I decided that in an attempt to pass the time until the start of another Cleveland Browns Super Bowl campaign (AKA the 2012-2013 football season), I am going to change my name to Tom for a few minutes and assume the position of “General Manager” of the Cleveland Browns and let you in on my plan for the perfect offseason.
This will be lengthy. I’ll talk about what I think our needs are, what I think we should do in free agency, and what I think we should do in the draft. Feel free to skip whatever you want.
As I see it, here are positions of need for us:
Offense
QB: Yes. We all are aware that Colt McCoy is not looking like the guy in Cleveland. Furthermore, we have a backup QB that is approaching the twilight of his nothing-to-write-home-about career and does not want to mentor anyone. We need at least one QB, if not two.
RB: Let’s be real. Peyton Hillis is a big question mark; no one is sure whether we will bring him back or whether he wants to come back. But even if we assume he is coming back, there are still some holes. Montario Hardesty is essentially always a threat for injury. Chris Ogbannaya showed he can be a steady back. We have no idea what we have in Brandon Jackson. So we have one decent back, maybe two.
WR: Let’s talk about the elephant in the room. Well, we actually have talked about the elephant in the room. Biggest need- We need playmakers. Period.
OL: Starting RT and depth.
Defense
WLB: Scott Fujita is a phenomenal team leader, but he’s not the impact player we need at that position. He’s also not getting any younger.
DE: We basically have Sheard and Mitchell. It’s a nice start, but we need more talent at the position.
CB: This position is a strength on the team, but we could stand to replace Sheldon Brown. He’s getting older and it was starting to show last season.
DT: What? Defensive tackle is a need with Taylor and Rubin??? Why yes. When the guys behind the big guys are Brian Sanford and Scott Paxson.
Free Agency:
I think we can go into the draft with some holes filled through free agency. I don’t expect a huge free agency addition (no DeSean Jackson, no Matt Flynn, etc). But here are some guys I think we could potentially target:
Donovan McNabb (QB)- We aren’t finding a franchise QB in free agency. McNabb is not a starter and he will not get a starting role on any team in the NFL. But he’s a guy that spent almost his whole career in Philly, running an offense quite similar to Shurmur’s offense, and he could be a great mentor for whoever the starting QB will be next year.
BenJarvus Green-Ellis (RB)- He’s a guy that I think we should go after if Peyton Hillis walks. I don’t know a whole lot about him, but I know he scored me lots of TDs in fantasy football. I think he’s a tough runner and a year ago he rushed for over 1,000 yards. He also had 9 receptions for 159 yards this year.
Le’Ron McClain (FB)- Maybe it’s just me, but if McClain can be half of what he was with the Ravens, I would love to see him instead of Owen Marecic.
Dwayne Bowe (WR)- Should KC let him walk, I think this is a guy we need to go after. He’s a big dude and he can be our #1 WR, plain and simple.
Robert Meachem (WR)- Marques Colston was tempting in this spot, but in the end I think NO is going to re-sign him. Meachem becomes replaceable in a stacked Saints offense. He can be a legit deep threat, and we need that.
Carl Nicks (G)- A little birdie tells me that the Saints gave their other guard (Jahari Evans) a fairly lucrative deal recently, so signing their other guard will be a tough sell given that he will command lots of $$ (Birdie: http://www.footballsfuture.com/2012/fa/ol.html). It would look really nice to have Nicks starting in place of Lauvao.
Mario Williams (LB)- I don’t think that any Browns fan would rather see Scott Fujita instead of Mario Williams at LB. My head tells me the Texans will try to keep him around, but my heart tells me I want to see him in orange and brown next year.
Brandon Meriweather (FS)- This guy went to the Pro Bowl in 2009 and 2010 with NE, but kinda fell off the boat this year in terms of production when we went to Chicago. I don’t see anyone that really jumps off the page at me at safety, so I think we should take a flier on him. If he returns to Pro Bowl form, great! If he doesn’t, at least there’s someone to compete with Mike Adams and Usama Young.
Draft:
And now, the moment you’re all waiting for. I know you’ve all been thinking “OMG when is shep615 going to post a mock draft? I’M DYING HERE!!!1!1!!!one” Well, wait no longer.
Round 1, Pick #4: I really wanted to turn this pick into 4 picks by trading down, honestly. But I couldn’t really justify it. And it’s for the same reason that we will easily outbid Washington to slip into the #2 pick. I looked at the playmakers on offense and I saw 3 that make any sense for us to take anywhere in the top 15: RGIII, Justin Blackmon, and Trent Richardson. I don’t want Trent Richardson because in the end I think we will be looking good at RB, and I would feel the wrath of B19K and many others if I picked a RB in the first round. I don’t want Justin Blackmon because I already filled the #1 WR need in free agency, and in the end I don’t think he necessarily fits what we need. So the only choice I had was… TRADE #4, #22, and Round 3 Pick 4 to St. Louis for
Round 1, Pick #2: Robert Griffin III (QB- Baylor)- I don’t think I need to say much here. I’m a believer in RGIII. We outbid Washington with two first round picks. Blackmon is the guy for St. Louis, and I think the Rams are in the same boat as us in that they need playmakers for Sam Bradford. Richardson makes no sense, and Blackmon would be gone if they traded with Washington. We win out. We have to give up the other first round pick to outbid Washington while only giving up 3 picks, but it’s a small price to pay for RGIII.
Round 2, Pick #5: Whitney Mercilus (DE- Illinois)- I hope he falls to us in round 2. He looks like a pass rushing beast, and think about it: If you’re an opposing quarterback, you’re either going to have a dude named Sheard in your face or a dude named Mercilus. Sheard sounds like you’re going to get sawed in half, and I’m not sure exactly what Mercilus sounds like. But with a name like that, you know it’s not going to be pretty.
Round 4, Pick #5: Josh Kaddu (OLB- Oregon)- What I’ve read about him is that he has the athleticism and the build to be a LB in the NFL. He’s got good speed and burst. The knock on him is that he’s raw. His technique could use some work. Good thing Fujita is around to show him the ropes.
Round 4, Pick #23: Dan Herron (RB- OSU)- Eh, why not? Could compete for #2/#3 spot behind whoever starts at RB next year.
Round 5, Pick #4: DaJohn Harris (DT- USC)- He’s 6’3” 308 lb. Could provide some nice depth behind Rubin and Taylor.
Round 6, Pick #5: Tony Bergstrom (T- Utah)- Depth on the O-Line. He’s big (6’6” 315 lb.) and he has a beard. Enough said.
Round 7, Pick #4: Derek Dennis (G- Temple)- It’s late and I want to be done so I just picked someone.
So there you have it. What do you think?
This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.
0 recs | 394 comments
…then you’d also be Mooncamping.
Dawg Nuts - February 2, 2012
What if Tom Heckert is Mooncamping? He DID trade for a FB (Peyton Hillis) and had him play HB. So we have two fullbacks on the field. I mean, the all fullback team will work but we gotta ease the fans into it (Le’Ron McClain, anyone?)
shep615 - February 3, 2012
I’d suggest to you, Tom: We keep Hillis and move him to FB. Another pair of reliable hands in our WCO.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
This is never going to happen. Peyton Hillis wants tailback money, and he deserves it. At this point if I were Peyton Hillis I would stop talking to any team that wanted to make me a fullback.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
We’ve already seen that having a good FB isn’t a priority for Shurmur. Why would he put one of our best playmakers at a position that he doesn’t view as all that important?
Legoman0721 - February 5, 2012 via Android app
I have no problem with the trade up. I’m in the “get our potential franchise QB while we have plenty of ammunition” camp.
Dawg Nuts - February 2, 2012
I wouldn’t give up 2 1st round picks for RGIII. Take who you want at 4 or trade down, and get some picks. They need to fill some holes.
lpcustom69 - February 14, 2012
Both firsts this year and a second next year would be completely painless.
HenryDawg - February 14, 2012
If the Browns think he’s good enough for 4 and aren’t willing to get him at 2, I don’t want them running this team anymore.
nickjs21 - February 16, 2012
Actually Fujita IS getting older.
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012 via Android app
I see what I did there. Haha
shep615 - February 3, 2012
NE would be foolish to let The Law Firm go.
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012 via Android app
I disagree. They have Woodhead and Ridley- I think they are quite capable of replacing The Law Firm. Also, my guess is he is looking for feature back money. In that case, I think NE would be foolish to sign him for what he wants so he can be one of three running backs that see significant time.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
BJGE has reliability. If I heard right, he has yet to fumble in the NFL
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012 via Android app
Well, can this Le’Ron McClain catch out of the backfield? Huh? HUH?!
Adrock2099 - February 3, 2012
All seriousness though, this would be a pretty darn near immaculate off season for me. It’ll never happen, especially all of those free agency signings, but as an exercise in what you’d want to see I like it.
Adrock2099 - February 3, 2012
It is a little bit unrealistic to expect all this to happen. But you know what stinks? Even with how unrealistic it is, I was reflecting as I was falling asleep last night and realized I didn’t even fill all our needs. Suck.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
You’re Fired! lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
bring back the SAVAGE!!!!!!
findlaybrownslover - February 4, 2012
um excuse me but fullbacks take at least 6 years to fully develop, everyone knows that
troy145 - February 4, 2012
We will have to spend in free agency this year with the new salary floor we will have no choice. I have been looking for this year numbers but can not seem to find it anywhere. If we are still 30+ mil under I expect to see 6 to 9 mid range fa’s in camp. So your list looks doable to me even though I am against bringing in McNabb. I would much rather invest in a good QB coach (our new OC may just do it) then a mentor.
GrillGuy - February 3, 2012
I don’t think that’s the case- I think the 90% rule or whatever doesn’t start until next season. Also, we just hired a new OC (Brad Chilldress), and we have a pretty decent QB coach (Gil Haskel, from what I’ve heard).
shep615 - February 3, 2012
Right, that rule doesn’t start until 2013. I would still like them to get practice trying to use more of the salary cap this season but it’s unlikely to happen. Nearly all the FA’s you have listed are just a dream. The only one they are likely able to because he would be desperate would be McNabb. And if H&H do sign McNabb, I will be super angry. We do not need him or McClain.
Aussie Brown - February 3, 2012
I thought our QB coach was Mark Whipple.
BornAKardiacKid - February 4, 2012 via Android app
You’re correct. Haskel is just an adviser I think.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
I dont think we’re quite that far off. Seems your number of $30+mil is from before the contract extensions given out in the pre-season.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Why McNabb when we have Wallace as backup? Why not give Marecic more time? Consensus is he is coming along fine? If your going to give up 2 first round picks why not go all out and give up 3 of them for a a guy (Luck) that many say is the best to come out since Payton Manning. All of you people on the RG3 waqon need to think about does this kid have the mental capabilities it takes to run an offense. Sure he is bright, but some of the smartest people need time to process things before giving an answer. RG3 didnt even have to make reads, he just used his god given talent to get him through and was a product of a pass happy system. He wont be able to do that in the NFL.
27BUCKEYE27 - February 3, 2012
Are you aware people said the same thing about Cam Newton (he couldn’t make NFL reads)?
Did you read what I wrote about McNabb and our needs at QB?
Have you heard an interview with RGIII? He doesn’t strike me as the type that needs processing time. The dude has a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree. He’s entering the draft as a junior. He’s the synthesis of a track star and a football star. He is an army brat. Why are you NOT on the RG3 bandwagon?
In conclusion, you must be smoking some bad “buckeye leaves” if you think the Colts are going to give up Andrew Luck. The only way Andrew Luck could be a Brown is if the Colts pick RG3, which is not going to happen.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
Shep you crack me up. You basically tell us how RG3 is the best thing since eatible underwear and in the same sentence tell us that there is no way Indy will take him. I just cant understand that if he is as great as you make him out to be why he is not rated ahead of Luck. Coming from a military family has absolutely no effect on a QB being able to read a defense or throw into tight coverage. RG3 was also helped by having a great receiving corp and one of the top receivers in colleDont get me wrong i like RG3 and will be happy if the Browns can get him at 4., but I just like Luck more mainly because of health concerns. RG3 just seems too fragile. Missing almost an entire year with knee injury just concerns me. Luck is like Tebow, but he can throw. Your opinion is more of a reality because the odds of Indy giving up Luck is slim to none anyway.
27BUCKEYE27 - February 3, 2012
I think most of us would take Luck over RG3 too, its just that I don’t think its realistic. It could happen but the more likely and realistic choice is Griffin.
HenryDawg - February 3, 2012
your comparison of RG3 to edible underwear cracks me up
bross09 - February 3, 2012
First off, edible underwear… Why would you want to eat underwear? I mean, whatever floats your boat man ;)
I like Luck more than RGIII. The way I see it, RGIII is a franchise quarterback. Andrew Luck seems like a HOF quarterback in the making (if he truly is the next Peyton Manning). The problem is I think Indy likes Luck too, so I didn’t mention Luck at all because I don’t see him being an option for anyone but the Colts.
So in your terms, RGIII is the best thing since edible underwear, but Luck is the best thing since… I don’t know, something better than edible underwear. But no one will eat our underwear if they can get something better. So I think we’re stuck with eating our underwear (which since edible underwear is apparently awesome, that’s probably OK)
shep615 - February 3, 2012
Why ask why? Just eat at the Y! If you have to ask, just dont. LOL
Luck is the best thing since…sliced bread?
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Sliced bread is highly overrated. I don’t want The Man dictating the thickness of my toast.
Dawg Nuts - February 4, 2012
The military family comment is meant to show that he has good character. As far as missing a season with a knee injury, that happened three seasons ago and he has been fine since then.
Griffin’s receivers, while good, were not great. Griffin made them look great.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
The knee injury doesn’t bother me. Knee injuries happen. We aren’t talking about a guy who is constantly beat up.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
to Montario Hardesty.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 6, 2012
Believe me that coming from a Military family doesn’t mean squat. Families in the Military are just as disfunctional as civilian families. That is like saying a preacher’s daughter is squeaky clean. We all know the joke on that one now don’t we? Everyone is assuming RG3 has good character, but does everyone here know him personnally? Now with that being said, I am not judging or stating he is a bad apple and for all I know he is a great guy with high character. I’m just getting tired of people stating he has good character when in reality they don’t know. H&H will let us know what they think about RG3’s character in the 2012 draft.
dirtyjoe - February 9, 2012
Has he shown anything besides high character? Is it normally you’re default assessment of people to assume they have low character? He definitely has confidence and he can pull it off because he backs it up. Some people confuse that with arrogance. If you can back it up its not arrogant.
HenryDawg - February 9, 2012
I stated that people using the “he came from a Military Family” means he is of high character is a bunch of BS. Nothing more…..Nothing less.
dirtyjoe - February 10, 2012
Fair enough, but every time I see him he seems to have good character and has done nothing to suggest that he doesn’t. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until they act like Steelers.
HenryDawg - February 10, 2012
I agree with that actually. The guy seems like he has high character, and that means he likely has good parents, but the military involvement doesn’t really point to anything.
notthatnoise - February 11, 2012
This. Hitler had military involvement…
Dawg Nuts - February 11, 2012
I wouldn’t if he was a low character person but he’s not and its pretty clear that his parents were a good influence on him. They’re at all his games and he has shown that he has a lot of respect for what they have done. The analogy to preacher’s daughter is usually a girl who is rebelling against a strict upbringing. I don’t see this quality in Griffin at all.
HenryDawg - February 12, 2012
The second part of the question answers the first, and Shep did expand on that by explaining that Wallace doesn’t want to be a mentor. I honestly don’t recall if that last part is based on an actual quote from Wallace or a PD-ism, but if the former we should just replace him. He adds no value.
JustBob - February 3, 2012
If I remember right, he said that in an interview on 923thefan.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
I’m with you on this. It can’t be that much more expensive to trade up to #1 for Luck. I haven’t given up on Colt just yet. But, if I had and was willing to give a lot to replace him, I want the QB that is ‘more of’ a sure thing.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
It will be much more expensive to move up to #1. The team picking there has a need at QB and the guy available is a higher rated prospect.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
Don’t be so sure. The NFL is in the entertainment business. I’ve seen enough off-season NFL drama to when I see it. Peyton didn’t fill his tv-time quota during the regular season so he’s making up for it now. LOL
There is no way for us to know, til Manning is cut, whether he will be or not. So, lets only hypothesize on RG3 until Irsay pays/renegotiates with Manning? Then, RG3 will be virtually forgotten and Luck will be the main topic. LOL
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Even if Peyton is back with the Colts next year they still have a need at QB. They clearly have no backup plan for after he retires and they will never again be in position to draft a QB of this caliber.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
exactly
bross09 - February 5, 2012
Damn, dude. Lets just put Luck in the HOF right now! lol not.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
You crack yourself up a lot.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012
It’s a constant.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Then there’s no reason to keep telling us, we’ll add it to the equation on a permanent basis.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
You swear, you wont think I’m being condesending? That’s the way that comment reads to me, without the lol.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I think it reads much more condescendingly with the lol than without it.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
That’s understandable. It is I, trying not to be mistaken. I’ll take that into consideration, going forward. Thanks.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I’m pretty much in the default mode that most people are speaking light heartedly except when its clear they are not. If you’re so LOL all the time you would think you would project that onto other commenters as well, yet you don’t, you read everyone else as condescending and hostile. Very interesting…my fake inner psychologist recommends self help books and lots of them.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
Good thing he’s fake then, because I can’t afford any books.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Just fake books.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
No need to buy fake self help books, I have you guys to point out all my flaws for me. I’m confident I can solve the problems I apparently have. Just need your help realizing them. L
I have no interest in reading books to ‘help discover’ negative personality issues. People that read them tend to be hypochondriacs and only end up with new issues. (No anxieties here.) I would however, turn to a specific book if I felt I needed help with a specific ‘problem’. I can’t afford the psychologist to point them out to me or I’d probably been seeing one for, the last 20 years.
In fact, I used to think it ‘was me’, but I find it strange that I have no problems making friends outside of Ohio and Pa. I want to like those peeps, all the same. They’re just less friendly and therefore, less likeable. I guess you have to be one, to be understood by one.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I was really excited until I got to the ‘k’ in books…
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
lol
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
lol
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
lol
Adrock2099 - February 6, 2012
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
heh
Brownie's Year - February 7, 2012
Good stuff. LO.. oops. I almost did it again.
DawgsNHawgs - February 7, 2012
Interesting. I feel the need to appear less condescending and hostile because I project others as being such? You may be onto something there. I’d like to think you’re wrong. But, idk, it is possible.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
This has nothing to do with Andrew Luck. If Peyton comes back the Colts will never be bad enough again to pick this high, so they will never have a shot at a top QB prospect, whoever that would be.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Expense has nothing to do with it. Of course we would all trade up for Luck, it’s just not possible. That’s why it is usually not mentioned in any mock drafts.
RyanBr - February 5, 2012
Just one thing to add, because overall I like it. Mario Williams would play DE for us.
notthatnoise - February 3, 2012
Thanks- I’ve always been a little hazy as to how the transition from 3-4 LB to 4-3 works.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
He was always a 4-3 DE to begin with. USUALLY, a 4-3 DE is a 3-4 OLB who rushes the passer.
SpecialBrownie - February 3, 2012
He started out as a 4-3 DE and was one of the best in the league at that. This year they switched to a 3-4 and I don’t think he played much due to injury. My guess is he would be a pretty good linebacker, but he’s an all-world DE, and he’ll want to be paid like it.
notthatnoise - February 3, 2012
REC
J. W. - February 3, 2012
I like it and I think Tony Bergstrom could be a really good RT, but I’m not sure if he’ll be there in the 5th but if he was, I would question why and would like to be more pro-active in getting a less risky RT. I know you can get away with less talented player there, but you still need to have a solid pass blocking, run blocking RT otherwise you’re screwed, we should not undervalue the importance of RT just because we aren’t using the 4th overal pick on it.
I like Sanford and Paxson as our backup DTs. Remember them smashing Ben? That alone should earn them roster spots next year.
If Benard can overcome the mental anguish and depression brought on by the unforgivable and reprehensible firing of Eric Mangini, he’ll be another good pass rusher. Mario Williams would play LDE
HenryDawg - February 3, 2012
I toyed with the idea of going with a tackle in the 2nd round, but I decided against it and here’s why: I think Jason Pinkston did a pretty good job at LG last season, and his original position is LT. I think with Steinbach coming back from injury and Carl Nicks coming in via free agency, I think we can move Pinkston to RT.
I know Sanford and Paxson did a number on Doucheberger, but I’d like to have a DT that can do that to every team. I think it would be nice if we had someone that could give a breather to one of the big guys that doesn’t make the opposing o-line feel like they can breathe a sigh of relief. I see Paxson and Sanford more as guys that teams can afford to have one lineman block and maybe they’ll get through to the QB every now and then. I’d like a guy that when he’s in the lineup, he will beat the one-on-one matchups on a semi-regular basis.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
There’s a reason Pinkston wasn’t already at RT. He’s too small.
SpecialBrownie - February 3, 2012
and too slow.
-bobby- - February 3, 2012
I think I recall reading when we signed him that he was projected to play RG because he wasn’t considered fast enough to play tackle. Then with the Steinie injury he was moved to LG.
JustBob - February 3, 2012
I guess that’s what I’m saying about RT – you think Pinkston could play RT, but do we know it? If he could I would think they would have started him there last year over Cousins and put Greco at Gaurd. I think we should go with more of a sure thing, either FA (I don’t think there are too many good FA OTs) or draft (should be quite a few good RTs)
HenryDawg - February 3, 2012
So, you’re not hopeful that we’ll be able to come up with a good FA RT?
JustBob - February 3, 2012
I’m sure Heckert will sniff out a couple of FA RTs before the draft.
HenryDawg - February 3, 2012
LMAO.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Someone recently pointed out to me that, most teams lines are formed with the best at LT, 2nd best at LG and so on and so on. I don’t entirely agree with that. But, if there is any validity to it, they must be pretty high on Pinkston. I mean they put him in Steinys spot and only JT and/or Macks shoes, would’ve been tougher to fill. It’s my belief that they drafted Pinkston, an LT from Pitt, because they consider him to be versatile enough to play where ever he may be needed. If we could get one of the 2 top ‘natural’ interior lineman, I think we would be pleasantly surprised with Pinkston at the RT. And overwhelmingly, in awe of the o-line unit, as a whole, for a long time to come.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Heckert was clear after last year’s draft that Pinkston will be a guard. They don’t think he’s athletic enough to play tackle. I know this because I thought he would play tackle for us and got corrected.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
I don’t remember this. Did Heckert say that before or after Steiny went down?
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Before, but Steinbach getting injured doesn’t make Pinkston more athletic. If they let an injury change their opinion of another guy then I want them fired.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
Heckert said in the season ending presser that neither Pinkston, Lauvao, or Steiny will switch to Tackle. If Steiny can play, Pink and Lauvao will fight for the RG spot.
Brownie's Year - February 5, 2012
LOL Pinkstons athleticism wasn’t the basis for me asking. But that’s funny that you thought it might.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I don’t think you got my point. If they didn’t think he could play tackle before, Steinbach getting injured wasn’t going to change that evaluation.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
The front office stated when they drafted him that they want to put him at guard, so I don’t see the move as likely.
notthatnoise - February 3, 2012
FREE AWESOME BELT BUCKLES FOR EVERYONE!
pwndabear - February 3, 2012
I’d buy my very own buffet so I’d never have to wait in line AGAIN!
Adrock2099 - February 3, 2012
His name is pronounced merciless — as in a lack of mercy. I think the only name that could possibly be better for a DE is “CueBeeSacker”
Nat - February 3, 2012
Right- I knew that’s how his name is pronounced. I was more just pointing out that as intimidating as “Mercilus” sounds, it’s not so clear how said lack of mercy would manifest itself. Like… Is this guy going to take off my head? Is he going to knock me into next week? Is he going to reach into my inner being and steal my soul?
My answer to this question (if he becomes a Brown): Yes.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
If we end up with him, I’d hope QBs would be thinking: All of the above.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
These don’t exactly mesh.
Also, “I don’t know a whole lot about him, but I know he scored me lots of TDs in fantasy football” isn’t the BEST method of analysis.
nickjs21 - February 3, 2012
Ha, touche. I know a little bit more about him than that, but the point is he scores a lot of TDs, which is nice to have.
And when I said a huge free agency addition, I meant a big star like DeSean Jackson or someone similar.
shep615 - February 3, 2012
When talented FA are available and we don’t even consider them, it makes you wonder if your team isn’t “all in” to become a winner. If you can get DeSean and/or Bowe. Trading up will be a smaller risk, because you don’t need the to use the pick for an unproven college WR.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
I doubt they’re not considering them, I’m sure they are. Keep in mind FAs may be just saying no to Cleveland and H&H aren’t going to make that public. The other factor of course is that if the guys so great, why isn’t their own team trying to sign them? DeSean would be a good pick up but I heard Philly was going to franchise him
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
Agree with this and it’s a shame because a couple of really good free agents would do wonders for the team. Getting players into Cleveland who say it’s a good place to play would encourage more good FA’s to sign in the future. If the signings even get us 2 extra wins a year it can also feed into a winning culture where players want to play. As of now, I don’t think we have that.
To get good players to come here H&H must pay extra money, above market value. This is something they appear unwilling to do. Most of you will say that’s a good thing. I’m not so sure.
Aussie Brown - February 5, 2012
Good point. There is nothing to gain but a lot to lose by making that information public. Why make it known to other potential candidates that others don’t want to go to Cleveland?
Isn’t DeSean the one that ‘held out’ for several weeks into the season? He’s a bad apple. Not a team player. Philly should let him go and let somebody else deal with him.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Exactly. Because all of the perennially good teams in the league were built on free agency. I mean the Pats, Giants, Steelers, Packers, etc., are all about building through free agency.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 4, 2012
Those teams haven’t ‘built’ in years. They just ‘plug-n-play’ thru the draft and free agency. Their past success’ attract the top FAs and they’re all very good at drafting. The Browns won’t attract top FA talent until they start winning.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
None of those teams sign top free agents.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
I can think of a total of 1 top free agent those teams have signed in the past half decade.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
If this is true, why are you putting this comment on me? Why not TDSH? LOL
My comment isn’t as far apart from this as his.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I think TDSH was being sarcastic.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
I think it’s pretty clear.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
TDSH was being sarcastic. I don’t think you were.
Also, are you really laughing out loud every time you comment? If so, you might want to see a doctor. We aren’t that funny.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
No. I don’t laugh out loud, most of the time, but I’m laughing on the inside, ‘as often as possible’. It’s hard to be in a bad mood, when laughing. I should see a Doctor for that? Maybe it would also explain why, “I smile too much”. Yes, I’ve been told that before, as well. I use the ‘lol’ as a chuckle in an attempt to show that I’m not being overly serious or confrontational. LOL is an actual out loud laugh.
There’s nothing wrong with me. It’s everyone else that has a problem. lol (kidding). I apologize, if my lol-ing aggravates/annoys you, but that’s me. I don’t know any other way. I’d go insane if I had to be more serious, more often.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
so it’s not a lowercase l, it’s just a capital I
bross09 - February 6, 2012
L? I’ll try this.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Maybe it’s you that should “see a doctor” if ‘happy people’ annoy you. lol (That’s a joke. Not an attempt at an insult).
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I think its the overuse of a juvenile phrase by an adult that’s annoying. It would be like having to tell people you just told a joke. If you have to explain it, its not funny.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
and don’t get me wrong, I lol too and say it, but not every post.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
I heard my wife’s 16 year old sister say “O-M-G” yesterday. Felt like slamming my head against a wall.
Dawg Nuts - February 6, 2012
At least she actually is a 16 yr old girl.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
I try to avoid lol on DBN but it may slip out.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
If anyone needed to lol more, you’d be in the lead. L
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Listen, I don’t think the problem was the formatting of lowercase l, lowercase o, lowercase l. It’s that the sentiment is not needed and makes your posts sound pretty juvenile. “L” doesn’t change that. Just try on nothing for a while, and see if you don’t get used to it.
nickjs21 - February 6, 2012
I laugh a lot, I just don’t type it when I do.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
Sorry for that. I don’t ‘chat’ with any juveniles. So, I was unaware of any similarities. In fact, I don’t ‘chat’ with anyone, other than, the ‘grumps’ on DBN. L (is that better?)
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
This is it exactly. If you’re in a good mood all the time I’m legitimately happy for you, that’s great. But you can be in a good mood without acting like a 12 year-old.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Again, I apologize. I was more aware of the fact that, for most, relaying ones mood through text is much more difficult than through speech. Hence, my ‘feeling’ the need to be more obvious about my feelings behind my comments, while not wanting to seem as if I’m merely stating the obvious. Does that make sense? I’m not sure it does. L
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Yes it makes sense, but now that you’ve been told that you don’t need to say it, and that people understand you’re speaking in a jovial manner, continuing to say it makes you look like a jerk.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
What? I’m laughing at myself, above. “I’m not sure” I made sense there. That’s funny, to me. This makes me a jerk? If it does, then we are definitely making progress here, today. Because I had no idea.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
The point is adding something like L or lol to something that’s supposed to be funny instantly makes it not funny.
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
When evaluating colt or any qb i ask one question. Can colt take and his arm take us to a super bowl? I think everyone knows the answer to that one. I like colt but an upgrade is needed if we can land any premium free agent wr it would do wonders even if it was desean jackson. Rg lll at 4 and then top tackle available at 22 with a deep class. Decent amount of de available also Whitney will not be there at 22. I think taking a flyer on le micheal James with a 3 or 4 would be worth it if we can get a sproles type player to change speeds with hillis and Jackson. Get some depth at LB from free agency this is the weakest draft for that group in years.
nomorewhodey - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Let’s just win the division a few times first. Shall we? lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Why? You were around in the 80s – how fun was it making it deep into the playoffs? Sure more fun than now, but we need to be thinking championships, not just playoffs.
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
Playoffs?!
Adrock2099 - February 4, 2012
I was just an emotional young lad, back then. Those playoff losses felt quite similar to getting dumped by a pretty girl. Now that I’m older, I’d rather get dumped by a an attactive woman than marry an ugly one. Regardless of how much she puts out. lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Acquiring some winners might help there, but you can’t get to the SB if you can’t even go 8-8. We don’t have impact players on our team and most Browns fans want to trade out of getting one.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
I changed my stance last night. I wanted to trade the #4 if Blackmon is gone. Now I’m on board with RG3@#4. Only if Blackmon is gone though. I still don’t like the trade up.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
And ONLY if we get McNabb as well. RG3 won’t be much competition for McCoy, at least not immediately. Donovan will be. McNabb could also show both of them ’exactly how to execute Shurmurs playbook
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
No on McNabb. He’s been on 3 teams in 3 years for a reason.
Brownie's Year - February 5, 2012
I want him for reasons other than playing. He’ll be fine as a mentor/cheap backup.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Also, if we can get RG3, I can see Donovan McNabb being able to offer some insight on how to be an effective mobile QB.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
Both Shurmur and Childress already coached McNabb. I’m sure they can handle it just fine.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
True this. Shurmur and Childress know what they’d be getting in McNabb. Makes sense to me that they would bring McNabb in to ‘show’ their other, younger QBs what they want to see.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
McNabb has never been very open to “mentoring” younger players.
I want nothing to do with him.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
That’s because his ego wouldn’t let him. He’s older and wiser now. Earning a paycheck as a mentor is better than not earning one at all. He likes Shurmur and Childress. He’d do a good job.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I don’t see why you would think that.
He was a locker room cancer here in Minny last season. So bad they cut him midseason.
No one in the NFL wants him. He has a bad work ethic and doesn’t like playing second fiddle to anyone. He is the polar opposite of what we need here.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
Elite talents to not make good coaches/mentors. Favre was never a good mentor to Rodgers, mcnabb wasn’t a mentor last year.
Why do you expect any of these elite talents to turn around and change their whole mentality that has been ingrained in them for the last 15 years?
bross09 - February 5, 2012
You know he’s one, you’re assuming the other.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012
How do you know that?
Seneca Wallace begs to differ.notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
McNabb wants to be here, too (he was practically begging the Browns to sign him in an interview where he said he approved of Shurmur and Heckert and Chilly and thought they would make a great coaching staff and he would love to play under them). I’m not sure Wallace does want to be here anymore.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
He can do the same for McCoy. Have we forgotten, Colts got wheels, too.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Colt’s wheels start rolling way too soon.
Dawg Nuts - February 6, 2012
Colt is mobile for an NFL quarterback, but he is not in the same league as Griffin.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
we already have a QB coach that knows the WCO.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
You ever hear the expression, “those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.” Donovan ‘could’ before. Now, he can ‘teach’. QB coaches can’t execute in practice. McNabb can. Obviously, QB coaches can’t be back-ups either. lol
I’m all for replacing Wallace with McNabb. Even more so, if we end up with RG3.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
…And those who can’t teach, teach gym.
If this was the case, shouldn’t the best players that ‘could’ in sports be the best at teaching? It doesn’t work out that way though.
The guys with elite talent don’t tend to be great coaches. Things cam easier to them than guys without elite skills. Delhomme was not an elite talent, mcnabb had that throughout his career.
The best coaches and teachers in any sport are the guys who as players didn’t have the elite talent but worked extremely hard and often had great fundamentals.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
It doesn’t work this way because, while those who ‘could’ were to busy ‘doing’, those who can’t, were gaining experience at ‘teaching’.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Then why don’t the ones that ‘could’ end up being good coaches after their careers? A lot of elite players just don’t do it because they know that they don’t want to teach. But those who do decide to do it (like Bob Cousy) generally don’t become good coaches.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
That saying is a dumb cliche, there are plenty of talented people who choose to teach or become professors instead of working in the corporate world.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Exactly. It’s pretty insulting to teachers. Some people just prefer it.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
It’s really insulting.
SpecialBrownie - February 6, 2012
not the most insulting thing I’ve heard about teachers this week either…
bross09 - February 6, 2012
If you want a coach hire a coach. Roster spots are too valuable.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
you would take Blackmon over RG3?
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
This is not news. LOL Big Damn Hell, Yeahs ! AJ Green had more to do with the Bengals’ success than A.Dalton. Blackmon is the closest thing out there to AJ. One has length to reach over defenders. The other uses his size to get seperation. They both can elevate and catch ‘everything’.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I guess if you think McCoy can be a good QB that’s a good argument.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
The jury is still out on McCoy. We’ll know better, soon enough.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Oh great another year of learning
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
It’ll be at least another year of learning for RG3 as well.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
I almost did that.
Brownie's Year - February 5, 2012
This isn’t that crazy, there are quite a few who want this.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
I vote that it is crazy. A lot of people do crazy things.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 6, 2012
I disagree. For a little while, I was on the Blackmon bandwagon. The dude is a monster. I do really want RG3 though.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
If we get Flynn or if they think Colt can get better I’m all for Blackmon but Colt is a giant question mark right now.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
agreed.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
It’s crazy. That would be the classic cart before the horse.
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
bross09 - February 6, 2012
Right on Lame Pun Coon, don’t let Bad Joke Eel take your shtick.
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
Thats better than getting dumped by an ugly woman, that you married. I have felt ass sore over the losses in the late 80’s playoffs. I hate Baltimore more than I hate my ex wife (BTW, she wasn’t bad looking-just a beyatch).
J. W. - February 5, 2012
LMAO
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Wow… I am willing to go on record and say that 0 of these FAs will be on the browns. Lets go in order:
McNabb- Was cut from Washington and Minnesota. Is a cancer to the team, not willing to learn the playbook or act as a mentor. Why would you want him here?
The Lawfirm- I could see this, but I think NE tries to keep him and Hillis will be back in cleveland making it unnecessary to sign a RB.
McClain- not gonna happen. We had a good FB here and the FO didnt want to spend 1.5 mil a year to keep him. Marecic is the FB for the next few years.
Bowe- Not a big time FA signing? this dude is a monster that has been marred by ineffective QB play. KC keeps him no doubt about it.
Meachem- I dont think hes that different then what we have. He is not a clear cut one in any generic offense. Hes a good product of having a great QB, something we need to find.
Nicks- We dont need to go get a big time FA OG. Steinbach is back (hopefully) and if not Greco or new draftee will be here. It would be much more likely if this was a RT.
Mario WIlliams- would look great; but theres no way in hell Houston will let him walk away. Hes worth the franchise tag.
Brandon Meriweather- His pro-bowl years seem to be a function of a Belicheck defense. He hasn’t been good and was passed over by UDFA’s, some of whom were WRs to play S. I wouldn’t waste the money on him, a draft pick will work fine.
-bobby- - February 3, 2012
I disagree that Bowe will remain in KC. I don’t think he survives the coaching change. Plus they are going to stay with Cassel most likely, which might deter Bowe from even wanting to stay there.
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012
If we can snag Bowe before the draft, I’d entertain any pkg to get the #2 that possibly leaves our #22 intact for Mercilus.
WYBHaden? - February 3, 2012
I don’t think any deal for #2 will leave the #22 intact.
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012
Then its NOT WORTH IT!! There is supposdly only 1 QB worth the trade up. If no LUCK, no trade up………
J. W. - February 3, 2012
I’ll second that.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
“There is supposedly only 1 QB worth the trade up.”
Umm… I think your “supposedly” includes you and maybe a few other fans- I think the majority of people whose jobs are actually evaluating football talent think that RG3 is worth the trade up.
shep615 - February 4, 2012
I like to think that my opinions are mostly inline with the majority of the pro-evaluators, also. But when the field is narrowed, to only the ones making the final decisions, it becomes exponentially more difficult. Actual drafts compared to most Mock Drafts proves this. IMO, most Mocks end up more than a little off-the-mark.
I’m sure everyone that has evaluated RG3 was/is ‘highly impressed’ with him. But I’d guess the majority don’t warrant an ‘expensive’ trade up. For one, some have no interest. Secondly, the further back that team is currently in the draft, the more expensive the move becomes. There is a such a thing as “paying too much”. We see it all the time in the NFL. Unfortunately for us, this used to be a reoccuring thing in Cleveland. Fortunately for me, at least, these days are behind us. But then again, maybe they’re not.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
Maybe the exact order is a little off the mark, but the players aren’t. You may have one or two surprise risers or fallers, but for the most part the draft usually goes pretty close to the mocks, at least in terms of talent level.
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
I agree. It’s easier to recognize talent than it is to recognize where said talent fits best.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Not for what is being thrown out there as compensation for trading up. If you are willing to go all in on RGIII, Then what the F, go all in and get the BEST choice, not Second best.
J. W. - February 5, 2012
Again, most everyone would go all in to get Luck. But, he is simply not available, so it’s not even worth mentioning.
RyanBr - February 5, 2012
Has Manning been cut? No. #1 is still available until he is.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Who says? ESPN? Tell me why a QB with a cannon arm and accuracy to match, smart and has the ability of Vick to evade and run(and not take sacks), is not a good choice for a team that has NEVER had that.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
I’ve heard somewhere that we could possibly make a trade for #2 that wouldn’t require our other 1st round pick. But I would imagine it would require us to give up our 1st pick, 2nd rounder, 3rd rounder, and possibly even one or two more picks. I’d rather only have to give up three picks than four or five.
shep615 - February 4, 2012
I don’t think trading up would be all that expensive. We’re basically the only trade partner that makes sense for St. Louis, and they don’t have a need at QB.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
The team that makes the best offer is the team that makes most sense for the Rams. Of course, the Browns are their first choice. They can possibly get ‘something for nothing’ in that trade. But if they’re even considering trading then all offers will be entertained.
But for the Browns it makes little sense. The only reason the Browns should trade with the Rams is if they want Blackmon. We know the Rams and Vikings likely have more interest in Blackmon than RG3. No need for the Browns to trade up if RG3 is the target. The Browns cannot afford to get into a bidding war for the #2 pick out of fear of losing RG3 to another team. Can’t win an auction when you can’t pay. I think Heckert is content with #4. Regardless of what the Rams do, The odds are highly favorable, that at least one, Blackmon and/or RG3 is on the board at #4. Can’t miss with either of those. We could greatly use Blackmons skill set and RG3 will still be a hot commodity to trade if McCoy does happen to succeed.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Not true. The Rams are rumored to have their eye on Kalil or Blackmon. The team that makes the most sense is the team that presents them with the best value.
We can give them an extra 3rd and 4th let’s say and they basically get those picks for free. They still get a shot at one of those guys.
If they trade up to 6 or 8 (Redskins or Dolphins), not only do they miss out on both Blackmon and Kalil, but they could also very well miss out on Riley Reiff.
If they want to go LT to protect Bradford, it is going to take an insane offer from the Dolphins/Redskins for them to trade up because the risk for the Rams is immense and part of me is saying they probably won’t do it.
What about if they want Kalil? Either way, they still can get one of those at 4.
Part of me is starting to think the Rams will stay pat unless we give them an offer. Why would you pass the chance at a #1 WR or the best LT prospect since Joe Thomas (when they are in your lap) just for a few extra picks?
bross09 - February 5, 2012
O.T. question: If you don’t mind my asking.
When I try to use the block quote, my whole comment ends up in the block. I’ve tried tabbing down. What am I doing wrong?
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
You have to highlight what you want to have blockquoted. Highlight first and then click on Blockquote.
Brownie's Year - February 5, 2012
and only put the text you want inside of it.
Even better, type the text you want to type, then highlight it and press blockquote
(by highlight I mean go over it with your mouse)
bross09 - February 5, 2012
Imo, best offer=best value.
I didn’t bring Kalil into the mix in an attempt to keep this as less confusing as possible. Besides, this is the first I’ve seen Kalil as being on the Browns’ fans’ radar.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Best offer=/=Best value.
Let’s say we are the Rams and we want RG3. Someone gives us an extra 2nd to trade down to 4 and we still can get RG3. Someone gives us a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and an extra 1st in 2013 to trade to 22 where we grab Ryan Tannehill.
One clearly is the better value, the one where we get the player we rated much higher.
It also keeps it from being as accurate as possible.
He isn’t on our radar specifically because we have Joe Thomas…
bross09 - February 5, 2012
Thats deceiving also. It depends on the team, especially if it’s one thats sucked really bad and high draft picks, & has a good chance of sucking really bad the following season. Thats 4 really damn good draft spots for 1 guy.
Kalil would totally be a draft and trade, because if you already have God on your team, you know there’s gonna be a team that wants his son.
J. W. - February 6, 2012
why does that matter? Teams don’t trade down in 2012 with thoughts about how bad their partner will be in 2013 or 2014.
You think we would sign and trade Kalil? Give me some of what you are on.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
I think Heckert has shown he will trade up if theres a chance the player he wants will be gone. Phil Taylor is a prime example. Most people/mocks did not have him going before 27 but Heckert thought KC-i think- wanted him so he traded up to get him. I think if Heckert wants RG3 and he thinks washington wants to trade up he will spend what is needed to secure the player.
-bobby- - February 5, 2012
I’ve heard somewhere that we could possibly make a trade for #2 that wouldn’t require our other 1st round pick. But I would imagine it would require us to give up our 1st pick, 2nd rounder, 3rd rounder, and possibly even one or two more picks. I’d rather only have to give up three picks than four or five.
Not for what is being thrown out there as compensation for trading up. If you are willing to go all in on RGIII, Then what the F, go all in and get the BEST choice, not Second best
J. W. - February 5, 2012
Thrown out there by who?
People have said to you a few times (and I’ve said it too) that Luck is essentially off-limits because no one will be able to pry him out of the Colts hands.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
The NFL and the WWE aren’t all that different. Only, we the fans believe the NFL has more integrity. I’m not saying outcomes are pre-determined in the NFL. But, that they are both in the business of entertainment. Luck is still on the table until, Manning is cut.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
…what?
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
I understand your skepticism.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
Manning won’t be cut if someone already worked a deal for Luck with Indy.
J. W. - February 6, 2012
Not certain of this, but I don’t think teams can ‘deal’ after the trade deadline, until the beginning of the next league year, which I believe, is in March.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Thats giving up a lot to move up for RG3. Unless he turns out to be a true, kick arse NFL QB. Ahhhh, the mysteries of the draft.
Les Fleurs Du Mal - February 3, 2012
I was hoping we could do it for #4, #22, and that extra 4th from Atlanta.
JustBob - February 3, 2012
I would agree to that. Then we really wouldn’t be losing anything.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
that is a lot to only move up 2 spots
I think it will be both 1st # 4, #22, 2nd #37 and possibly a 4th and that is too much to move up just 2 spots. When if Washington do jump ahead of the Browns Blackmon would fall to the 4 spot which is one of the MAJOR needs, or can trade the pick for a additional 2nd and 2013 1st to say the Jags, or Carolina. then if Mccoy dont work out then you would have a additional 1st for next years class of QB Barkley, Bray, Wilson, Jones, Murray. there is so many more options by not trading up IMO
Highspeed30 - February 4, 2012
The price would have to make sense. Giving up that much doesn’t make sense for us at this point. Now, if we have him at #4 and someone wants to overpay, I have no problem with trading him for a “julio trade” or better.
J. W. - February 5, 2012
There is no reason at all to believe it would cost our first four picks.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012 via Android app
Right. We are talking two spots here.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
Two other factors driving that price down:
1. (Rams/Vikings) get their guy either way.
2. Browns can get RG3 at 4.
Jon @ DBN - February 5, 2012
Rec. The only reason the Browns would even make an offer is out of fear of another team bidding on the #2. The other potential bidder will be moving up more than 2 slots. Therefore, the price will be to high for the Browns to pay. Trading up for the Browns is not a viable option.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
This is false for the millionth time.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
For the millionth time, prove it’s false. Instead of just repeatedly, saying it’s false. You can’t. You just refuse to believe.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Its false because you state something as an absolute that is nowhere near certain. You need to prove its not a viable option, until then, it is. Teams do it almost every single year.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
My bad. I stated something as an absolute with the presumtion that it would be seen as what it is. My opinion.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
That makes more sense
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Teams do what every year? Overpay? Only in hind-sight. No one in their right mind knowingly overpays up front.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Well its subjective. I doubt ATL thought they were overpaying for Jones even though most Browns fans think they got fleeced.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Life is subjective. Especially those of sports fans. lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
My sister who lives in Atlanta texted me about the trade. She was pissed, and I just had to laugh.
J. W. - February 6, 2012
You are leaving out the factor of where the Rams would have to drop.
Just because another team offers “more” doesn’t mean it is a better deal.
Think of it like this Blackmon and a 2nd rounder is better than Floyd and two 2nd rounders.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
I left it out intentionally. Where the Rams fall is the least important of all the factors. It’s only a factor in the equation used to determine the overall value of the offer being evaluated.
Yes, in the draft, ‘more is always better. Either more picks. Or more valuable picks.
Picks don’t have names until the pick is made.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Well I can see why you think you’re front office material.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
That was Scout. Not FO. Not office material, here. Wouldn’t be a very good negotiater. To stubborn.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Actually, I think I could make a good scout today, if it weren’t for the fact that I know I lack the communication skills necessary to make a convincing eval report. LOL
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Stop making lame excuses. You can get better at writing and communication with a little practice. If you think you can scout, go scout.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
The attempt at motivation is greatly apperciated. But after 41 years, “it doesn’t get any better than this”. lol
Besides, who’s gonna pay a 41 yr old with no experience to do any job?. We’re not talking General Labor here. lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I honest to God don’t understand any of this.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
There’s a lot of things I don’t understand. But, that doesn’t make them any less true. lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Really? I’d say the Rams view this as pretty darn important.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
Which was more important last year? Falling back from 8th into the 20s? or the value we received? The answer is obvious or it wouldn’t have happened. I’m 100% positive Heckert would have preferred to fall back less. That’s a given.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
The Rams aren’t the 2011 Browns. They don’t have a franchise LT.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
You seem to be missing the part where the “value received” is directly related to how far you fall back. If another team offered us the number 10 overall pick for Jones, we probably would have taken that deal for a lot less picks, especially if we thought someone we really wanted was going to be there at 10 and not in the late 20s. This is really not that complicated.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 6, 2012
No. I didn’t miss that part. That’s exactly the point I had been trying to make. I totally agree, it’s not that complicated.
Agreeing with me, is what makes it so complicated. (for others) lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
It most certainly is not.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
I actually would consider it the most important factor to the Rams.
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
Again, Imo, the most important thing is ‘value received’ for their pick. ‘Where they fall’ is merely a factor in determining said ‘value’.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Yes, a big factor
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
or a small factor if the other incentives ‘out weigh’ it.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
But that’s a nonsensical statement. If you have a set of factors, literally any one of them is small if the others outweigh it. That statement doesn’t mean anything.
What we are saying is it will take a lot to outweigh that factor.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Just because a statement may be obvious, doesn’t make it meaningless. I see a lot of Mr. Obvous’ around here. Sometimes it’s out of neccesity. Other times it’s not. Rather than confront, I chose to conform. But, as It’s been pointed out to me recently, in trying to be less confrontational, I’m actually producing the opposite effect. Not going to be able to change that overnight.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I didn’t say it was meaningless because it was obvious. I said it was meaningless because it is meaningless. What you said was “This one thing here will always be considered small if all the objects around it are bigger than it.” That is true of every object, ever. You made a sentence, but you didn’t actually say anything.
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
Who do you think the Rams would want to pick that would be around at #7-11? They get one of the highest rated offensive playmakers in the draft if they draft anywhere from #2-4. Anything later than that and they would likely miss out and half to take someone second rate. If they already plan on taking Blackmon then it would make a lot more sense to trade back to #4 and take him plus extra picks than staying at #2 or trading back to #7 or later and missing out.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
Idk the answer to your question. I’m not a fan of the Rams enough to know all their needs. I do know however, that there are several 1st round possibilities that they are considering. Have you ever seen a camera shot of the inside of a draft war room? There are hundreds of names on the wall. I never said it was a bad idea for the Rams to seek a trade with the Browns. In fact, just the opposite. Who doesn’t like getting something for nothing? For the Browns however, I think it is a bad idea. There is no way to not ‘overpay’ for 2 spots. Because: The only reason to do it is to prevent losing RG3 to a team currently further back in the draft. I’ve explained that the larger leap from the ‘other’ bidder warrants a higher cost. Therefore, how do the Browns jump fewer spots, at a reasonable price?
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Hmmm… I see your point.
Still, I think if I’m the Rams and I’m targeting Blackmon (it’s definitely a big “if” because anything could happen), I’d rather take less to move back two spots and still get my guy. Originally you said that the price would be too high for the Browns to pay in order to out-bid another team from further back, but I think it’s a case where we could offer less than the team further back but still be outbidding them (because we are picking as high as we are).
I guess what it comes down to is how highly you value a potential franchise QB. I would put a high value on RG3 because I think his potential is a lot higher than a lot of QBs that come out of the draft, but that’s just my opinion.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
Trading back and still getting your guy = something for nothing. Everyone wants that.
Yes it is still possible to make a better offer with less picks. Because the fall back isn’t as great. That’s a best case scenario, requiring the ‘other’ team to present a low ball offer.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
The hundreds of names are because there are hundreds of picks, but you’re only going to take one or two at the top of the draft.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
You rearrange the hundreds of names in you’re particular order based on your evaluations and needs. Then when it’s your turn to pick you take your top BPA that fits your need. Or, you trade up a few spots to get in front of another team you think will take him. Or, you trade back thinking you can fill your next priority/get your guy, further back.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
It is fact that nobody can put together a better package with the least number of picks than the Browns.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Yes. That is an obvious fact that other teams know as well. Any team further back than #4, looking to trade to #2 will obviously have to ‘sweeten the pot’. At some point it becomes too sweet for the Browns. It’s impossible to outbid a team, that’s willing to pay more to move up more spots, without ‘overpaying’.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
All teams have hundreds of names on the wall. However, every team has guys who are high on their board and they know they can get. Those are “their guys” and teams like to be able to have a shot at “their guy”. People believe that Kalil and/or Blackmon are their guy. We obviously can’t know for sure, but it is very likely.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
True this. The list of ‘their guys’ have more than 2 names on them, as well.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I would say Reiff is very likely “their guy” and they could very well miss out on him too.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
I think they’ll get their top choice staying at #2.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Sadly, that’s my guy. But I’ll still be happy with any of the other top prospects being suggested, at #4.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
no question, but they also might still be able to get him at #4.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
How would they miss out on Riley Reiff? If the Rams traded back with Washington Reiff will be there if not then Claiborne will be there. The Bucs are not going to take Reiff, and if they rate Reiff or Martin a little bit less than they do Kalil then they will take the better package.
Highspeed30 - February 6, 2012
Bucs probably will take Claiborne, but they aren’t guaranteed to. They CAN miss out on Reiff because they can’t predict what the bucks do and at #6, there is a statistical chance that Blackmon and the top 2 LTs are gone. At #4, there is not that chance.
One of Kalil/Blackmon will be available and if somehow we traded up to #2 for Blackmon, Reiff will still be there.
Any scenario at #4, they can get Blackmon or a franchise LT
bross09 - February 6, 2012
They can draft Claiborne then, cause they have a need at CB as well, and Jeff Fisher is a defensive guy and former DB so he do see value in a shutdown CB. And Martin will still be available as well some have Martin rated ahead of Reiff, he is the best run blocking T between the 3. there are a lot of options for the Rams and to think they would not accpet a trade based on who may or may not be there is not realistic cause they will still be inside the top 10 whether they traded with Washington or Miami.
Highspeed30 - February 6, 2012
I’m not seeing a lot of need at CB. We have some solid youth, a crafty vet and a shutdown CB in the making. If we ever took a guy like Claiborne it would be because we didn’t have needs elsewhere and he was clearly the BPA. This would be a definite trade down scenario to get picks plus someone like Coples, Engram or Mercilus who could help the D more than another CB.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
I was talking about the Rams trading back to #6 spot cause i am hearing that they would miss out on Blackmon or Kalil but i am just pointing out that there are other options such as Reiff, Martin or Claiborne
Highspeed30 - February 6, 2012
Oh sorry, I thought you meant us. Yeah I agree, they could use any of those guys too, especially if the extra picks were significant. I just don’t see the Redskins or anyone else really selling their next two drafts for RG3 though. Our two ones this year automatically trump almost any deal they could put together except firsts and seconds in the next 2 drafts and that’s too risky for 1 player. ATL didn’t even give up that much to move 21 spots.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
A lot of things have to happen before we can get a clear picture of what may or may not happen in the draft. After Free agency things will settle. If the H&H bring in a guy like Jason Campbell do they still look to get RG3?? or trade up for him
Highspeed30 - February 6, 2012
I would not think so, no
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
I agree with all of this. But, I can’t help but be intrigued by the idea of replacing Adams with a ball hawk DB. Int’s are my favorite plays. If Claiborne is better at CB then FS, then we can move S.Brown to FS?
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I wouldn’t be surprised if Brown ends up a FS next year whether we pick a new CB in the draft or not. I think you’re on to something there.
shep615 - February 6, 2012
Didn’t Adams lead our team in picks last year?
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
You would be correct.
Bernie19Kosar - February 7, 2012
You would be correct.
Bernie19Kosar - February 7, 2012
You would be correct.
Dawg Nuts - February 7, 2012
You would be correct. But 3 isn’t enough for the ’team leader, imo.
DawgsNHawgs - February 7, 2012
they could draft a CB, but why pass up a franchise LT to protect their franchise QB? Look at what happened with Couch? Look at any QB who didn’t have a good LT?
Some may have martin rated ahead of Reiff, but I haven’t seen them. Probably some amateur mock drafter. martin by most sources is clearly #3 and some sources that have shown ability in the past (mcshay for example) rate Reiff as #1.
If martin is such a good run blocker, put him at RT.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
I don’t think you’ve done that. At least I haven’t seen it.
The higher cost is only to the team down the draft order (say, the Redskins or Seahawks). To a man with $20,000, $10,000 is a large asking price. It’s not as much to a man with $60,000. The Browns have more picks to pay with and less distance to move up. It’s teams like the Redskins that have to figure out how to beat what Cleveland can offer, not that other way around.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012
I think he’s saying he agrees with that which is why the Redskins will throw the farm at the Rams so then we’ll have to top that. Not sure that’s the case but that’s his argument.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Could be, but I disagree with the constant assertion that the Browns have to overpay to get the #2.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012
The Browns don’t have to overpay, if there are no other offers. But if there are no other offers, then they don’t have to trade. Unless, the targeted player is the same for the Rams as it is for the Browns. Then they’ll have to pay an even greater premium to make that deal happen.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I agree, I’ve seen credible mocks that even have us keeping our second first. That would be great but I think it would be both firsts and maybe a 3rd or 4th.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Not quite but close enough.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I partially agree with this. And although, the difference between an additional first this year is greater than additional first next year. But not significant enough for the ’skins to have to greatly increase their offer.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
If Heckert targets a player that he wants for the browns he will not be afraid to trade up to get him. So if Heckert wants RG3- or even Luck- I think he will spend what is necessary to secure that if he feels it is needed.
-bobby- - February 5, 2012
The only way I see us not getting RG3 at 4 right now is if the Rams are not 100% sold on Kalil/Blackmon and wouldn’t mind the extra picks they would get from trading down.
I don’t think this is the case though, because Kalil is that much of a sure thing.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
What about Minny trading out? They’ve said they would entertain offers.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
They worry me, too. That’s why I hope the Rams fall in love with Blackmon. I doubt Minnesota would go anywhere with Kalil/Claiborne facing them at 3.
nickjs21 - February 5, 2012
If I were in H&Hs’ shoes, I’d stand pat at #4 while giving consideration to trading back. In otherwords I want what the Rams want. I’ll take something for nothing if I can get it.
I think we can all agree that: Luck, Blackmon, RG3, Kalil and Claiborne would all make big impacts in Cleveland. All 5 of them cannot be drafted in the first 3 spots. Let the Colts, Rams and Vikes narrow our choices. There will still be a choice between 2 of them. Imo, the most important thing is: that we get a top 5 talent if we use the #4.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
The first 3 are needs, the second two are not, causing us to invest money into positions we don’t need, and that will have less impact on winning. I hope they’re not that passive about it.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Adding Kalil into the mix with RG3 and Blackmon, as a possibility for Heckert only strengthens my stance on a trade up not being an option. It’s already guaranteed that at least one of the 3 will be there at #4. Barring injury between now and draft day, of course.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
It only strengthen’s my belief that they are not going to trade up to #6 or #8.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
Huh? Who we talking about trading “up” to #s 6 or 8?
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I meant down to 6 or 8.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
I guess the difference is that those of us who want RG3 or Blackmon are saying we really need a QB or WR, not a LT or CB.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
I think most of us are aware of all the needs. It’s the prioritizing of those needs where most of disagree.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Since J.W. mentions the Julio trade, we are giving up more value in picks than the Falcons gave up to move up from the 20s to the top 10. It will not take that many picks, you can bank on it.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
If we don’t even try to get Mario Williams I will be disappointed. Other than that there are no FAs that I know of that I truly want although I think we need to sign at least three all together one being a WR.
crazyL80 - February 3, 2012
I don’t think going for someone so expensive at a position we are okay at is a good idea. I agree we should at least inquire, but I think he will be to expensive.
macdowellm03 - February 3, 2012
We are good at? HUH??? Mario is a huge upgrade…..
J. W. - February 3, 2012
I said okay at, not good.
macdowellm03 - February 4, 2012
We have plenty of money, they just won’t spend it.
Aussie Brown - February 3, 2012
Until, 2013. The final year of “rebuilding”. When it’s hopefully ‘plug n play’.
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
who are we plug n playing in 2013? We’re not playing in a vacuum. You have to build with impact players, not fillers and thats what we’ve been doing. Get your impact QB this year, use FA to get your impact WR(Desean)-he’s still young and NFL proven. Use your 2nd to get a RT/DE.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
You misunderstood me. I know this because I agree with you. The ‘13 draft will be the final step in ’rebuilding’. The core will be in place. This will allow us to ‘plug in’ proven impact talent thru FA.
Personally, I don’t like DeSean. Not a team player in my book. I’d rather have Holmes. DeSeans’ greed makes him a jerk. Holmes can be a jerk because he’s passionate about winning. Really though, I wouldn’t pursue Holmes either.
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Where do you come up with this stuff?
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
There is a little bit of credence to that idea- It was either Holmgren or Shurmur that talked about their 3-5 year plan. The idea was that on average the teams that are most often competing in the playoffs have 20-30 impact players on their roster. Each offseason on average a team can bring in about 5-7 impact players between draft and free agency. So essentially, 3-5 years isn’t too unrealistic in terms of being done with rebuilding.
Now, whether that’s what dawgsnhawgs was thinking or not, I’m not sure. But at least that’s the general thumbnail sketch of what H & H are working on.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
I was talking about the stuff about Holmes and Jackson.
I agree on the 3-5 years stuff and also read them saying that.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
My head. Where do you get yours? LOL
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
I’m not sure that they won’t spend it, but that they spend it differently than dumping it into one guy. Also FA is a two way street. Williams may not want to leave a playoff team to come to a 4 win team.
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
Agreed that Williams won’t want to come here. That’s why we have to invest a lot in him. In my opinion he would be worth it.
Aussie Brown - February 5, 2012
I’m sure they look into acquiring a lot of FA we don’t even know about.
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
If we haven’t heard of them they will be mediocre at best and possibly like Usama Young. We need good starters in free agency, not more roster fillers.
\Broken record
Aussie Brown - February 5, 2012
I will give up on the Browns if they trade our #4, #22, and our 2nd rounder to move up two spots. I don’t care if god himself is available at 2. Maybe if we were close to the Super Bowl but at this point we need talented starters. No way am I giving up 3 starters to move up two spots. If RGIII is available at 4 we take him. Then we take our next DE at 23.
gentryholdem - February 4, 2012
No. we need a QB. You saw the most prime example of it this year. You take Peyton Manning off the Colts and they go from SB contender to #1 pick in the draft. If the FO believes that RG3 (or if they go for Luck) is the real deal, then you must go get them. We will not win anything until there is a QB in place.
-bobby- - February 4, 2012
Irrelevant point. Joe Thomas is no longer eligible for the draft.
Dawg Nuts - February 4, 2012
That reminds me of something I thought of when The Saturday Night Tebow scit came out. Couldn’t referring to a QB as Jesus, be construed as being a negative, when you consider the ‘amount of unfathomable amount of pain’ he endured, in a relatively short period of time?
DawgsNHawgs - February 4, 2012
But going on that vein, he endured it for a short period of time and then went up to heaven in glory. Which, figuratively speaking, would be really nice if it happened to a QB.
shep615 - February 4, 2012
Relatively, short period of time. It couldn’t end soon enough. In the end he was begging his father, to take his life. I’d like to see more QBs ‘Tebowing’ when they’re playing the Browns. Asking God to have mercy on them and ‘make it stop’. lol
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
Ha, this fusion of religion and NFL football is a bit of a stretch, but it’s amusing :)
shep615 - February 5, 2012
I come to DBN for my amusement. If I amuse others in the process, I’m good with that too. LOL
DawgsNHawgs - February 5, 2012
A little under 1/4 of the comments you have ever posted here contain “LOL.” Are you a 14 year-old girl?
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
“A 14 yr old girl”. That’s funny. But it only earns a lower case lol. While thinking, “if I amuse other in the process” I LOL’d because I realized that ‘if I am amusing others, it’s probably because most of them are laughing AT me, rather than WITH me’. AND I’m good with that too. Whatever it takes, to get people laughing, is fine with me.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
So, what…roughly, 20% of my comments contain an lol? Damn those 14 year old girls. Why do they get all the happiness? LOL
You tell me then, what’s a more appropriate percentage of ‘laughing’ for a middle-aged man? What’s the number drop to when I’m 60? At what age does ‘grumpiness’ become a mandatory requirement for a man to still be socially acceptable? lol
(There all rhetorical questions, but I’d be amused if you wanted to answer them).
I’d use less lol’s but some seem to take me as being ‘more serious than I am’, when I’m not using them.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I have no problem with you being happy all the time. That’s great. I have a problem with “lol” being in almost every single one of your comments in this thread. It comes off as condescending and belittling. Think of it this way: we’re trying to have an adult conversation about something and you’re laughing at everything we say. That is disrespectful.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Okay. Now I see the misunderstanding. Those lol’s are not me laughing at ‘your’ comments. They are me adding, what I feel is an, at least somewhat, humorous comment of my own.
No disrespect intended. When speaking, if I say something I find funny, I tend to let out a little laugh afterwards to let others know, I’m either joking or kidding. Then they laugh. If I smile, they smile. If I do neither. They do neither. Apparently, doing the same through type, is incorrect. Sorry, damn. Seems like, if I’m not lol-ing I’m apologizing for doing so.
It’s more fun here, when peeps are joking. I thought if I could lighten it up a little, I could get more of that.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
Lighten it up all you want. Seriously, you don’t have to explain yourself, your comments are completely fine as is. But, y’know, no need to laugh at your own comments.
nickjs21 - February 6, 2012
He is over 1/4 for this thread, he’s on a nice pace.
bross09 - February 6, 2012
I’ll lol less and just L, if that will make you guys feel better, about me. But I bet it has little effect. L
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
You don’t have to just L. You don’t have to anything. Just write, and omit sound effects.
nickjs21 - February 6, 2012
Ok squish like this? KABOOM I really don’t know what you mean by sound effects SCREEEEECHHH
macdowellm03 - February 6, 2012
Yes, exactly strangles macdowellm03 out loud.
nickjs21 - February 7, 2012
It actually makes me feel worse.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
This saddens me. I know you have a Sense of Humor. Because your jokes crack me up. (most of them, that is). But, to you, I’m apparently not even, the least bit funny.
I have a solution. I’ll make a fanpost. You can vote. Anonymously, if you like.
DawgsNHawgs - February 6, 2012
I don’t know what your fanpost is going to be about but I assure you it’s not necessary. This isn’t meant to be a big deal.
nickjs21 - February 6, 2012
How about we just aim for discussing the Browns like grown ass adults?
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
Where’s the fun in that? Football is my link to my childhood, when life was ‘more’ fun.
DawgsNHawgs - February 7, 2012
see ya. We can’t accept mediocre from our quarterbacking anymore. We have to get a top QB, unless you think Barkley or Jones is worth waiting for when we go 3-13 next year.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
Another thing to note: If we can fill the DE hole elsewhere, I would REALLY like Vontazae Burfict with our 2nd round pick. He would have to fall, but with his perceived problems controlling his temper, I don’t see it as that much of a stretch. It’s risky, but I can’t help but think we would have a straight nasty defense with TJ Ward and V. Burfict both looking to bring the pain.
shep615 - February 4, 2012
I was thinking the same thing.
kamasutraman_007 - February 4, 2012
I could see Pit or Bal taking them before that but I would think it may not be a bad idea to get someone with his attitude.
HenryDawg - February 4, 2012
His attitude on the field is fine but the guy is lazy. He won’t work.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
Thats been his biggest knock all of his college career. The next level, you will only get so far with physical ability, you’ve got to use your brain also.
J. W. - February 5, 2012
I had not heard that, I agree that would be a problem.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
Burfict? What I’ve read about him is that he often will be penalized for late hits or personal fouls because he gets too carried away with the game. I didn’t hear about him being lazy, just lacking discipline on the field. I could be wrong though.
shep615 - February 5, 2012
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/03/vontaze-burfict-fletcher-cox-among-nfl-draft-entries/
It’s really bad when your coaches will say that about you on the record.
notthatnoise - February 5, 2012
This is a more complete analysis.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
you also notice that while he has “reportedly” matured (thank you anonymous “reports”), his coach went on the record this season saying he wasn’t trying hard enough.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
And McCoy will have a competition. Could it be motivational?
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
Also, sorry for not including the source, Chad Reuter, Senior analyst, NFLdraftscout.com.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
That makes it better, but there seem to be conflicting stories. One guy on that website saying he has matured, but his DC saying he didn’t always try hard and there were other reports of scuffles in the locker room.
bross09 - February 5, 2012
I would love to know what scout thinks being benched by his HC, getting into a locker room fight, and being taken off the field numerous times because of dumb penalties means he has matured.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
I don’t know for sure if he will mature guys. He has a super amount of raw unbridled talent though.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
Not arguing that. But I’m not using a high pick on a player who needs to grow up, at a position where we are already good at.
Poor use of resources.
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
Our Mike isn’t under contract as of yet. Just another in the hundreds of scenarios to be played out yet.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
Heckert said they want him back and DQ said you would have to tear the jersey of his back to make him leave. It’s not certain but its damn close.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
I’m cool with this too. I was disappointed he lost out on CPOTY. It all comes down to money.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
It comes down to this for me. If you ask me the simple question of who is going to be cheaper AND have a higher ceiling, I’ve already answered that. The inherent problem is do you use the pick? I’m not 100 percent. I’d have to talk to the kid. Work out performance clauses, etc.
The New Kardiac Kids - February 5, 2012
I think DQ will be even better next year.
HenryDawg - February 5, 2012
No one ever denied the physical talent, but no matter how talented you are you have to work in the NFL. It doesn’t look like Burfict wants to work.
notthatnoise - February 6, 2012
Not to mention the locker room fights, bad penalties and bad attitude. Other than that, he’s swell.
Did I also forget to mention that we have a MLB?
Bernie19Kosar - February 5, 2012
If Ingram is available I take him in the second round he has a motor and skills.
Suppa Bob - February 5, 2012
If you were Tom Heckert, then he’d be you, and he would use your body to General Manage….thanks Ace!
browindiavs - February 4, 2012
First great comments by everyone. I would sign DQ for sure. Go after Bowe and Nicks, give them what they want. In the draft, pray that RG III lands to #4 then trade the pick to Washington, pick up a 2nd and try to get a first for ‘13. Then with the #6 trade with Seattle or KC, pick up another 2nd. Now you have #11,#22,#37,#39 and #44. Pick up Mercilus with our 11th. He is a forced fumble freak so is Sheard. Then Wright with 22nd. Minnifield with our #37, Ronnell Lewis with our #39 and Levy Adcock with our #44. Our third round pick Doug Martin. He’s perfect for AFC North. To finish our Defence, try to get Lavonte David. He can play OLB as well as SS. The rest of the draft, draft fill ins. Give Colt another year and if he doesn’t work out, give up everything to get Barkley in ’13. Defence always wins Super Bowls and I feel we are on the way. Go Browns.
browndogs - February 6, 2012
wait…so youget your #1 WR…and then draft the QBOTF and trade the QB?
bross09 - February 6, 2012
Is Nicks a FA? I don’t think so and I’m pretty sure he isn’t coming here if he was.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
No.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 6, 2012
Carl Nicks OG from the Saints. I think he is a FA. Money talks and I’m sure he will come here if the price is right.
browndogs - February 6, 2012
He is a free agent, and won’t be tagged.
Would love it if the Browns went after him.
Bernie19Kosar - February 6, 2012
Sorry I thought you meant Hakim, which I would have liked even more.
HenryDawg - February 6, 2012
None of this gives us the impact that a franchise QB or superstar WR will give us by picking one of them in the top 4.
Dawg Nuts - February 6, 2012
you don’t need a “superstar” WR when you have Bowe, he is close to that level, if he isn’t at that level.
I want us to get RG3, Bowe,and Nicks, but all 3 is probably a pipe dream. There is still a chance…
bross09 - February 6, 2012
shep615 - February 6, 2012
I like this much better when the quote is implied.
notthatnoise - February 7, 2012
I second that emotion.
Adrock2099 - February 7, 2012
I purposely set you up. I should get a rec or two for the effort.
bross09 - February 7, 2012
I am a whore
bross09 - February 7, 2012
i actually really like this. I’ve been hyped on Griffin but the urgency is diminished if we can plug all these holes in one draft, allowing us to mortgage on Barkley next year, no matter the cost.
Barkley/Bowe/Wright/Little/Hillis/Thomas/DQ/Mercilus/Rubin/Sheard/Haden/Ward/Minnifield
How am i gonna afford all these jerseys?!
WYBHaden? - February 10, 2012
That gives me a great idea. They should make a customizable jersey that you can switch around to how you want, as many times as you want.
macdowellm03 - February 10, 2012
i see velcro in your runway future.
WYBHaden? - February 10, 2012
Jersey sales are a huge revenue source. Interchangeable jerseys will never be available.
DawgsNHawgs - February 12, 2012
I thought it would be a good idea to make a package of stuff you would need to transform your old Browns jerseys into new ones and selling them. I think that idea could catch on.
shep615 - February 13, 2012
im very hesitant to buy another browns jersey….in all ive bought couch , edwards , winslow , and quinn for both my son and i and also a william green…however if browns draft RG3 i will definitly buy it for my son and i …however ill most likely special order it without the name on the back
junkyard dawgz - February 17, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.