GunnerBill Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Anyone believe that a compromise could not be "okay take your pass rusher at #1 but get me the #2 pick so I can have my Quarterback"??? Not sure if San Fran would be willing to go down to #12 but that team does have a LOT of holes....
YoloinOhio Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 @benaxelrod Rizz said he's been told Sashi Brown - and Jimmy Haslam - are the ones running the Browns draft.
Beef Jerky Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 @benaxelrod Rizz said he's been told Sashi Brown - and Jimmy Haslam - are the ones running the Browns draft. Total fail, someone text Haslam and tell him that you will wreck this league
CommonCents Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Anyone believe that a compromise could not be "okay take your pass rusher at #1 but get me the #2 pick so I can have my Quarterback"??? Not sure if San Fran would be willing to go down to #12 but that team does have a LOT of holes.... This draft sets up nicely for the Browns. They have a ton of holes and a ton of picks. It's a deep draft and they have the luxury of also getting the best player on the board. If I'm then I let the board come to me.
YoloinOhio Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Now rumor in Cleveland that if Haslam makes them take Trubisky at 1, Hue wants out
CommonCents Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Now rumor in Cleveland that if Haslam makes them take Trubisky at 1, Hue wants out I thought that I heard something last night that they admitted they decided to draft Garrett two weeks ago? This is going to go on all day, it's crap.
Chuck Wagon Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 I thought that I heard something last night that they admitted they decided to draft Garrett two weeks ago? This is going to go on all day, it's crap. Well if there's one franchise in the league that thinks it could create some benefit out of smokescreening the first pick in the draft, it's the Browns. I think there's legit division in the building between Garrett and Trub and the pro Garrett camp is running to the media in hopes creating backlash pre-draft will sway the other side. And I think it's the camp that actually makes the decisions that's pro Trub. Paying the picks to go from 12 to top 5 runs counter to everything the Browns have done to this point. You are talking about 12, 33 and later picks likely at a minimum, if not next years #1. I believe the pro Trub camp looks at it as they can take Trub #1 and still get impact defensive players at 12 and 33.
CommonCents Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Well if there's one franchise in the league that thinks it could create some benefit out of smokescreening the first pick in the draft, it's the Browns. I think there's legit division in the building between Garrett and Trub and the pro Garrett camp is running to the media in hopes creating backlash pre-draft will sway the other side. And I think it's the camp that actually makes the decisions that's pro Trub. Paying the picks to go from 12 to top 5 runs counter to everything the Browns have done to this point. You are talking about 12, 33 and later picks likely at a minimum, if not next years #1. I believe the pro Trub camp looks at it as they can take Trub #1 and still get impact defensive players at 12 and 33. If they trade up they are fools. They have a ton of picks in a deep draft. Sit back and fill out that roster with studs, the QB you want may even make it til 12.
2003Contenders Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Well if there's one franchise in the league that thinks it could create some benefit out of smokescreening the first pick in the draft, it's the Browns. I think there's legit division in the building between Garrett and Trub and the pro Garrett camp is running to the media in hopes creating backlash pre-draft will sway the other side. And I think it's the camp that actually makes the decisions that's pro Trub. Paying the picks to go from 12 to top 5 runs counter to everything the Browns have done to this point. You are talking about 12, 33 and later picks likely at a minimum, if not next years #1. I believe the pro Trub camp looks at it as they can take Trub #1 and still get impact defensive players at 12 and 33. The irony is that the Browns were the first team to essentially come to terms with a player BEFORE they actually drafted him, as was the case when they took Tim Couch #1 overall overall back in 1999. Of course, even that was an epic fail as Couch was a bust, Donovan McNabb went one pick later, and the Browns turned down an offer to get the Saints entire draft (plus multiple future first rounders).
P51 Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 (edited) Anyone believe that a compromise could not be "okay take your pass rusher at #1 but get me the #2 pick so I can have my Quarterback"??? Not sure if San Fran would be willing to go down to #12 but that team does have a LOT of holes.... I do. I think it makes sense for both teams, especially the Browns considering the Haslam factor. I cant believe a coach like Hue would take kindly to a QB being forced down his throat. Edited April 27, 2017 by P51
26CornerBlitz Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 @JeffDarlington 49ers’ intel makes them skeptical about Trubisky going to the Browns, sources say. As such, they’re continuing to prepare for all scenarios. @MaryKayCabot Myles Garrett is still the likely pick for the #Browns at No. 1 with the #NFL draft just hours away https://t.co/1htdZvnIIH
cba fan Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Now rumor in Cleveland that if Haslam makes them take Trubisky at 1, Hue wants out Holy **** show that would be. Wow!
ALF Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 If I were the Browns GM , draft Garrett at #1 , maybe trade for Sheldon Richardson . If Trubisky is not there at 12 try to work a trade to the team that drafted him. They have plenty of draft picks , otherwise QB in 2018 for sure.
Recommended Posts