Chuck Wagon

THAT would certainly add some spice. If the Bills are set on Rosen (my hope) and the Browns are equally fine with Darnold or Allen. But as 26 says, you can't bank on your QB being at 4 and watch them go 1, 2, 3. My thought with the Giants is they don't actually want any of the QBs, they either want one of Chubb or Barkley and are playing the Browns on thinking they can take Chubb or Barkley and still get the QB they want at 4. It's entirely possible the price is prohibitive on us moving up to 2 not because the Giants want the same player or even want QB, but because they have a player they want who'll be long gone by 12. I've also see rumors the Jets want either Chubb or Barkley, not a QB afterall. I know the board is QB crazed and couldn't imagine that, but I don't know the Jets could consider either of those guys stay at 6.

They have a WR who can really go get a deep ball

I think it would certainly have to be worked out with the Giants before hand with the Browns going back up from 2 to 4. If the Giants want Darnold too, that certainly eliminates the motivation to help. But if the Giants simply want a non-QB who will be gone before 12 and that's their hang up on dealing down and Denver isn't going QB or at least isn't willing to give up the price to go up to #2 , there would be incentive for the Giants to play ball, get their guy at 4 plus add draft picks, the Browns to get the ransom to move out of 1 and still get their top choice and the Bills to actually get their #1 guy if they are paying the price to move.

I think it's very possible that Beane and Gettleman have Darnold as #1 by a margin in their boards, while Cleveland might have Darnold and Allen very close, if not the "controversial" guy at #1. There could be distance on our board and the Giants board between the other QBs, so much so that the Giants would only go QB if Darnold is on the board while Darnold is the only guy we'll push all in for and are otherwise willing to see whoever remains out of the group of the other 3-4, giving something like a 2nd and 3rd to go to #6 if only 1 guy is left of that group. Dorsey is now running the Browns, but Haslam is still the owner and still very much involved. There's been speculation the entire process about the Browns being very high on Allen and certain members seeing him as Wentz 2.0, wanting to make up for missing him. Allen certainly hasn't hurt his status in the post draft work. If Beane is telling the Browns he'll give them a,b,x,y,z for #1 while only willing to give a,b,x for #4, but the Browns are equally comfortable or perhaps even prefer the guy who'll be there at 4, it's certainly a factor to consider.

Can we pin this?

You can do both. If the player you want to take #1 is going to be there at #4, then it certainly makes sense to trade #1. They could sit at 12 and offer 22 / 35 / 64 (the value of pick #6) to move back up and walk out with the QB they want, plus 2 of the top ~8 position players, plus 3 2nd round picks, plus an additional 2019 1st.

Everyone always blames the location in FA, but I firmly believe the lack of a QB is a bigger factor. When Green Bay actually targets a FA, they don’t usually miss, you think guys really want to live in Wisconsin over Dallas?

I’d have to think a deal with the Giants to flip 2 and 4 would be a prerequisite. Browns could give up #64 and a later pick without even flinching. I agree it won’t happen, but if the Bills need to give up a ransom to get a guy, may as well get YOUR guy, perhaps Cleveland really wants Allen but doesn’t want to take the backlash of picking him over Darnold (though they’d still get it).

If the Browns trade him, he’s sure to be good. I couldn’t begin the imagine the nuclear meltdown from the fans in Cleveland if they trade away the #1 pick, yet again take a QB later.

If you assign ~700 points to the 2019 1st, #12 / #22 / #53 / #56 / 2019 = 3,390 points while #1 = 3,000 points Browns would have 4 / 12 / 22 / 33 / 35 / 53 / 56 / 64 / 114 / 150 / 175 / 205 (plus 2019 1st x2) They could give up very little likely to go from 4 to 2, could give up a second or other later to go from 12 to ~7 to get Ward or Fitzpatrick, and still have 22 and 3+ 2nd round picks

If the Browns are equally split on Allen or Darnold and the Giants for sure aren't going QB, it certainly makes sense to go get your guy, the Browns get the ransom, then can turn around with the Giants and flip 2 and 4 and the Giants still get their same guy. I've seen Giants guys on twitter say the Bills are working hard with the Browns, not the Giants, because the Bills and Giants want the same player (Darnold) so the Giants won't trade the pick unless he's gone.

The Buccaneers wish to engage the Giants in trade talks for the #2 pick

And Joe Thomas is gone

That's my only hangup on them making a significant step forward. They took major character risks (something Dorsey was known for in KC) and could very much be in a position of players just looking out for themselves.

It's ludicrous, but if the Browns have Darnold and Allen close, they should take the guy they have first at 1 and if they guy they have second is available at 4, take him too. Best case, they are both good and you are trading one for a mega-ransom. Medium case, one is good and the other either isn't or doesn't get a chance to show much, and you are still trading him for something, but you have a franchise QB. Worst case, they both bust, but you are getting fired anyway.

McBeane has a grand master plan and we just need to trust them.

I think some posters are trying to prove a point about our ability to still get a "decent" QB and a bunch of other talent. Realistically, between 22-53-56, we'll likely to be lucky to get 2 guys who are really good starters. I think there's more than a decent amount of projection that if we keep all the picks the guys we draft are sure to be good, which isn't reality.

Just don't see Arizona outbidding us if Rosen is there at 4.

I wasn’t really sure which day 2 pick he had us taking at 12.

LOL. Yes.

LG is still bad for them, unless they draft Nelson at 5.

Ok, but still, Nelson.

Veldheer at LT, Nelson at LG and shifting Bolles to RT should make the line MUCH better.

Peterman is a just camp arm unless he proves he's not.