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.

Cleveland Browns (11 Viewers)

'beer 30 said:
'daveR said:
"6-10 isn't good enough". Where are the wins going to come from???

We play Pit, Bal, Cin, NYG, Dal, Pha, Was, Den, KC, Oak, SD, Buf, Ind

We are probably better than Indy who is a mess right now. We are maybe equal to KC, Oak, Buf, Was. We might get one or two in the div.

My prediction is 6-10, and I'm an optimist!
Click to expand...
That's not the point. I don't want my HC or anybody on the coaching staff for that matter saying "well, we'd love to be better than 6-10 but we just don't have the horespower this year and we play a ##### of a schedule". Winning starts with an attitude.
Click to expand...
I'm down with that! :thumbup: The local talkers aren't, though. They're using it to drive a wedge between the F.O. and the owner. Whiners!

 
'Captain Quinoa said:
'daveR said:
"6-10 isn't good enough". Where are the wins going to come from???

We play Pit, Bal, Cin, NYG, Dal, Pha, Was, Den, KC, Oak, SD, Buf, Ind

We are probably better than Indy who is a mess right now. We are maybe equal to KC, Oak, Buf, Was. We might get one or two in the div.

My prediction is 6-10, and I'm an optimist!
Click to expand...
I don't get the dire gloom and dooom about the schedule. Yes the NFC east and AFC west have a lot of solid teams, but not ONE of them finished with more than 9 wins last year. It's not like they were a bunch of regular season juggernauts. SD, DAL, NYG, PHI... all better on paper but known to blow plenty of games to lesser teams in recent years. I would be more shocked if they only won 2 or 3 games than if they won 7 or 8.
Click to expand...
So, what numbers are you predicting based on your method & info?
 
'wadegarrett said:
'rizzler said:
I'll bet my posting privileges on this forum that we won't take Blackmon @ 4.
Click to expand...
Agree...think Claiborne is #1 on their board but hoping to trade down to get him.
Click to expand...
There are a few "issues" with this...TB is likely to draft Richardson, under the assumption that Claiborne will be gone by #5 (by the browns). If we trade with someone who grabs Richardson OR Claiborne, we are literally SCREWED.Example:#4 - richardson/claiborne #5 - claiborne/richardson, #6 - blackmonAs of today, this would LIKELY be the #'s 4,5,6 picks in the draft.... where are we trading down to? And who are we going to take with that pick? If it's tannehill, i'll puke. one of those 3 players HAS to be ours, IMO. But trading down anywhere past 7, and we won't.
 
'daveR said:
'Captain Quinoa said:
'daveR said:
"6-10 isn't good enough". Where are the wins going to come from???

We play Pit, Bal, Cin, NYG, Dal, Pha, Was, Den, KC, Oak, SD, Buf, Ind

We are probably better than Indy who is a mess right now. We are maybe equal to KC, Oak, Buf, Was. We might get one or two in the div.

My prediction is 6-10, and I'm an optimist!
Click to expand...
I don't get the dire gloom and dooom about the schedule. Yes the NFC east and AFC west have a lot of solid teams, but not ONE of them finished with more than 9 wins last year. It's not like they were a bunch of regular season juggernauts. SD, DAL, NYG, PHI... all better on paper but known to blow plenty of games to lesser teams in recent years. I would be more shocked if they only won 2 or 3 games than if they won 7 or 8.
Click to expand...
So, what numbers are you predicting based on your method & info?
Click to expand...
It's March 28. Ask me again around August 28.
 
The real reason the Rams chose to trade with the Redskins over the Browns

Mar 28, 2012 -- 2:30pm

By Tony Grossi

ESPNCleveland.com

Extra points …

Palm Beach, Fla.

Another slant on Browns trade offer: For the first time, somebody has given a reasonable explanation of why the St. Louis Rams snubbed the Browns and chose Washington’s trade offer for the No. 2 spot in the draft.

If you believe both teams offered three No. 1s and one No. 2 it came down to this – St. Louis preferred to have No. 1s in three consecutive years rather than two in 2012 and one in 2013. And that’s why Washington’s offer was better.

“It was part of it, yeah, considering our needs,” Rams coach Jeff Fisher said Wednesday at NFL owners meetings. “If you look at it from this perspective: I haven’t met the players yet, haven’t seen them on the field, and I realistically don’t know what we have. We’ll have a much better idea after the season what kind of team we have. And our needs very well may change.

“To have an opportunity to have two 1s in ’13, ’14 was really important to us.”

Fisher sloughed off Mike Holmgren’s contention that friendly relationships between the Rams and Redskins trumped any offer the Browns would have made.

“We didn’t make a decision because of my relationship with Mike or anyone’s relationship with anybody else,” Fisher said.
Click to expand...
And...
Cross off the Rams – in pencil -- as a trade partner for No. 4: Not because of any ill will caused by Holmgren’s comments. Because the Rams are more interested in moving down from No. 6 rather than moving up.

“We could go up or down,” Fisher said. “(But) I think it probably would be more realistic for us to move down than it would up.”

The Rams are in the same boat as the Browns. They need players and are not zeroing in on one player or position at No. 6. So those who think the Rams will give up a second- or third-round pick to move up to grab LSU cornerback Morris Claiborne or Oklahoma State receiver Justin Blackmon may be disappointed.
Click to expand...
 
If the Vikings don't take Kalil at 3, or they trade out and someone (TB) jumps up there to take Richardson or Claiborne the Browns should take Kalil.

Move him to RT.

It's not like there are no previous examples of great linemen swapping from LT to RT.

It would also fit Heckert's BPA drafting style and fill a huge hole.

If the Browns are not blowing smoke and intend to get McCoy weapons to see what he can do, the RT position needs a fix badly.

Thomas, Mack, Kalil sounds good to me.

22 - Take a WR

37 - Fill in the RB

Or flip the WR and RB choices around depending on who is on the board.

Profits?

 
'Village Idiot said:
If the Vikings don't take Kalil at 3, or they trade out and someone (TB) jumps up there to take Richardson or Claiborne the Browns should take Kalil.

Move him to RT.

It's not like there are no previous examples of great linemen swapping from LT to RT.

It would also fit Heckert's BPA drafting style and fill a huge hole.

If the Browns are not blowing smoke and intend to get McCoy weapons to see what he can do, the RT position needs a fix badly.

Thomas, Mack, Kalil sounds good to me.

22 - Take a WR

37 - Fill in the RB

Or flip the WR and RB choices around depending on who is on the board.

Profits?
Click to expand...
That's the problem with this time of year, a lot of smoke is being blown. I do agree with you that if they are serious about helping McCoy, then starting with the right side of the line wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. I think the media sensationalizes everything and that the Browns move to get Griffin wasn't because they don't like McCoy long term, just that Griffin is an elite talent and they wouldn't be doing their due dilligence if they didn't make a move to acquire him. I also think that the Browns can find temporary help at the WR and OL position after cuts are made.... not great help, but any improvement helps. A lot of mock drafts, take them for what they're worth, have the Browns grabbing Floyd at 22. Based on your scenario, we could be looking at Kalil at 4, Floyd at 22, then a 2nd tier RB in the 2nd. That would certainly raise some eyebrows. A lot of conjecture at this point, but I think it's quite possible that one of the multiple 2nd tier RBs falls to the 3rd round.

Food for thought: If Heckert trades down and acquires an extra 2nd, then he could take BPA at 6,7,8, Jonathan Martin/Floyd at 22, then use one of the two 2nd round picks for a RB. I think moving down a few spots gives Heckert a lot more options.

As I've always said, I trust Heckert and won't question him if he picks defense early. You have to grab the best guy and I think he's proven that he knows talent. Should be interesting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know what the Browns are doing. They have 3 playoff teams in their division, and they seem to be dismantling the team and creating more holes instead of filling them. We've definitely created two new glaring holes at RB and RT. They can and probably will fill both in the draft, but isn't it kinda like spinning your wheels? We still need so many other things. Plus, we need depth. Contending seems so far away...

We need another CB, younger LBs, more depth on the DL, an RT and probably 2 OGs. WRs. An RB. And a franchise QB.

Trade back with the Rams, draft Claiborne and pick up a second rounder.

Rd 1: CB

Rd 1: OT

Rd 2: RB

Rd 2: DE

Rd 3: WR

Rd 4: LB

 
'wadegarrett said:
The real reason the Rams chose to trade with the Redskins over the Browns

Mar 28, 2012 -- 2:30pm

By Tony Grossi

ESPNCleveland.com

Extra points …

Palm Beach, Fla.

Another slant on Browns trade offer: For the first time, somebody has given a reasonable explanation of why the St. Louis Rams snubbed the Browns and chose Washington’s trade offer for the No. 2 spot in the draft.

If you believe both teams offered three No. 1s and one No. 2 it came down to this – St. Louis preferred to have No. 1s in three consecutive years rather than two in 2012 and one in 2013. And that’s why Washington’s offer was better.

“It was part of it, yeah, considering our needs,” Rams coach Jeff Fisher said Wednesday at NFL owners meetings. “If you look at it from this perspective: I haven’t met the players yet, haven’t seen them on the field, and I realistically don’t know what we have. We’ll have a much better idea after the season what kind of team we have. And our needs very well may change.

“To have an opportunity to have two 1s in ’13, ’14 was really important to us.”

Fisher sloughed off Mike Holmgren’s contention that friendly relationships between the Rams and Redskins trumped any offer the Browns would have made.

“We didn’t make a decision because of my relationship with Mike or anyone’s relationship with anybody else,” Fisher said.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012. :loco:

IDIOCY

 
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'cstu said:
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
Click to expand...
So he's projecting a teams record 2 years into the future and taking that teams 1st in 2014 over the #22 in 2012? I *guess* that it's a compliment, but what I really take away from this is that Jeff Fisher is either a liar or a huge moron.There's a reason that people directly trade lower picks in one year for higher picks in the next year. It's because picks now are worth more than picks later. There's not a GM with a brain in this league that would trade their #22 this year for a 1st 2014...
 
'nxmehta said:
'cstu said:
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
Click to expand...
So he's projecting a teams record 2 years into the future and taking that teams 1st in 2014 over the #22 in 2012? I *guess* that it's a compliment, but what I really take away from this is that Jeff Fisher is either a liar or a huge moron.There's a reason that people directly trade lower picks in one year for higher picks in the next year. It's because picks now are worth more than picks later. There's not a GM with a brain in this league that would trade their #22 this year for a 1st 2014...
Click to expand...
No. What he said is he thinks he'll have a better grasp on the team's needs after he's been around them for a while. Right now is too soon.
 
Heard a scenario this morning I like, draft Richardson @ 4, trade the 22nd & say a third to move up and grab Floyd around 13ish. Please stay away from Mike Adams.

 
'beer 30 said:
Heard a scenario this morning I like, draft Richardson @ 4, trade the 22nd & say a third to move up and grab Floyd around 13ish. Please stay away from Mike Adams.
Click to expand...
I agree that Floyd won't be there at 22.There are too many teams that would be willing to grab him before 22 or move in front of us at 22 to grab him.
 
'daveR said:
'nxmehta said:
'cstu said:
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
Click to expand...
So he's projecting a teams record 2 years into the future and taking that teams 1st in 2014 over the #22 in 2012? I *guess* that it's a compliment, but what I really take away from this is that Jeff Fisher is either a liar or a huge moron.There's a reason that people directly trade lower picks in one year for higher picks in the next year. It's because picks now are worth more than picks later. There's not a GM with a brain in this league that would trade their #22 this year for a 1st 2014...
Click to expand...
No. What he said is he thinks he'll have a better grasp on the team's needs after he's been around them for a while. Right now is too soon.
Click to expand...
So I guess the Titans entire scouting department is incapable of determining who the BPA at 22 is this year. Let's just wait two years before they get it together. It still doesn't make sense dude. Why not trade all your picks this year for picks in 2015? By then they'll definitely know what they need.
 
'nxmehta said:
'daveR said:
'nxmehta said:
'cstu said:
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
Click to expand...
So he's projecting a teams record 2 years into the future and taking that teams 1st in 2014 over the #22 in 2012? I *guess* that it's a compliment, but what I really take away from this is that Jeff Fisher is either a liar or a huge moron.There's a reason that people directly trade lower picks in one year for higher picks in the next year. It's because picks now are worth more than picks later. There's not a GM with a brain in this league that would trade their #22 this year for a 1st 2014...
Click to expand...
No. What he said is he thinks he'll have a better grasp on the team's needs after he's been around them for a while. Right now is too soon.
Click to expand...
So I guess the Titans entire scouting department is incapable of determining who the BPA at 22 is this year. Let's just wait two years before they get it together. It still doesn't make sense dude. Why not trade all your picks this year for picks in 2015? By then they'll definitely know what they need.
Click to expand...
I know you meant the Rams scouting department, but nobody really drafts strictly BPA without taking needs into account. That said, I do think they're just trying to get cover for favoring the Redskins because of personal relationships. It's true that teams would always prefer the draft pick now so they can start developing the player now.

 
'nxmehta said:
'daveR said:
'nxmehta said:
'cstu said:
So Jeff Fisher thinks a 1st round pick in 2014 is worth more than a 1st round pick in 2012.
Click to expand...
He thinks the Redskins future picks will be higher (possibly top 10) than the Browns' 22nd pick.Take it as a complement that he doesn't think the Browns will be absolutely terrible next year.
Click to expand...
So he's projecting a teams record 2 years into the future and taking that teams 1st in 2014 over the #22 in 2012? I *guess* that it's a compliment, but what I really take away from this is that Jeff Fisher is either a liar or a huge moron.There's a reason that people directly trade lower picks in one year for higher picks in the next year. It's because picks now are worth more than picks later. There's not a GM with a brain in this league that would trade their #22 this year for a 1st 2014...
Click to expand...
No. What he said is he thinks he'll have a better grasp on the team's needs after he's been around them for a while. Right now is too soon.
Click to expand...
So I guess the Titans entire scouting department is incapable of determining who the BPA at 22 is this year. Let's just wait two years before they get it together. It still doesn't make sense dude. Why not trade all your picks this year for picks in 2015? By then they'll definitely know what they need.
Click to expand...
Different questions, no?
 
From Tannehill's pro day:

Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill had an outstanding performance at his pro day, according to NFL.com's Gil Brandt.

This likely solidified his status as a top-10 pick in the NFL draft. There was "a large contingent" from the Cleveland Browns, which included offensive coordinator Brad Childress. Dolphins coach Joe Philbin and Seahawks coach Pete Carroll also attended the workout.

Tannehill reportedly has a pre-draft visit set up with the Browns, who have the fourth overall pick in the draft.

At his pro day, Tannehill showed off his mobility, accuracy and arm strength. While he wasn't throwing against a defense, he only had three incompletions (he missed one long pass and had two drops) on 68 passes thrown. He also ran the 40-yard dash in 4.62 seconds. As ESPN's Todd McShay pointed out, Andrew Luck ran it in 4.67 seconds, although Luck is an inch taller and 13 pounds heavier.

McShay said on ESPN's "SportsCenter" that Tannehill is a legitimate top-10 pick and believes he is a better fit for the Browns than the Dolphins, who select eighth.

"I would say the Browns, because they are a better team," McShay said when asked which team was a better fit for Tannehill. "They have better parts around the quarterback position. Miami, I'm not sure what the plan is when I look at the Miami organization. While they have Matt Moore and they brought in [David] Garrard, I just don't know if you want to bring in a young quarterback with everything else that’s going on in Miami."

Fellow ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper Jr. disagreed.

"I can see Cleveland taking [Tannehill], but I disagree with them being the best fit," Kiper said. "I think it's Miami. When you have [offensive coordinator] Mike Sherman there, you have familiarity, and there's some personnel. I think you're [McShay] underrating that personnel base a little bit. Granted they have to do some work in the draft, no question about that."

Whether or not the Browns are the best fit, Tannehill shouldn't be in the conversation for them with the No. 4 pick. That choice should be between Alabama running back Trent Richardson and Oklahoma State wide receiver Justin Blackmon.

Even though the Browns need to upgrade at quarterback over Colt McCoy, it's a stretch to validate taking Tannehill that high. There are six elite prospects in this draft (Luck, Robert Griffin III, Matt Kalil, Richardson, Blackmon and Morris Claiborne), and Tannehill is not among them. His 19 starts in college make him too much of a risk.

If the Browns decide to trade back, then they should consider Tannehill.
Click to expand...
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/44949/ryan-tannehill-impresses-at-his-pro-day
 
'PlasmaDogPlasma said:
From Tannehill's pro day:

Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill had an outstanding performance at his pro day, according to NFL.com's Gil Brandt.

This likely solidified his status as a top-10 pick in the NFL draft. There was "a large contingent" from the Cleveland Browns, which included offensive coordinator Brad Childress. Dolphins coach Joe Philbin and Seahawks coach Pete Carroll also attended the workout.

Tannehill reportedly has a pre-draft visit set up with the Browns, who have the fourth overall pick in the draft.

At his pro day, Tannehill showed off his mobility, accuracy and arm strength. While he wasn't throwing against a defense, he only had three incompletions (he missed one long pass and had two drops) on 68 passes thrown. He also ran the 40-yard dash in 4.62 seconds. As ESPN's Todd McShay pointed out, Andrew Luck ran it in 4.67 seconds, although Luck is an inch taller and 13 pounds heavier.

McShay said on ESPN's "SportsCenter" that Tannehill is a legitimate top-10 pick and believes he is a better fit for the Browns than the Dolphins, who select eighth.

"I would say the Browns, because they are a better team," McShay said when asked which team was a better fit for Tannehill. "They have better parts around the quarterback position. Miami, I'm not sure what the plan is when I look at the Miami organization. While they have Matt Moore and they brought in [David] Garrard, I just don't know if you want to bring in a young quarterback with everything else that’s going on in Miami."

Fellow ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper Jr. disagreed.

"I can see Cleveland taking [Tannehill], but I disagree with them being the best fit," Kiper said. "I think it's Miami. When you have [offensive coordinator] Mike Sherman there, you have familiarity, and there's some personnel. I think you're [McShay] underrating that personnel base a little bit. Granted they have to do some work in the draft, no question about that."

Whether or not the Browns are the best fit, Tannehill shouldn't be in the conversation for them with the No. 4 pick. That choice should be between Alabama running back Trent Richardson and Oklahoma State wide receiver Justin Blackmon.

Even though the Browns need to upgrade at quarterback over Colt McCoy, it's a stretch to validate taking Tannehill that high. There are six elite prospects in this draft (Luck, Robert Griffin III, Matt Kalil, Richardson, Blackmon and Morris Claiborne), and Tannehill is not among them. His 19 starts in college make him too much of a risk.

If the Browns decide to trade back, then they should consider Tannehill.
Click to expand...
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/44949/ryan-tannehill-impresses-at-his-pro-day
Click to expand...
I caught the highlights of Tannehill's pro day. He looks the part, has a quiet confidence that you like to see, looked like he had a strong arm, but there was something about his throwing motion that I didn't like. It looked like he pushed the ball similarly to what you see weaker armed QBs do. I'm thrilled to see the Browns have a big presence there, we're certainly playing the hand well. I have a feeling Miami will get desperate on draft day and overpay for the #4 pick. I wouldn't mind their 8, as long as either Richardson, Claiborne, or Blackmon is there. BTW, Richardson's highlights had me drooling.I can see this happening:

1) Colts: Luck

2) Skins: RGIII

3) Vikes: Kalil

4) Dolphins: Tannehill

5) Bucs: Claiborne (Although they can eff us out of Richardson)

6) Rams: Blackmon

7) Jags: Reiff

8) Browns: Richardson

In that situation, (which I think is unlikely but fun to speculate), we'll likely take Miami's 42 overall. Turn that 42 back around with the 22 and move back up in the early teens to grab Michael Floyd. Or stay at 22 and give me Janoris Jenkins. Alshon Jeffrey at 37, and Zebrie Sanders at 42.

Or, if the Browns stay at 4, I'd be thrilled right now with Richardson.

Ok, I'll stop now. :)

 
'PlasmaDogPlasma said:
'NJDawgPound said:
I'm thrilled to see the Browns have a big presence there, we're certainly playing the hand well.
Click to expand...
Of course the GM and the Head Coach were watching Richardson.
Click to expand...
Exactly...
The day the Browns draft plan became clearer

Mar 30, 2012 -- 6:00am

By Tony Grossi

ESPNCleveland.com

Follow the general manager and coach: Thursday might have marked the seminal moment of the Browns’ draft evaluation process.

Faced with a conflict in pro day workouts, GM Tom Heckert and coach Pat Shurmur could have broken up and split duty between Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill and Alabama running back Trent Richardson.

Instead, they chose to double-team the Richardson workout.

They would probably say that logistics played a big part in their choice. Tuscaloosa, Ala., is a lot closer to Palm Beach, Fla, where the team’s top two football executives had spent the week attending NFL owners meetings. But I think there’s more to it than that.

Of all the offensive players attached to the Browns with the No. 4 pick in the draft, Richardson probably has been the least talked about.

Asked directly if Richardson is under consideration for the No. 4 pick, Shurmur said this week at NFL meetings, “I’m not going to talk about my five guys (in the running). He is an outstanding player … he’s been very productive on a team that’s won a lot of games.”

In a different context, Shurmur was asked what a pain it was last season to not be able to practice with his starting running back from week to week and sometimes not even know which back would start until game time.

“You need not remind me,” he replied. “But I do know that’s a critical position, and the quarterback has to have confidence that he can turn around and hand the ball off and get yards, or drop back and know (the back’s) going to protect properly, or drop back and throw it to him. That’s an important confidence to have.”

Colt McCoy didn’t have that confidence last season. And if the Browns are determined to surround him with better pieces on offense, Shurmur just made a strong case in the above paragraph that the best running back in the draft – Richardson – is the best selection at No. 4.

Richardson v. Tannehill: Draft expert Dane Brugler of nfldraftscout.com and cbssports.com lives in Dallas, so he attended the Tannehill workout in College Station, Texas. Brugler has been high on Tannehill since the fall.

“He’s got all the physical abilities – strong arm, excellent size, good feet,” Brugler said Thursday night. “He had right foot surgery in late January. It was important to see him move around the pocket, make some sharp cuts. He ran well. Besides Andrew Luck, he’s probably the best quarterback in the draft at throwing on the run, at squaring his shoulders and throwing accurately.

“Plus, he played in a lot of traditional formations under center under Mike Sherman at Texas A&M. And he’s got everything you can’t teach. He’s smart, confident, driven, very mature.”

Brugler talked to Browns offensive coordinator Brad Childress at the workout. Childress told him, “He’s played in a system that prepares him for every throw there is. He gets it. He knows what he needs to do. This guy is one of those guys who is capable of doing all the things you need to be able to do.”

And yet … Brugler said Richardson is the right pick for the Browns at No. 4.

“Mike Holmgren believes that in the first round you go for talent, then you build your team around that after the first round,” Brugler said. “I think Trent Richardson is the best offensive player on the board for the Browns at No. 4.

“Richardson a special kid, a combination of Ray Rice and Maurice Jones-Drew. He’s 5-9, 228, and so thick. Every ounce of muscle he can possibly have, he has it. No one works harder than he does. If he stays healthy he’ll be a special back for the next 10 years.”

One more thing about Tannehill: I respect Mike Mayock of NFL Network a whole bunch. I really do. But when he says the Browns have to take Tannehill at No. 4, I cringe.

I can’t help but recall Mayock's evaluation of the Quarterback Class of 2011. I watched Mayock every night a year ago and he consistently said that Blaine Gabbert was the better pick over Cam Newton. In Mayock's parlance, tha'ts what you call a terrible misread.
Click to expand...
 
One more thing about Tannehill: I respect Mike Mayock of NFL Network a whole bunch. I really do. But when he says the Browns have to take Tannehill at No. 4, I cringe.

I can’t help but recall Mayock's evaluation of the Quarterback Class of 2011. I watched Mayock every night a year ago and he consistently said that Blaine Gabbert was the better pick over Cam Newton. In Mayock's parlance, tha'ts what you call a terrible misread.
Click to expand...
And tacking on to this I'll copy what I put on here earlier in the week from the 2010 draft...
From the Clevleland Plain Dealer, April 15, 2010...

NFL Network draft expert Mike Mayock thinks the Browns should take Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen at No. 7 if they're sold on his character.

"I do think he has the physical skill-set to be a top 10 pick in the draft, similar to [Jets rookie] Mark Sanchez," Mayock said on a conference call Wednesday. "The question is what kind of kid is he? If you buy into him – his work ethic, toughness and leadership – there's no reason not to take him. He's every bit as talented as Sanchez."
Click to expand...
His track record shows Mayock doesn't know **** about evaluating QBs.
 
He also said he really liked McCoy during the Pittsburgh game last year. His last one. And now he says we need to go in another direction?

 
I'm not a Cleveland fan but as a Richardson owner I have been following things more closely than I would have otherwise. It would seem like Richardson has to be the pick here. The defense didn't give up that many points and are you really convinced Tannehill is a franchise QB? If there is any doubt - and I think there is - then you take the franchise RB and be really happy about it. Richardson is a guy you build the offense around and he helps the defense because running plays kills the clock etc. If McCoy is only a backup we will find out for sure this year and the Browns can add a veteran QB via free agency or look to get one in next years draft. Or both. But to miss out on Trent Richardson seems crazy to me right now. I would not even risk trading down. Just take the best RB prospect since ADP.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That package the Rams turned down was huge. As a Browns fan, I'm glad they did. Still, it makes you wonder what would happen if they offered the same to Indy, and maybe threw in a (nameless) QB.

 
"Sources familiar" with Browns GM Tom Heckert tell the Canton Repository he is "leaning toward" trading down from No. 4.However, the Browns would reportedly like to swap their pick without "dropping too far." Miami at No. 8 is one possibility, though the Dolphins may have to move all the way to up No. 3 to ensure they aren't leveraged by the Vikings in their pursuit of Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill. For a team with as little offensive talent as the Browns, staying at No. 4 might be the best call.
Click to expand...
After seeing how our offseason acquisitions have gone, if we trade out of 4, and fail to land Richardson, I may just give up on this franchise and go "hometown" with the Bills.There's literally only so much one man can take... I was never big on this move, under the assumption we were landing RG3, or at least a big free agent WR.Nope and Nope.No Richardson, and we are doomed.ETA: I still think the reports are BS and we will, in fact, take Hocus Pocus.
 
That is hilarious. Were all his points for writing down his name?

On another topic... if we're not taking a QB with a high pick, anyone have any guesses on which QB we take with a lower round pick. Kirk Cousins maybe?

 
'eric rymer said:
So does this change anyone's opinion of possibly taking Claiborne? Seriously....how do you get a 4? VY got a 6 that was changed to a 13. I'm not calling him the next VY but dayum....a 4?http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/03/claiborne-gives-birth-to-a-four-on-the-wonderlic/
Click to expand...
You gotta try hard to get a 4 imoFurther solidifies my belief we should happily take Richardson at 4 and move on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Browns need some offensive weapons not new quarterback

By Clark Judge | CBSSports.com Senior NFL Columnist

After failing to swing a deal with St. Louis to acquire the right to draft Robert Griffin III, the Cleveland Browns are "moving forward," as head coach Pat Shurmur put it, with Colt McCoy as their quarterback.

Good for them. They should. But the Browns shouldn't stop there with commitments. They should "move forward" with someone to make McCoy look good, too.

I'm talking about finding offensive playmakers in this year's draft, and that shouldn't be difficult. The Browns have two first-round choices -- the fourth overall and the 22nd. If they know what's best for them, their fans and their starting quarterback, they'll draft legitimate threats to resuscitate the league's 29th-ranked offense and make McCoy and the team play better and win more.

That, of course, means just saying, "No," to persons pushing quarterback Ryan Tannehill with the fourth overall pick. They want to flush McCoy, convinced that Tannehill is better and that McCoy can't play at this level, but I don't know how anyone comes to that conclusion.

Not yet, I don't.

Frustrated Browns' fans tell me McCoy is overmatched and has no future, and maybe they're right. But, based on what he has for running backs and receivers, how does anyone know? I mean, let's be honest: The people around him aren't very good.

Yeah, there was running back Peyton Hillis in 2010, but that's about it. Don't tell me about Josh Cribbs because he's a special-teams star who also happens to play wide receiver. I don't want to hear about Greg Little, either. The guy isn't a No. 1 receiver.

Ask people to name the best player on this offense, and they'll tell you it's Joe Thomas. And it is. But he's the left tackle. He's not someone catching passes or taking handoffs from the quarterback.

And that's a problem.

Maybe Colt McCoy isn't the answer, but the Browns never made an effort to find out. They surrounded him with ordinary players at wide receiver and running back and hoped he somehow could make them better. It didn't happen, and now fans want another quarterback.

I have another idea: Find better running backs and receivers first. And maybe you find a better quarterback while you're at it.

"At this point," Shurmur said at last week's NFL owners' meetings, "Colt is our quarterback. I've said it all along: We're looking forward to him getting better and being our guy."

He cautioned that there are no guarantees, and there shouldn't be. McCoy has as many interceptions in his career (20) as touchdowns, a 6-15 record and lukewarm support within the Browns' organization. All that could change, of course, if the Browns started to surround him with playmakers, and that's why they invented the draft, folks.

Look, I don't know what McCoy can't do, but I know what he can. I saw it when I watched him in successive games in 2010 vs. New England and the New York Jets. He and the Browns destroyed the Patriots one week -- one of only two New England losses that season -- then rallied to take the Jets into overtime, with McCoy driving the Browns 59 yards at the end of regulation to tie things up with a touchdown pass.

That Colt McCoy energized Cleveland. Last year's Colt McCoy sedated it. So now we're writing him off? C'mon. Before banishing the guy to the bench, how about giving him a chance to succeed? How about surrounding him with something more than average talent? At least then you have an accurate barometer.

I saw what happened when his most reliable receivers were Ben Watson and Evan Moore, and it was impressive. I also saw what he did in preseason last year under a first-year head coach, and that was promising, too. What wasn't was everything after that, with the Browns failing to produce more than 14 points in 10 of their last 13 regular-season starts and finishing behind only St. Louis in scoring.

McCoy ranked 27th among the league's quarterbacks and next to last in yards per attempt. His best rusher ranked 36th. The Browns had a league-low four touchdowns rushing. No receiver averaged more than 12.6 yards per reception, and their wideouts led the league in drops.

Oh, yeah, Cleveland also lost nine of its last 10.

Trust me, Ryan Tannehill isn't the solution. But Trent Richardson could be. Same goes for Justin Blackmon. Or Kendall Wright, Michael Floyd or Stephen Hill ... someone, anyone, who can make catches, make yards and make this offense into something other than a still life. Granted, McCoy isn't Tom Brady, but Tom Brady may be the only guy who could win with this supporting cast.

A year ago Cincinnati demonstrated how to run a draft when it gained its franchise quarterback and franchise wide receiver in the first two rounds. That was smart, with the move propelling the Bengals into the playoffs and setting them up for years.

The Browns are nowhere near the playoffs. In fact, they made them once since returning to the NFL, and that was back in 2002. McCoy may not be the quarterback to get them there, but nobody will know until he has weapons to work with -- and I'm waiting.

Colt McCoy is a quarterback with glimpses of promise and a multitude of unanswered questions. So let's answer them now. Do what's best for the Cleveland Browns and Colt McCoy, and don't just push forward with him; push forward with offensive playmakers to make him ... and the Cleveland Browns ... what they haven't been.

Successful.
Click to expand...
 
Browns need some offensive weapons not new quarterback

By Clark Judge | CBSSports.com Senior NFL Columnist

After failing to swing a deal with St. Louis to acquire the right to draft Robert Griffin III, the Cleveland Browns are "moving forward," as head coach Pat Shurmur put it, with Colt McCoy as their quarterback.

Good for them. They should. But the Browns shouldn't stop there with commitments. They should "move forward" with someone to make McCoy look good, too.

I'm talking about finding offensive playmakers in this year's draft, and that shouldn't be difficult. The Browns have two first-round choices -- the fourth overall and the 22nd. If they know what's best for them, their fans and their starting quarterback, they'll draft legitimate threats to resuscitate the league's 29th-ranked offense and make McCoy and the team play better and win more.

That, of course, means just saying, "No," to persons pushing quarterback Ryan Tannehill with the fourth overall pick. They want to flush McCoy, convinced that Tannehill is better and that McCoy can't play at this level, but I don't know how anyone comes to that conclusion.

Not yet, I don't.

Frustrated Browns' fans tell me McCoy is overmatched and has no future, and maybe they're right. But, based on what he has for running backs and receivers, how does anyone know? I mean, let's be honest: The people around him aren't very good.

Yeah, there was running back Peyton Hillis in 2010, but that's about it. Don't tell me about Josh Cribbs because he's a special-teams star who also happens to play wide receiver. I don't want to hear about Greg Little, either. The guy isn't a No. 1 receiver.

Ask people to name the best player on this offense, and they'll tell you it's Joe Thomas. And it is. But he's the left tackle. He's not someone catching passes or taking handoffs from the quarterback.

And that's a problem.

Maybe Colt McCoy isn't the answer, but the Browns never made an effort to find out. They surrounded him with ordinary players at wide receiver and running back and hoped he somehow could make them better. It didn't happen, and now fans want another quarterback.

I have another idea: Find better running backs and receivers first. And maybe you find a better quarterback while you're at it.

"At this point," Shurmur said at last week's NFL owners' meetings, "Colt is our quarterback. I've said it all along: We're looking forward to him getting better and being our guy."

He cautioned that there are no guarantees, and there shouldn't be. McCoy has as many interceptions in his career (20) as touchdowns, a 6-15 record and lukewarm support within the Browns' organization. All that could change, of course, if the Browns started to surround him with playmakers, and that's why they invented the draft, folks.

Look, I don't know what McCoy can't do, but I know what he can. I saw it when I watched him in successive games in 2010 vs. New England and the New York Jets. He and the Browns destroyed the Patriots one week -- one of only two New England losses that season -- then rallied to take the Jets into overtime, with McCoy driving the Browns 59 yards at the end of regulation to tie things up with a touchdown pass.

That Colt McCoy energized Cleveland. Last year's Colt McCoy sedated it. So now we're writing him off? C'mon. Before banishing the guy to the bench, how about giving him a chance to succeed? How about surrounding him with something more than average talent? At least then you have an accurate barometer.

I saw what happened when his most reliable receivers were Ben Watson and Evan Moore, and it was impressive. I also saw what he did in preseason last year under a first-year head coach, and that was promising, too. What wasn't was everything after that, with the Browns failing to produce more than 14 points in 10 of their last 13 regular-season starts and finishing behind only St. Louis in scoring.

McCoy ranked 27th among the league's quarterbacks and next to last in yards per attempt. His best rusher ranked 36th. The Browns had a league-low four touchdowns rushing. No receiver averaged more than 12.6 yards per reception, and their wideouts led the league in drops.

Oh, yeah, Cleveland also lost nine of its last 10.

Trust me, Ryan Tannehill isn't the solution. But Trent Richardson could be. Same goes for Justin Blackmon. Or Kendall Wright, Michael Floyd or Stephen Hill ... someone, anyone, who can make catches, make yards and make this offense into something other than a still life. Granted, McCoy isn't Tom Brady, but Tom Brady may be the only guy who could win with this supporting cast.

A year ago Cincinnati demonstrated how to run a draft when it gained its franchise quarterback and franchise wide receiver in the first two rounds. That was smart, with the move propelling the Bengals into the playoffs and setting them up for years.

The Browns are nowhere near the playoffs. In fact, they made them once since returning to the NFL, and that was back in 2002. McCoy may not be the quarterback to get them there, but nobody will know until he has weapons to work with -- and I'm waiting.

Colt McCoy is a quarterback with glimpses of promise and a multitude of unanswered questions. So let's answer them now. Do what's best for the Cleveland Browns and Colt McCoy, and don't just push forward with him; push forward with offensive playmakers to make him ... and the Cleveland Browns ... what they haven't been.

Successful.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
:goodposting: let's see what Colt does with some legitimate NFL players at WR, RB and RT
 
'nxmehta said:
That is hilarious. Were all his points for writing down his name?On another topic... if we're not taking a QB with a high pick, anyone have any guesses on which QB we take with a lower round pick. Kirk Cousins maybe?
Click to expand...
Coleman from UTC or Harnish from NIU.
 
'rizzler said:
"Sources familiar" with Browns GM Tom Heckert tell the Canton Repository he is "leaning toward" trading down from No. 4.However, the Browns would reportedly like to swap their pick without "dropping too far." Miami at No. 8 is one possibility, though the Dolphins may have to move all the way to up No. 3 to ensure they aren't leveraged by the Vikings in their pursuit of Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill. For a team with as little offensive talent as the Browns, staying at No. 4 might be the best call.
Click to expand...
After seeing how our offseason acquisitions have gone, if we trade out of 4, and fail to land Richardson, I may just give up on this franchise and go "hometown" with the Bills.There's literally only so much one man can take... I was never big on this move, under the assumption we were landing RG3, or at least a big free agent WR.Nope and Nope.No Richardson, and we are doomed.ETA: I still think the reports are BS and we will, in fact, take Hocus Pocus.
Click to expand...
Please go hometown regardless of what happens. You'll be happier; we'll be happier.
 
'GreatLakesMike said:
'rizzler said:
"Sources familiar" with Browns GM Tom Heckert tell the Canton Repository he is "leaning toward" trading down from No. 4.However, the Browns would reportedly like to swap their pick without "dropping too far." Miami at No. 8 is one possibility, though the Dolphins may have to move all the way to up No. 3 to ensure they aren't leveraged by the Vikings in their pursuit of Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill. For a team with as little offensive talent as the Browns, staying at No. 4 might be the best call.
Click to expand...
After seeing how our offseason acquisitions have gone, if we trade out of 4, and fail to land Richardson, I may just give up on this franchise and go "hometown" with the Bills.There's literally only so much one man can take... I was never big on this move, under the assumption we were landing RG3, or at least a big free agent WR.Nope and Nope.No Richardson, and we are doomed.ETA: I still think the reports are BS and we will, in fact, take Hocus Pocus.
Click to expand...
Please go hometown regardless of what happens. You'll be happier; we'll be happier.
Click to expand...
+1
 
'daveR said:
'GreatLakesMike said:
'rizzler said:
"Sources familiar" with Browns GM Tom Heckert tell the Canton Repository he is "leaning toward" trading down from No. 4.However, the Browns would reportedly like to swap their pick without "dropping too far." Miami at No. 8 is one possibility, though the Dolphins may have to move all the way to up No. 3 to ensure they aren't leveraged by the Vikings in their pursuit of Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill. For a team with as little offensive talent as the Browns, staying at No. 4 might be the best call.
Click to expand...
After seeing how our offseason acquisitions have gone, if we trade out of 4, and fail to land Richardson, I may just give up on this franchise and go "hometown" with the Bills.There's literally only so much one man can take... I was never big on this move, under the assumption we were landing RG3, or at least a big free agent WR.Nope and Nope.No Richardson, and we are doomed.ETA: I still think the reports are BS and we will, in fact, take Hocus Pocus.
Click to expand...
Please go hometown regardless of what happens. You'll be happier; we'll be happier.
Click to expand...
+1
Click to expand...
+2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
Cleveland Browns road to the number 1 seed!
Replies
8
Views
745
Gatorman
Gatorman
Ministry of Pain
**Browns at Bengals** (-7, 37) 1:00
Replies
7
Views
296
Dez
Dez
Ministry of Pain
**Bears at Browns**(-3, 37.5) 1:00
2 3
Replies
102
Views
2K
Max Power
Max Power

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 12 (members: 0, guests: 12)
Top