Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

“There’s a lot of things I can do at No. 1 and not just get a quarterback,” Dorsey said Thursday at the NFL Scouting Combine. “My door is wide open if somebody wants to come up and talk to me about a trade, I’m willing to trade. But also I’m going to do what’s best for this organization, and I will do that.”

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/03/01/browns-open-to-everything-with-no-1-pick-including-a-trade/

Posted
Just now, Buffalo Bills Detective said:

TRADE IT ALL FOR ROSEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <thick sarcasm>

 

depending on what "it all" is...good idea, and dont know why you would have sarcasm about it

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Oddly, the Browns might be the best bet to trade up since they also have #4, so it doesn't hurt them as much to drop to #21 and #22.

 

They can pick in the top 4, then get two more picks in the 1st plus a bunch of other picks. If that happens they need to change those uniforms to be ready for prime time, because if they hit on a top 4 pick, #21, #22, an extra second and maybe next year's Bills 1st they might be a super team.

Posted
2 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

Oddly, the Browns might be the best bet to trade up since they also have #4, so it doesn't hurt them as much to drop to #21 and #22.

 

They can pick in the top 4, then get two more picks in the 1st plus a bunch of other picks. If that happens they need to change those uniforms to be ready for prime time, because if they hit on a top 4 pick, #21, #22, an extra second and maybe next year's Bills 1st they might be a super team.

Browns already own picks 1, 4, 33, 35.  That is, 4 picks before the 2nd round is 4 picks old.  They can get good in a hurry.

Posted

Does a GM ever say "We are not going to listen to offers" even if they do not plan to listen?

 

If Cleveland does not pick a QB at 1 it is gross negligence.  Play the game to wait to 4 for a QB is a huge risk that 3 are not selected ahead of you and you end up with the leftovers.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Buffalo Bills Detective said:

TRADE IT ALL FOR ROSEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Both 1sts, next year's 1st and next year's 2nd and 3rd!!!!! <thick sarcasm>

Why are you against having a franchise QB? The Rams weren't against it when they went all out for Goff

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

We'll give you 21, 22, a second rounder this year, a second rounder next year and Mike Tolbert

 

You give us #1 and that tall WR that smokes a lot of pot.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

Oddly, the Browns might be the best bet to trade up since they also have #4, so it doesn't hurt them as much to drop to #21 and #22.

 

They can pick in the top 4, then get two more picks in the 1st plus a bunch of other picks. If that happens they need to change those uniforms to be ready for prime time, because if they hit on a top 4 pick, #21, #22, an extra second and maybe next year's Bills 1st they might be a super team.

Yes but Bills are not trading all the way up to #1. Highly, highly doubt that.

Posted

The only way they trade out is if they know that the Giants won't go QB, If the Giants took Darnold that means Rosen won't sign with the Browns as he stated, making Mayfield or Josh Allen their QB or unless they know they can get Josh Allen at 4 and a **** ton of picks later on.

Posted

I wonder what the difference would be between trading for their #1 vs their #4. They obviously aren't going to give a good deal for 4 if they are trying to sell 1

Posted

They want to see who is serious about moving up, so they can decide if they need to take a QB at one, or if they can take Barkley at 1 and a QB at 4.

 

Would any team desperate for a QB do something like the Saints did to get Ricky Williams?

 

The Saints traded away 8 picks, including two 1st rounders, to the Washington Redskins so they could move up from their own #12 spot in the draft to the #5 spot.

Here is what the Redskins received.

 

Year

Round

1999

1st (12th Overall)

1999

3rd

1999

4th

1999

5th

1999

6th

1999

7th

2000

1st (2nd Overall)

2000

3rd

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, kdiggz said:

Why are you against having a franchise QB? The Rams weren't against it when they went all out for Goff

 

He must be thinking, "why make a move to get a potential franchise QB when you can get a center, a LB and a DT. We all know those positions are more important than a franchise QB"

 

Anyone thinking its silly to "trade so much" for a QB amuse me. A franchise QB makes EVERYONE better around them (look at Aaron Rodgers and the lack of talent across GBs roster) and you don't consistently compete for championships without one. 

  • Like (+1) 2
×
×
  • Create New...