YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I concur. I think our optimistic Buffalo Media would have taken a different route if it happened in Buffalo. Sully is checking out jobs with the Cleveland Plain dealer this morning... so much opportunity.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 How was this a bad trade for Cleveland? The FO there clearly doesn't believe that the Weeden/Richardson is the answer, so why not start anew ASAFP? The draft is going to be phenomenal next season. Sure, they're giving up this season, but they were obviously going to be dreadful anyway. I understand that. But this was supposed to be the year they turned the ship around. There was A LOT of optimism in Cleveland. And to make this move after WEEK TWO!? That's a lot of sails out of the wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I understand that. But this was supposed to be the year they turned the ship around. There was A LOT of optimism in Cleveland. And to make this move after WEEK TWO!? That's a lot of sails out of the wind. No doubt, but the writing was on the wall already. Neither of those guys looks great, and neither Banner nor Lombardi has any times to them. Yeah, it sucks for the fans, but Banner has proven his skills over the years. I'd trust him. The Eagles had one losing season out of 12 between 2000 and 2011, his last year there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I dont think you can compare these trades. The Raiders went all in for a QB and it didn't work and they didn't give it a chance to work. The Colts already have a QB, if Trent doesn't work out they move on without much upheaval. Maybe they don't have their late round 1, but they tried to win now. and in fact it will be a cheaper mistake than if they just picked a guy and he didnt work out because cleveland took the bulk of the financial risk already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsox Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Browns get a first round pick for Richardson, and all we could land for Lynch is a 4th rounder. Oh how special our FO is I feel sorry for Browns fans though, they literally have nothing going with their team. As much as we complain here, it's worse there (and with the Jags), imo. Yep. It sucks. Really passionate Fans, Esp in Cleveland. Jacksonville should just forfeit their franchise. I think 32 teams is too much as it is. Get it down to 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 No doubt, but the writing was on the wall already. Neither of those guys looks great, and neither Banner nor Lombardi has any times to them. Yeah, it sucks for the fans, but Banner has proven his skills over the years. I'd trust him. The Eagles had one losing season out of 12 between 2000 and 2011, his last year there. In the meantime, Browns fans will be spending the next 11.5 months sitting on ice packs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 and in fact it will be a cheaper mistake than if they just picked a guy and he didnt work out because cleveland took the bulk of the financial risk already. The contract will be cheap for them to forgive if it doesn't work, that is very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) In the meantime, Browns fans will be spending the next 11.5 months sitting on ice packs. And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. Edited September 19, 2013 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. Wow. Totally forgot about that. Jebus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I must have missed the Bills one for Lynch jerseys. I had two. I gave them away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 lopsided advantage for INDY. INDY gets a PROVEN top 15 RB ....Richardson is an absolute stud who should only get better playing on an offense that actually has a QB that opposing defenses will have to respect and stop loading the box. BROWNS get a first round draft choice with about a 25% chance of hitting on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 lopsided advantage for INDY. INDY gets a PROVEN top 15 RB ....Richardson is an absolute stud who should only get better playing on an offense that actually has a QB that opposing defenses will have to respect and stop loading the box. BROWNS get a first round draft choice with about a 25% chance of hitting on it. Disagree. Richardson is good but not worth a #1 in trade. Advantage: CLE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Put your money where your mouth is. So, if his average goes up to a still-sub-par 3.8 YPC, then you're right? I don't think so. I never said he is a terrible back. He will probably do just fine in Indy. But he's just a running back, and by all the evidence so far, a not very dynamic one. Backs like Richardson are a dime a dozen and are not worth a no. 1 pick and they are not the difference between winning and losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 So, if his average goes up to a still-sub-par 3.8 YPC, then you're right? I don't think so. I never said he is a terrible back. He will probably do just fine in Indy. But he's just a running back, and by all the evidence so far, a not very dynamic one. Backs like Richardson are a dime a dozen and are not worth a no. 1 pick and they are not the difference between winning and losing. He actually could be the difference in Indy, this year. It changes their whole offense to be able to effectively run the ball. He actually is dynamic, if you watched him play last year. He is one tough runner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 So, if his average goes up to a still-sub-par 3.8 YPC, then you're right? What is par? I don't think so. I never said he is a terrible back. He will probably do just fine in Indy. Agree. But he's just a running back, and by all the evidence so far, a not very dynamic one. Incorrect Backs like Richardson are a dime a dozen Incorrect and are not worth a no. 1 pick Thats debatable. not the difference between winning and losing. Running the ball is not the difference between winning and losing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobChalmers Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Wow!!!! Batchit crazy move here. Wonder why. My theory is new regime recognizes that a RB is not where you invest a high 1st round pick. Seriously - if you knew what you were getting - how many RB's other than AP are really dominant enough to justify a #1 pick anymore? And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. It's a new FO, that obviously disagrees with the previous one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Running the ball is not the difference between winning and losing? No, it's not. It's a passing league now. The Giants were last in the league in rushing in 2011 and Green Bay was 24th in the league in 2010. Both won the Super Bowl. There is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning anymore. The concept is anachronistic now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Sweet!!!!!!!! Me and my buddy are going to the Browns thursday night game, which is now a guaranteed win! woohoo!~ Yep , this will help us on Thursday night. Has to. Maybe the pieces actually are falling into place... Still too early to tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 No, it's not. It's a passing league now. The Giants were last in the league in rushing in 2011 and Green Bay was 24th in the league in 2010. Both won the Super Bowl. There is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning anymore. The concept is anachronistic now. You actually cannot make a blanket statement like that, realizing that every team is different. An effective running game can absolutely be the difference between winning and losing on a team that has a weak OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) You actually cannot make a blanket statement like that, realizing that every team is different. An effective running game can absolutely be the difference between winning and losing on a team that has a weak OL. My blanket statement is that there is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning. I stand by that. The team that has been most dominant in this century - the Pats - is built almost entirely around passing. They do run it reasonably well, but that's because teams have to defend against the pass on any given play. Same goes for the teams Payton Manning has led. Chris Johnson ran for over 2000 yards and the team went 8-8. AP ran for 2000 and the team squeaked into the playoffs in the last minute of the final game of the season and then was bounced out quickly in the first round. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in rushing in 2011, but the team went 5-11. Frank Gore had some great seasons before Harbaugh built a decent passing game, and in those years SF was mediocre at best. I think this piece is pretty much right: http://espn.go.com/n...n-game-changer. Also, one issue with Cleveland is that they do have a weak run blocking line - which is precisely why Richardson was useless to them. Edited September 19, 2013 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts