hillis (our "best" playmaker) is as good as gone. The Colts still have Addai (although I don't care for him) and a promising back in Delone Carter.
5. Garcon is pretty decent, although he tends to drop too many balls. At this point in their careers, he's much more established than Greg Little.

Is that enough? I'm tired of this discussion. Let me say it again, I'm fine if we draft RGIII at #4. He's a great talent that could be a great NFL QB someday. However, in my opinion, giving up the #22 pick to move up and get him would be a mistake as the offense has no playmakers to support his development. Situation + Talent = Success. Right now, the situation is ****. That's my opinion on the matter. Please stop making this into, "OMG, FtE hates Griffin. Doesn't he know that you need a QB to win?"

As stated, Garcon is a Free Agent and Dallas Clark? Really? It's not 2008 and the system is going to change there in Indy. They are going to be a Run first, 3-4 Defense Team under Pagano. They have scrubs at RB's and a TERRIBLE Offensive Line...that is probably losing Jeff Saturday.

So you wouldn't want to bring RG3 or Luck HERE, but you're fine with the Colts taking Luck and adding him to their abortion of a Roster. A roster that we beat rather easily and was Lucky to winm even 1 game. That makes ZERO sense.

Would you take Luck here? Do you still feel the Team has to be built before the QB and pass on him?

The truth must be that you don't consider RG3 to be a Franchise QB. It is not an understatement to say that EVERY SINGLE Nfl Scout and GM believes that when you have a chance to take a Franchise QB...you take him, regardless how the rest of your roster looks.

So which is it? Do you think RG3 is a Franchise guy or not?

Bald_81
01-27-2012, 01:46 AM
I'm probably in the minority here, but as of now I'm going to predict the Rams stay at #2 and draft Matt Kalil, and it will be the Vikings who trade out of the third spot with a team that desperately wants RG3.

Fdmstng99
01-27-2012, 06:46 AM
I'm probably in the minority here, but as of now I'm going to predict the Rams stay at #2 and draft Matt Kalil, and it will be the Vikings who trade out of the third spot with a team that desperately wants RG3.

I could see it, the Rams need to do something to keep Bradford from getting killed.

Rosebud
01-27-2012, 09:11 AM
I could see it, the Rams need to do something to keep Bradford from getting killed.

Getting a receiver who can get open would let Bradford get rid of the ball faster and that would keep him alive longer to...

ArkyRamsFan
01-27-2012, 11:53 AM
I'm probably in the minority here, but as of now I'm going to predict the Rams stay at #2 and draft Matt Kalil, and it will be the Vikings who trade out of the third spot with a team that desperately wants RG3.

Well we may be in the minority but our ranks are growing. I, too, am also leaning this way.

I think that with Fish as our HC it is going to take a sterling offer for him to want to trade out of the 2nd overall pick.

It really depends on how much better Kalil grades out compared to guys like Reiff and Adams, but if he does grade signifcantly higher then I believe the Rams will stay put.

gpngc
01-27-2012, 12:02 PM
I'm probably in the minority here, but as of now I'm going to predict the Rams stay at #2 and draft Matt Kalil, and it will be the Vikings who trade out of the third spot with a team that desperately wants RG3.

As a Seahawks fan, I hope this happens. This would mean the Vikings would put #3 up for sale, and Seattle would have a shot. If the Rams dangle the pick, they'd likely shy away from sending RG3 to Seattle...

I just don't see how the Rams could stay put if they know teams are willing to offer a lot to move up (which you've got to assume they are). The Rams can go down to four or six and still get a LT or Blackmon.

There are only two scenarios in which they stay put...

1) They really like Kalil (or Reiff) over the other possibilities they'd take at 4, 6, 8, etc.

2) No one offers anything worth it to move down (except maybe Seattle) and they stay at 2 (this scenario may also have to do with a feeling that Minny would take their guy - Kalil, Rieff, or Blackmon - if they were to move down).

So I think it's unlikely that the Vikings deal the pick but the Rams don't. I hope I'm wrong though...

boknows34
01-27-2012, 01:17 PM
I'm probably in the minority here, but as of now I'm going to predict the Rams stay at #2 and draft Matt Kalil, and it will be the Vikings who trade out of the third spot with a team that desperately wants RG3.

And the Vikings have already made it clear they are willing to listen to offers for the 3rd pick.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/26/spielman-says-vikings-more-than-willing-to-listen-to-trade-offers-for-no-3-pick/

GM Rick Spielman said Wednesday on NFL Network. “If someone wants to come up and get our pick, we’re going to be more than willing to listen.”