What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Trent Richardson Thread (1 Viewer)

I would riot if I was a Cleveland fan.
I would rejoice. Richardson will be done by the time Cleveland is a winner. You don't build around a RB. You build around a QB. Now they have ammo if they don't have the #1 outright.

Edit: They are explaining this right now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Totally stunned. W...T....F....

As was mentioned, 2014 first round should be fantastic and Cleveland is setting themselves up to make a splash and draft whomever they want.

If they want Bridgewater, they'll need the ammo to get him. Well...they might not need to trade up now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
in the NFL you can't win without a franchise QB, so i guess this trade locks in Cle for a top 1-5 pick in a draft loaded with QB talent. Maybe they figured they had to sacrifice Trent to make sure they don't win more then 3-4 games.

 
How does a team throw in the towel after two weeks? Does this mean the injury to Weeden is worse than it seemed?

 
Their is one stat that stook out as an issue I had with T-Rich.

Lack of big plays.



What was missing for Richardson were the big plays. His longest run of the year was only for 32 yards, and just two of his 267 carries went for 20 yards or more. That's not a lot: 0.7 percent is the fifth-lowest rate for any back with 200 carries or more over the past five years.

 
How does a team throw in the towel after two weeks? Does this mean the injury to Weeden is worse than it seemed?
It's not throwing in the towel. It's a brilliant trade for CLE and terrible one for IND. I knew Irsay had a big mouth, but I didn't realize he was this bad.

 
Serious questions....

A. How many teams would be smart to trade their starting RB for the Colts 1st rounder?

B. How many teams would be smart to trade a 1st for Trent.

To me, the answer to A is at least 27 (and I could be talked into 32, if it wasn't in the middle of the season).

The answer to B is clearly zero.

 
I don't see how this can be bad for T-Rich right?? I mean hugely better team, massively better QB, got to be good news for Richardson overall?

 
as a Richardson owner I'd think he obviously warrants a benching for this week....anyone care to hazard a guess as to how long it takes for him to get up to speed to be playable in fantasy?

 
Their is one stat that stook out as an issue I had with T-Rich.

Lack of big plays.



What was missing for Richardson were the big plays. His longest run of the year was only for 32 yards, and just two of his 267 carries went for 20 yards or more. That's not a lot: 0.7 percent is the fifth-lowest rate for any back with 200 carries or more over the past five years.
Wow

 
This reeks of something being wrong with Richardson
No, actually it reeks of something being really wrong with Weeden. Can't wait until the medical reports come out in a few days indicating he's gone for 8 games or more.

This is as blatant a case of throwing in the towel as I've seen in a long time.

 
So the Browns basically trade the #3 overall pick in 2012 for a pick in the 20s in the 2014 draft.

-QG
Sure, and it was a bad pick at the time but that's not really the point.

They got a 1st round pick for a RB, which is highway robbery. Most teams don't get to get bailed out of wasted first round picks.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top