Jump to content

Cleveland and the #1 and #4 picks.


xxxxxxxx

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

Retain. As in sign them to longterm deals, after 5 years is up.

And this is just hypothetical, but say they actually get their franchise QB at 1, then would there not be a major incentive to trade out of 4, maybe at a cheaper price.

16 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

I think Cleveland takes Darnold #1 and I think there is a chance Barkley is there at #4. Best case scenario for Cleveland.

I get the logic, but doubt they could keep both long-term if (and its a big if) both picks pan out. Best case scenario might be to swap 4 for 20 and 21.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Luxy312 said:

If Cleveland believes any of the QB's are head and shoulders above the others, they MUST take them with the #1 pick.  Kizer was a dumpster fire and the possibility of 2 QB's coming off the board between 1 and 4 is just too much. 

But if you had Rosen, Darnold and Allen rated close to each other -- which would be the Clevelandy thing to do -- you'd be satisfied taking Barkley #1 and whichever of the three is left at #4.

 

As for the cost of re-signing, they won't have to worry about that for 4 or 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, simool said:

 

Joe Thomas was the first one I heard mention it, but more along the lines of if he was drafting.

 

Then earlier this week a reporter from the orange and brown report filed a report from the senior bowl which said as much. https://scout.com/nfl/browns/Article/Browns-make-the-hiring-of-Todd-Haley-as-offensive-coordinator-Amos-Jones-as-special-teams-coordinator-and-Freddie-Kitchens-as-running-backs-coachassociate-head-coach-official-114145188

 

I have read it a couple of other places I will try to dig up and post back for you.

 

The discussion I heard was on FM 100.5 here and it was the Homer True show.

 

There's nothing in that article that says anything about NOT taking quarterback.  Hiring an OC, ST, and RB coach doesn't mean a thing in the context of the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

It's a deep RB class and they can get a good one in later rounds, but their top priority as a franchise is to secure a QB as stated by Haslam and Dorsey. 

True, you don't need to pick a RB first.  I'd also think about whether I need to replace Joe Thomas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ennjay said:

But if you had Rosen, Darnold and Allen rated close to each other -- which would be the Clevelandy thing to do -- you'd be satisfied taking Barkley #1 and whichever of the three is left at #4.

 

As for the cost of re-signing, they won't have to worry about that for 4 or 5 years.

 

I doubt they have three QB's ranked identical, but it would be typical Cleveland dumbassery to pass on a guy that becomes a franchise QB in order to draft the third best QB that turns out to be the next big flop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

I remember when my dad called us all into the living room.  The Bills had just won the AFC Championship in '92.  He said "I want a divorce."  I got 2 Christmases for a while.

Thank you! Not relevant, but funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ennjay said:

But if you had Rosen, Darnold and Allen rated close to each other -- which would be the Clevelandy thing to do --

 

How do you arrive at this conclusion?   Does Cleveland have a history of rating guys close to each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Luxy312 said:

 

There's nothing in that article that says anything about NOT taking quarterback.  Hiring an OC, ST, and RB coach doesn't mean a thing in the context of the draft.

 

Crap sorry man I pasted the wrong friggin link somehow. FFS

 

Here it is https://scout.com/nfl/browns/Article/Would-John-Dorsey-take-the-best-available-player-and-possibly-pass-up-the-quarterback-at-number-one-114144681

 


 

Quote

 

OBR insider Tony Pauline, who's at the Senior Bowl posted this in Rumor Central Wednesday.

"If the draft were held today the Browns would select Saquon Barkley with the first pick then see what fell to them at pick number four. They believe Barkley is a difference maker."

Dorsey was asked at the Senior Bowl if he would consider taking Josh Rosen with the first pick, even if he didn't want to come to the Browns.

"That's a hypothetical because I always take the best available player," Dorsey said. "If it was there and we as an organization felt comfortable that we were gonna select him, we'd select him.

"That's how that works."

 

 

Edited by simool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MURPHD6 said:

 

I get the logic, but doubt they could keep both long-term if (and its a big if) both picks pan out. Best case scenario might be to swap 4 for 20 and 21.

Winning cures everything. If Darnold and Barkley are successful, probably means Cleveland is in the playoffs. I can't think of two positions that can take over a game more than QB and RB.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewDayBills said:

Winning cures everything. If Darnold and Barkley are successful, probably means Cleveland is in the playoffs. I can't think of two positions that can take over a game more than QB and RB.

 

Yes sir.

Anyone thinking that the Buffalo Bills are in a position to trade with Cleveland for the 4th I think are fooling themselves.

Cleveland is not selling this year, they are buying.

They have too many top 65 picks already, they are not going to go out and look for more.

 

They may trade the 4th to Denver of NYJ but the farthest they would go down the board (for teams wanting a QB) would be Washington.

 

They have 7 picks in the top 100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Yes sir.

Anyone thinking that the Buffalo Bills are in a position to trade with Cleveland for the 4th I think are fooling themselves.

Cleveland is not selling this year, they are buying.

They have too many top 65 picks already, they are not going to go out and look for more.

 

They may trade the 4th to Denver of NYJ but the farthest they would go down the board (for teams wanting a QB) would be Washington.

 

They have 7 picks in the top 100.

Given that they have been moneyballing their rebuild, I wouldn't put it past them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, simool said:

 

It is pretty much common knowledge that they are going to take Barkley 1st.

A quick survey of the last twenty mock drafts on the Walterfootball database shows 4 of them have Saquon Barkley going to the Browns with the first pick.  Sixteen mocks have them picking a QB.  It is possible that Cleveland will pick Barkley, and that could be good for the Bills' QB hopes, and it might even be the right pick, but among media types and fans alike it most assuredly is not common knowledge that they are picking Barkley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TigerJ said:

A quick survey of the last twenty mock drafts on the Walterfootball database shows 4 of them have Saquon Barkley going to the Browns with the first pick.  Sixteen mocks have them picking a QB.  It is possible that Cleveland will pick Barkley, and that could be good for the Bills' QB hopes, and it might even be the right pick, but among media types and fans alike it most assuredly is not common knowledge that they are picking Barkley.

 

Mocks are just that, mocks.  Take the time to read the rest of the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, simool said:

 

Mocks are just that, mocks.  Take the time to read the rest of the thread.

Absolutely, but they still represent what their authors think will happen, and that disproves your original post, that everybody knows the Browns are going to pick Barkley.  Dorsey hasn't tipped his hand yet, and unless somebody has inside info, nobody's going to know for sure until he does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

Simple rules for NFL success:

 

1) Don't take franchise players because they will be expensive and want to leave.

 

2) Don't win games against the other conference because they don't help with playoff tiebreakers.

Hey, don't laugh, this is how Cleveland got to be in such a position of power in this draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barkley #1......will give Colts whatever it takes to switch places.....QB #3.....Browns can outbid anyone for the #3 slot and Indy would be idiots not to start a bidding war for #3, drive up the price then move down 1 spot and still get their guy plus addition picks

 

Image Barkley and either Rosen or Darnold to start the draft

jmo

Edited by Bob&Doug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nucci said:

Why would you be concerned about something so far in to the future? A lot will happen in 5 years...salary cap increases....

Because alot of teams with franchise QBs are cap poor and the NFL is trending that way. Look at Detroit, for example. Arguably, they would better of getting two solid 10-15 year starters at positions where the talent drop off is steeper than 1 pro bowl rb who might walk after his rookie confract is up, when starting  rbs can be had much later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, CardinalScotts said:

now find quality players who want to play there

They now have a solid front office. If they hit on the 1 and 4 picks it really wouldn't take much to change the culture. 

 

Put it like this, a guy like Le'von Bell. Wants to get paid and paid huge. If he were to reach the FA market they have the money and the chance to play the Steelers twice a year which would certainly appeal to Bell. He would sign. Or a guy like Jarvis Landry. Yea, he's a dirty player and I detest him. But the guy is a talent. And is looking to get paid.  He could easily sign with a team like Cleveland. 

 

Could include Cousins in on that. He's a guy that is looking for a huge payday. Could get that there if he reaches FA. Now, I'm certainly not saying the Brows would go after and sign all 3, but they have the funds to pay and pay big.

 

QB: Cousins

RB: Bell

WR 1: Landry

WR 2: Gordon/Coleman

 

Pretty enticing for other FAs to be a part of that. As I said, wouldn't take much and they have more than enough cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Come on man. No way they'll take two QBs with as much help as they need all over the roster. 

Not much different than taking a QB at #1 & then trading #4 for picks. Taking a QB also at #4 & trading him for picks would be mostly the same as trading the #4 pick.

But, why do that when you can just trade the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, billykay said:

Not much different than taking a QB at #1 & then trading #4 for picks. Taking a QB also at #4 & trading him for picks would be mostly the same as trading the #4 pick.

But, why do that when you can just trade the pick.

 

:mellow: It's completely different. 

 

They have already accumulated plenty of picks. It's time to acquire players to rebuild their roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

:mellow: It's completely different. 

 

They have already accumulated plenty of picks. It's time to acquire players to rebuild their roster.

I agree with you, 26. I was only commenting that taking 2 QBs and trading one isn't much different than taking one & trading the 2nd pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, billykay said:

I agree with you, 26. I was only commenting that taking 2 QBs and trading one isn't much different than taking one & trading the 2nd pick.

 

I don't believe they can afford to do that with the state of their franchise.  They have a lot of cap space in addition to premium picks that they need to hit on to make their team competitive as soon as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I don't believe they can afford to do that with the state of their franchise.  They have a lot of cap space in addition to premium picks that they need to hit on to make their team competitive as soon as possible. 

 

Also with Dorsey stepping in as GM, he might not trade out of those picks. He might want to start winning now and take a QB and BPA at 4.

 

He has not loyalty to Kizer or the previous regime. Hes basically walking into a buffet of draft picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FearLess Price said:

 

Also with Dorsey stepping in as GM, he might not trade out of those picks. He might want to start winning now and take a QB and BPA at 4.

 

He has not loyalty to Kizer or the previous regime. Hes basically walking into a buffet of draft picks.

 

That makes the most sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, billykay said:

I agree with you, 26. I was only commenting that taking 2 QBs and trading one isn't much different than taking one & trading the 2nd pick.

 

The big difference is that teams’ rookie caps are based on the actual slots they pick at.  Say the Browns picked Darnold or Rosen at 1, then Allen or Mayfield at 4 before trading him to a team picking much later in the first.  The Browns would have a much larger rookie pool than they needed (no real problem there), but the team trading up would have some real difficulties with that QB’s contract.  They couldn’t pay him like the 4th overall pick because of the rules for rookie pools and rookie contracts.  Thus it would be prohibitively difficult for a team to make a big trade for a player already drafted by a team.  The Browns only trading partners would be the team’s with the next 2 or 3 picks. 

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I don't believe they can afford to do that with the state of their franchise.  They have a lot of cap space in addition to premium picks that they need to hit on to make their team competitive as soon as possible. 

 

The Browns plan is to add a vet and take a QB at 1 unless they find a FQB in free agency.  I can’t imagine that they think Cousins is such a player, but you never know.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...