Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Browns say they have talked to Rams about #1 pick

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Browns say they have talked to Rams about #1 pick
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Apr 15, 2010 8:55 PM
BR1986FB wrote:
royal_k wrote: If you want to pm me your number, I'll end a text your way when we pick.
My phone doesn't get texts but my girlfriend said she can add it on my phone. As soon as I get it I'll pm you.

Wes will laugh at this but I've only sent 3 texts in my life from a previous phone. I only use my cell once a day to call my girlfriend on my hour drive home.
This is not funny......GTFO!!!!!!!!!!
Apr 15, 2010 8:55pm
S

Sonofanump

Apr 15, 2010 8:59 PM


You got that southern drawl, you yoddell?
Apr 15, 2010 8:59pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:01 PM
remember this name - Terrell Skinner

big, fast safety from Maryland about 6'3 and 215, long arms, a guy that looks to light people up almost all the time

not sure what the deal is but his stock is so low that he might not get drafted, I think there are some character issues
Apr 15, 2010 9:01pm
F

Fabio

Gibby Hunter

547 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:02 PM
I'm not even sure we would NEED to trade up for St. Louis's 2nd round pick. If you take a look at the teams ahead of us in the second round, they either have their QB or will get one in the first round of this year's draft.

St. Louis- Assuming they take Bradford
Detroit- Stafford
Bucs- Freeman
Kansas City- Cassel- but are they still sold on him?
Philadelphia- Kolb

Unless another team that needs a QB trades up in the 2nd round just behind St. Louis, I can't see us trading up for McCoy.
Apr 15, 2010 9:02pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:09 PM
Fabio wrote: I'm not even sure we would NEED to trade up for St. Louis's 2nd round pick. If you take a look at the teams ahead of us in the second round, they either have their QB or will get one in the first round of this year's draft.

St. Louis- Assuming they take Bradford
Detroit- Stafford
Bucs- Freeman
Kansas City- Cassel- but are they still sold on him?
Philadelphia- Kolb

Unless another team that needs a QB trades up in the 2nd round just behind St. Louis, I can't see us trading up for McCoy.
What if St Louis doesn't take Bradford? Who else needs a qb? I was discussing this at work today....is it possible that he slides to the Browns at 7?
Apr 15, 2010 9:09pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:10 PM
wes_mantooth wrote:
BR1986FB wrote:
royal_k wrote: If you want to pm me your number, I'll end a text your way when we pick.
My phone doesn't get texts but my girlfriend said she can add it on my phone. As soon as I get it I'll pm you.

Wes will laugh at this but I've only sent 3 texts in my life from a previous phone. I only use my cell once a day to call my girlfriend on my hour drive home.
This is not funny......GTFO!!!!!!!!!!
True story
Apr 15, 2010 9:10pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:11 PM
wes_mantooth wrote:
Fabio wrote: I'm not even sure we would NEED to trade up for St. Louis's 2nd round pick. If you take a look at the teams ahead of us in the second round, they either have their QB or will get one in the first round of this year's draft.

St. Louis- Assuming they take Bradford
Detroit- Stafford
Bucs- Freeman
Kansas City- Cassel- but are they still sold on him?
Philadelphia- Kolb

Unless another team that needs a QB trades up in the 2nd round just behind St. Louis, I can't see us trading up for McCoy.
What if St Louis doesn't take Bradford? Who else needs a qb? I was discussing this at work today....is it possible that he slides to the Browns at 7?
If St Louis doesn't take him, I have a feeling that Washington either will (even with McNabb) or will get Cleveland, Oakland, Buffalo & Jax in a bidding war.
Apr 15, 2010 9:11pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:13 PM
Who is his agent? Is there any concern about signing him?
Apr 15, 2010 9:13pm
F

Fabio

Gibby Hunter

547 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:19 PM
wes_mantooth wrote:
Fabio wrote: I'm not even sure we would NEED to trade up for St. Louis's 2nd round pick. If you take a look at the teams ahead of us in the second round, they either have their QB or will get one in the first round of this year's draft.

St. Louis- Assuming they take Bradford
Detroit- Stafford
Bucs- Freeman
Kansas City- Cassel- but are they still sold on him?
Philadelphia- Kolb

Unless another team that needs a QB trades up in the 2nd round just behind St. Louis, I can't see us trading up for McCoy.
What if St Louis doesn't take Bradford? Who else needs a qb? I was discussing this at work today....is it possible that he slides to the Browns at 7?
Good point, but to be completely honest, I would be shocked if St. Louis doesn't take Bradford. And if they didn't, and had the intention of drafting McCoy with their 2nd round pick, why would they trade their pick to a team who wants the same player? Other than that these are the teams that need a QB, or would probably take the best QB available:

Buffalo- Definitely needs a new QB.
Jacksonville- I don't see why people hate Garrard, he seems fine to me, but its pretty much assured the only QB they'll take in this draft is Tebow
Denver- I could see McDaniels bringing in another QB to promote competition
Oakland- depends if Al Davis has had enough of Jamarcus Russell
Minnesota- Depends if Favre returns, but it definitely doesn't hurt to plan for the future.
Carolina- They claim they are set on Matt Moore, but I beg to differ. In my opinion he's Jake Delhomme 2.0
Arizona- People say this but I think they are willing to give Leinhart/Anderson a chance.
49ers- Are they finally going to give up on Alex Smith- or will they see if he can redeem his bust status with Crabtree going into his second year?

other than those teams, I'm not sure I see any others who feel they have a pressing need at QB.
Apr 15, 2010 9:19pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:22 PM
wes_mantooth wrote: Who is his agent? Is there any concern about signing him?
Tom Condon. Same agent as Quinn, I believe.
Apr 15, 2010 9:22pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:26 PM
Bradford will go No. 1.

Either St. Louis wants him and makes the pick or another team goes up to get him.

St. Louis hasn't seemed gung ho about Bradford, so far, unless I'm missing something. I guess they could just be keeping an open mind.

I kind of hate when teams get the No. 1 pick in any sport and get over dramatic about it because they're in the spotlight.
Apr 15, 2010 9:26pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:29 PM
Non wrote: Bradford will go No. 1.

Either St. Louis wants him and makes the pick or another team goes up to get him.

St. Louis hasn't seemed gung ho about Bradford, so far, unless I'm missing something. I guess they could just be keeping an open mind.

I kind of hate when teams get the No. 1 pick in any sport and get over dramatic about it because they're in the spotlight.
Agreed. I did like when Cincy picked Palmer....it was known way before the draft and the contract was already in place.
Apr 15, 2010 9:29pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:32 PM
The Rams have A.J. Feeley, Keith Null and Mike Reilly. Yikes.

If that wasn't so awful they might be able to build a different way, but they have to get a QB.
Apr 15, 2010 9:32pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 15, 2010 9:38 PM
And I thought Quinn, Anderson & Ratliff were bad.
Apr 15, 2010 9:38pm
G

Gameover

Senior Member

150 posts
Apr 15, 2010 10:11 PM
^ Who?


:)
Apr 15, 2010 10:11pm
Cleveland Buck's avatar

Cleveland Buck

Troll Hunter

5,126 posts
Apr 15, 2010 11:07 PM
Unless we are trading up, scrapping the 3-4, and picking Ndamukong Suh, I would rather just stay where we are. People aren't even talking about Suh anymore since they stopped playing football. They will be talking about him again when they start playing again. He is an animal, and if the Rams don't take him, they are complete idiots. I don't care who their QB is. Suh is going to get 10 sacks a year and dominate inside for many years. Trent Dilfer can win a Super Bowl if you have a dominant defense.
Apr 15, 2010 11:07pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Apr 16, 2010 1:56 AM
I think the issue with Suh is people don't want to pay #1 pick money to a DT.
Apr 16, 2010 1:56am
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 16, 2010 7:42 AM
Not that it would please me giving up all of the picks but if the draft were to happen today, I think the Browns WILL move up and take Bradford.
Apr 16, 2010 7:42am
D

dat dude

Senior Member

1,564 posts
Apr 16, 2010 8:05 AM
No chance the Browns move up to #1 and take Bradford. You do not announce to the rest of the NFL that you have had talks to move up to #1 a week before the draft if you really intend on moving up. There is no benefit to doing so. You would be just negotiating against yourself. Heckert and Holmgren are not that stupid.
Apr 16, 2010 8:05am
BCBulldog's avatar

BCBulldog

Senior Member

824 posts
Apr 16, 2010 8:37 AM
dat dude wrote: No chance the Browns move up to #1 and take Bradford. You do not announce to the rest of the NFL that you have had talks to move up to #1 a week before the draft if you really intend on moving up. There is no benefit to doing so. You would be just negotiating against yourself. Heckert and Holmgren are not that stupid.
I don't know. I think we are beyond the smokescreen of saying you want to move up, but not really wanting to do it. There is nothing to gain. At this point, it is well known that the interest is there, now the Browns are trying to use the media to lower the asking price.

I think they are trying to get out in front of it all before the Rams do. The Rams aren't saying much because I don't think they want this first pick and there isn't very much interest from other teams in trading up to get it. If there was more interest, they would be out there shopping it trying to drum up offers and dropping hints that they may just keep the pick. They aren't saying anything. I think their greatest fear is that they have to actually use the pick on a QB that they really don't like.
Apr 16, 2010 8:37am
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Apr 16, 2010 8:53 AM
BCBulldog wrote:
I think their greatest fear is that they have to actually use the pick on a QB that they really don't like.
And this is where my thought process lies. I think the Browns love Bradford and the Rams aren't sold on him. If the Rams can trade down to #7 and maybe get Clausen AND picks, I think they'd probably be happy. Maybe even McCoy for the Rams in round 2.

I just don't like the Browns giving up all of those picks when we have 5 in the top 100. At least three of those picks should be starters. Unless Bradford is the starter from Day 1, I don't like using the picks for a player who will sit when we need a player to make an impact NOW.
Apr 16, 2010 8:53am
D

dat dude

Senior Member

1,564 posts
Apr 16, 2010 8:57 AM
1.) How is the media going to lower the asking price?

2.) You have to believe that before the presser, H&H discussed every answer to every possible question they could receive. So, why would they alert everyone in the league that they are interested in the #1 pick? IMO, if other teams were thinking of moving up, they may now be thinking it is necessary to begin negotiations with the Rams so they don't fall behind the 8 ball. The more players in the negotiations, the higher the asking price and/or offer.

3.) I don't think you can take the Rams silence as an admission that they don't want the pick. They need a QB now. They cannot afford the chance to trade out of the #1 slot to #7 without a QB deal. In other words, if they like Clausen more, they can do a swap with the Browns if Clausen falls to #7, similar to Rivers/Manning deal.
Apr 16, 2010 8:57am
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 16, 2010 9:29 AM
BR1986FB wrote:
BCBulldog wrote:
I think their greatest fear is that they have to actually use the pick on a QB that they really don't like.
And this is where my thought process lies. I think the Browns love Bradford and the Rams aren't sold on him. If the Rams can trade down to #7 and maybe get Clausen AND picks, I think they'd probably be happy. Maybe even McCoy for the Rams in round 2.

I just don't like the Browns giving up all of those picks when we have 5 in the top 100. At least three of those picks should be starters. Unless Bradford is the starter from Day 1, I don't like using the picks for a player who will sit when we need a player to make an impact NOW.
From everything I've read, Bradford is a starter in the NFL right now. I think the age of sitting your #1 pick (QB) for a year to "learn the system" is over. It's better to get that young QB experience in the game, even if he struggles, than it is to sit him and learn the system.
Apr 16, 2010 9:29am
BCBulldog's avatar

BCBulldog

Senior Member

824 posts
Apr 16, 2010 10:13 AM
dat dude wrote: 1.) How is the media going to lower the asking price?

2.) You have to believe that before the presser, H&H discussed every answer to every possible question they could receive. So, why would they alert everyone in the league that they are interested in the #1 pick? IMO, if other teams were thinking of moving up, they may now be thinking it is necessary to begin negotiations with the Rams so they don't fall behind the 8 ball. The more players in the negotiations, the higher the asking price and/or offer.

3.) I don't think you can take the Rams silence as an admission that they don't want the pick. They need a QB now. They cannot afford the chance to trade out of the #1 slot to #7 without a QB deal. In other words, if they like Clausen more, they can do a swap with the Browns if Clausen falls to #7, similar to Rivers/Manning deal.
My responses for your first two points are tied together. I think the Browns believe that they are, in fact, the only team interested in trading up to #1. By exposing this in the media, they not only can test this theory, but expose the Rams vulnerability if they truly don't want Bradford. If the Browns are wrong, they are still in the same position. But if they are right, they have all of the leverage.
Apr 16, 2010 10:13am
dazedconfused's avatar

dazedconfused

Senior Member

2,662 posts
Apr 16, 2010 12:12 PM
please dont trade up...that asking price is way too high.

schefter just said it would be the 7th, 38th, next years first and then some...why not just get mccoy in the second and save yourself the trouble
Apr 16, 2010 12:12pm