Ok let me kill this Trent Richardson argument once and for all. Look Trent Richardson is a really good running back, certainly the best in the coming draft class, but he's not an LT/AP once in a generation talent that warrants a Top 10 pick. For starters let's look at the starting running backs of the last 5 Super Bowl winners:

2010: James Starks/Ryan Grant
2009: Reggie Bush/Pierre Thomas
2008: Willie Parker
2007: Ahmad Bradshaw/Brandon Jacobs
2006: Joseph Addai/Dominic Rhodes

Not exactly a who's who of superstar running backs is it? Not only that but most of these teams had a running back by committee system. Running backs are seemingly the easiest to find quality starters in later rounds (Arian Foster was undrafted for God's sake) and they have a short shelf life. If you asked a casual NFL fan who the two best RB's in the league are they'd probably say Adrian Peterson and Chris Johnson right? Well both the Vikings and the Titans are not in the playoffs. In fact, not since the late 90s Broncos has a team with an elite running back won a Super Bowl (and that's because they had Elway, want a SB winner with an elite RB and only decent QB? You'd have to go all the way back to the '85 Bears with an aging Walter Payton). The last team to even GET to the Super Bowl with an elite running back was the Seahawks with Alexander and even he didn't last too long after that run.

Look at the Chargers, they had LT in his prime for a number of years....never made a Super Bowl. The Rams have had Steven Jackson for a number of years now....never even close to a Super Bowl. The Lions with Barry Sanders? The Chiefs with Priest Holmes? Do you see a pattern here?

Richardson is a nice player but if you want a round one running back it's better to do it when the rest of the team is filled out (See the Saints with Ingram, Steelers with Mendenhall, etc.). The Browns would be better served re-signing Hillis, drafting a RB in the later rounds, or signing one in FA. But drafting this guy with the #4 pick would keep the Browns on the same losing treadmill. Teams are just gonna stack the box like they did with Hillis.

Y-Town Steelhound;1047007 wrote:Ok let me kill this Trent Richardson argument once and for all. Look Trent Richardson is a really good running back, certainly the best in the coming draft class, but he's not an LT/AP once in a generation talent that warrants a Top 10 pick. For starters let's look at the starting running backs of the last 5 Super Bowl winners:

2010: James Starks/Ryan Grant
2009: Reggie Bush/Pierre Thomas
2008: Willie Parker
2007: Ahmad Bradshaw/Brandon Jacobs
2006: Joseph Addai/Dominic Rhodes

Not exactly a who's who of superstar running backs is it? Not only that but most of these teams had a running back by committee system. Running backs are seemingly the easiest to find quality starters in later rounds (Arian Foster was undrafted for God's sake) and they have a short shelf life. If you asked a casual NFL fan who the two best RB's in the league are they'd probably say Adrian Peterson and Chris Johnson right? Well both the Vikings and the Titans are not in the playoffs. In fact, not since the late 90s Broncos has a team with an elite running back won a Super Bowl. The last team to even GET to the Super Bowl with an elite running back was the Seahawks with Alexander and even he didn't last too long after that run.

Look at the Chargers, they had LT in his prime for a number of years....never made a Super Bowl. The Rams have had Steven Jackson for a number of years now....never even close to a Super Bowl. The Lions with Barry Sanders? The Chiefs with Priest Holmes? Do you see a pattern here?

Richardson is a nice player but if you want a round one running back it's better to do it when the rest of the team is filled out (See the Saints with Ingram, Steelers with Mendenhall, etc.). The Browns would be better served re-signing Hillis, drafting a RB in the later rounds, or signing one in FA. But drafting this guy with the #4 pick would keep the Browns on the same losing treadmill. Teams are just gonna stack the box like they did with Hillis.

Pretty much what I said, except you elaborated on it in tl;dr fashion.

like_that;1047012 wrote:Pretty much what I said, except you elaborated on it with in tl'dr fashion.

Hooked on Phonics doesn't work for everyone. I've always been someone to back up my points on here with facts and logic.

like_that;1047003 wrote: Hillis is a 7th rd pick
I would not be happy with Richardson at 4, especially when we have much bigger needs, and RB is the easiest to figure out.

Hillis is not an elite back.

The only reason I say take T-Rich is if we can't trade down and RG III is either gone or did not enter the draft. I agree that a QB and WR are more important, that's why I'd prefer RGIII or Blackmon but I don't see either being available at 4.

And I don't want Claiborne at 4 because I'm in the camp that believes the D-Line makes the defensive secondary.

I'd much prefer to trade out of the pick.

Y-Town Steelhound;1047013 wrote:Hooked on Phonics doesn't work for everyone. I've always been someone to back up my points on here with facts and logic.

So did I. Sometimes professors have a word limit. I was just giving you a hard time anyway.

lhslep134;1047015 wrote:Hillis is not an elite back.

The only reason I say take T-Rich is if we can't trade down and RG III is either gone or did not enter the draft. I agree that a QB and WR are more important, that's why I'd prefer RGIII or Blackmon but I don't see either being available at 4.

Hillis isn't but the point is he was doing damn well for the Browns, and they didn't give up much at all to get him. If Richardson fell to the Browns 2nd first round pick, then I would possibly consider it.

I'm not opposed to the Browns adding another RB in the draft, particularly if they don't re-sign Hillis. But why wast a 1st rounder on Richardson when you could get say Lamar Miller or LaMichael James in round 2 or 3.....or even Isaiah Pead or Boom Herron in round 4 or 5?

I've always been in the camp that every NFL running back is a capable runner because they were most likely very good in college. In the NFL, if you have a good offensive line you'll have good running backs.

I'm a huge LeMichael James fan. He's my favorite RB in this draft.

Commander of Awesome;1047028 wrote:I'm a huge LeMichael James fan. He's my favorite RB in this draft.

I like him too. And before someone chimes in with the cliche "he's too small" argument. How'd that argument work out for Ray Rice, Chris Johnson, Darren Sproles, MJD, etc?

I like him as well. What about the RB from VT?

Commander of Awesome;1047028 wrote:I'm a huge LeMichael James fan. He's my favorite RB in this draft.

Would you take him with our second rounder? I think if he falls to the 3rd we absolutely should take him there (and obviously disregard taking T-Rich) but he's so talented that IMO no way he lasts to the 3rd.

like_that;1047032 wrote:I like him as well. What about the RB from VT?

David Wilson. I've been preaching his name since day 1. Want him with 2nd rd pick

lhslep134;1047035 wrote:Would you take him with our second rounder? I think if he falls to the 3rd we absolutely should take him there (and obviously disregard taking T-Rich) but he's so talented that IMO no way he lasts to the 3rd.

I agree completely. He wont last until the 3rd. I would take him in the second, especially if we trade rape a team and get an additional pick in the 2nd round.

Commander of Awesome;1047028 wrote:I'm a huge LeMichael James fan. He's my favorite RB in this draft.

+3

Tannehill suffered a foot injury that could be "monumental to his draft status".
This means Achilles in my mind

I just don't see the value in selecting any RB in the first round any more. Given the rule changes (which won't go away) regarding defenseless receivers, offenses heavy reliance on passing, and RB relative short shelf life, there really isn't a need to spend so highly on one. The Adrian Peterson based offenses just don't happen because not all are AP and they don't succeed for the long term.

Not a cut in stone type of deal as most teams have a certain philosophy and conferences that are stronger in particular areas, but I would rank need for a RB behind QB, D-line and linebackers for the Browns, whether any of the available are the BPA or not.

Ggimme hue jackson as OC with rg3 and jeffery with our 2 first round picks and we have something cooking!

Well rg3 is entering the draft

bases_loaded;1046758 wrote:Year one: take care of defense. Check
Year two: take care if offense. April
Year three:fill in holes. Next year

Your timeline is a little off. Holmgren was hired in December 2009. He brought in Heckert the following month. Year 1 was 2010. They were here for free agency, the draft, and the whole offseason. This past season was year 2. Year 3 is beginning now.

bases_loaded;1046801 wrote:When your prior regime drafted 3 busts in the second round,its hard to expedite the process. Unless of course you want a bunch of stop gaps

This regime came in and took Hardesty, McCoy, and Lauvao in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. That's not looking like much of an "expeditor" either.

If the Browns take Trent Richardson at 4, I will be livid. If Blackmon and RGIII aren't there, you trade back 1 or 2 spots at a time, as far as you can to get the guy you want.

se-alum;1047145 wrote:If the Browns take Trent Richardson at 4, I will be livid. If Blackmon and RGIII aren't there, you trade back 1 or 2 spots at a time, as far as you can to get the guy you want.

Heard a funny tweet read on knr on the way home.

"the browns will draft Richardson when Tim Tebow switches to scientology".

A couple of guys I wouldn't mind the Browns targeting are U of A's Juron Criner and Nick Foles. Foles has great footwork and an NFL arm and can make all the throws, and Criner has special ability, but the team was terrible this year due to 5 new offensive linemen, a terrible defense, and inability to run the football.

I really wish we could find out who Heckert wanted to pick in the 3rd round instead of Holmgren forcing him to take McCoy.......back in 2010.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andrew_perloff/01/10/2012.nfl.mock.draft/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t11_a2

BR1986FB;1047291 wrote:http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andrew_perloff/01/10/2012.nfl.mock.draft/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t11_a2

Apparently Andrew Perloft didn't listen to Heckert and Holmgren's press conference.

like_that;1047297 wrote:Apparently Andrew Perloft didn't listen to Heckert and Holmgren's press conference.

If they like him I wouldn't discount it. The #2 pick equals the #4 & 22 on the old draft chart.