The Rg3 Bidding War Has Begun
-
It's funny that Peyton Manning essentially is dictating the future of the NFL.
If Manning wasn't hurt like he is, Andrew Luck probably wouldn't end up in Indy. Even if they were picking first overall. Assuming Peyton were healthy, the Colts could forseeanly trade out of the first pick and receive an kings ransom, strengthening their roster immensly and adding a Tannehill or Osweiler to sit and learn under Manning, a la Rodgers and Green Bay.
Some say they wouldn't pass up on Luck, but Manning believes he has 4 or 5 years left and by adding a large amount of high round picks to surround Manning they would be favorites for a couple more Super Bowls.
That would enable another team to trade up to first for Luck, which would then give the Browns a better chance to trade up for RG3, which some of you would cream your pants over.
So blame Peyton for us not getting RG3.
-
Being reported on twitter that the Rams will trade the #2 pick.
Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
Rams will trade No. 2 pick. Only question is where. Chargers once got two 1s, a 3 and a 5 for Eli Manning. Rams likely to get similar deal.
Being reported on twitter that the Rams will trade the #2 pick.
Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
Rams will trade No. 2 pick. Only question is where. Chargers once got two 1s, a 3 and a 5 for Eli Manning. Rams likely to get similar deal.
Yup, heard that on ESPN. We have to hope Washington ends up with Manning, or else we're going to have to consider giving up something along those lines.
& Lets go back to the Ryan Leaf trade- the Chargers gave up two firsts a second, and Eric Metcalf.
It's damn obvious whoever wants to move up to #2 is going to have to overpay for the pick.
-
I don't see the Browns trading up. Our front office isn't one that's going to take risks, especially not on offense. In all reality I think it's about a 5% chance we can get the #2 pick.
I think the only advantage we have is that St. Louis will get the 4th, meaning they wouldn't have to drop that far down in the draft. But we're not giving up the 22 so what are the other options? a 2013 1st? I'd give that up in a heartbeat and we're so bad that's almost a guaranteed top 10 pick for the Rams next year. Maybe package the 2012 2nd and 2013 1st?
But like I said, we don't take risks. I have a feeling they are so dead set on the WCO they will completely look past RG3's talent.
-
they want 2 first rounders a 2nd and a fifth....there goes 80% of our draft for chumley the big grinned full-of himself- rastafarian. i'd hire you guys in a heartbeat....to clean my balls and toilet.
-
No, you're confused. Canton Mike got it. You can't get past your Griffin Man-Crush. The Redskins (theoretical) offer IS superior to yours. In fact, it's flat out stupid to those of us who happen to be objective about the situation.
I'll spell it out as simply as I can. If the Redskins offer is true- that's enough value to not only move up to #2 to take Griffin, it's enough to move up to #1 to take Luck.
I fervently hope H&H aren't going to be dumb enough to give away THREE premium picks to move up two draft slots.
IF the Rams would take the Redskins potential offer (they'd be fools not to) Kalil and Blackmon (two blue chip prospects at positions of dire need for the Rams) will be off the board. The Vikings will take one (most likely Kalil) - the Browns will have the other sitting in their laps. So it's time for the Browns to play reverse screw job- hold the Rams hostage.
You need to extract the "Blackmon is a top 5 lock" logic from your brain.
He's not a top 5 lock, so there is value for STL to trade back to #6 because I believe both Blackmon (if he doesn't run 4.49 or lower) and Floyd (or Rieff) will be there for them to choose.
I don't think the Browns want Blackmon or Richardson @ #4 so therefore it makes trading UP even more of a necessity.
Getting back to which package is more valuable, I think the Rams value #22 more than a 2013 #1 pick from Washington because they have players scouted and are dealing with a known variable.
#4
#22
#33
#66
#96
#100/#118
If the take take the Browns trade, they'll have their choice of four of the top 66 players with them being able to get an impact OT (Rieff) and Receiver (Hill, Jeffrey, Wright) that can be the foundation of their offense for years to come.
If they take the Redskins offer:
#6
#33
#39
#66
#70
#96
Redskins offer includes their #39 + #70 but does that equal #22 + #100 or #118?
What do you think?
#6 + #39 + #70 <<<< #4 + #22 + #100 or #118?
It's not even close.
And in your scenario you had the Rams trading #6 + #33 to the Browns to get back up to #4?????
Why do that when they can make the Browns trade amd keep #33 while getting #4 + #22??
Your post continues to not make any sense just like I stated originally.
If you want to talk about Washington's 2013 #1, then the Browns 2nd rounder continues to make their deal superior but I doubt they even have to include it.
Browns #4 + #22 + 4th rounder (Falcons or our's if it seals the deal) beats any Washington offer that has went public.
You need to extract the "Blackmon is a top 5 lock" logic from your brain.
He's not a top 5 lock, so there is value for STL to trade back to #6 because I believe both Blackmon (if he doesn't run 4.49 or lower) and Floyd (or Rieff) will be there for them to choose.
I don't think the Browns want Blackmon or Richardson @ #4 so therefore it makes trading UP even more of a necessity.
Getting back to which package is more valuable, I think the Rams value #22 more than a 2013 #1 pick from Washington because they have players scouted and are dealing with a known variable.
#4
#22
#33
#66
#96
#100/#118
If the take take the Browns trade, they'll have their choice of four of the top 66 players with them being able to get an impact OT (Rieff) and Receiver (Hill, Jeffrey, Wright) that can be the foundation of their offense for years to come.
If they take the Redskins offer:
#6
#33
#39
#66
#70
#96
Redskins offer includes their #39 + #70 but does that equal #22 + #100 or #118?
What do you think?
#6 + #39 + #70 <<<< #4 + #22 + #100 or #118?
It's not even close.
And in your scenario you had the Rams trading #6 + #33 to the Browns to get back up to #4?????
Why do that when they can make the Browns trade amd keep #33 while getting #4 + #22??
Your post continues to not make any sense just like I stated originally.
If you want to talk about Washington's 2013 #1, then the Browns 2nd rounder continues to make their deal superior but I doubt they even have to include it.
Browns #4 + #22 + 4th rounder (Falcons or our's if it seals the deal) beats any Washington offer that has went public.
It doesn't make sense to you why the Rams would trade a second rounder to the Browns to move from the 6 to the 4 instead of just doing the trade with the Browns??
It is simple really ... the Browns don't seem like they are going to trade the 22 and the 4 for the 2. So the trade you think the Rams would make doesn't exsist. And if they were to take the Skins offer they will most likely miss out on drafting Blackmon because there is a good chance the Browns do draft him or atleast bluff and show signs that they are going to draft him so they can force the Rams hand if need be.
I wouldn't consider making any deals with the Rams that is going to make us lose 4 or 5 picks. If RGIII is there at 4 I can live with us takin him. I wouldn't sell the farm when we have so many holes though. We can always draft next years sexy top QB after we fill out the roster this year. There is a top QB prospect in almost every draft.
-
Being reported on twitter that the Rams will trade the #2 pick.
Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
Rams will trade No. 2 pick. Only question is where. Chargers once got two 1s, a 3 and a 5 for Eli Manning. Rams likely to get similar deal.
Being reported on twitter that the Rams will trade the #2 pick.
Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
Rams will trade No. 2 pick. Only question is where. Chargers once got two 1s, a 3 and a 5 for Eli Manning. Rams likely to get similar deal.
So I know the draft chart is being "thrown out the window" with the new contracts for rookies and competition driving up prices for the #2 slot this year, but I wanted to compare this 2004 trade to the one that will occur this year.
1st of all, in 2004, the Chargers picked Eli Manning with the #1 pick overall in the draft (not the #2 like the Rams will) as we know, the draft picks are exponentially more valuable closer to the top of the draft. The Giants traded their 2004 round 1, 3, and 5 picks and their 2005 round 1 pick to move from #4 to #1 to get Eli.
So if this year's trade is going to mirror the trade in 2004, there are 2 big differences. One, as mentioned we would trade from #4 to #2 (not #1) and for the "second best QB" in the draft and not the "best QB" (in Luck). Secondly, we would be able to offer the Rams 2 first round picks THIS year, experts say current draft picks are valued much higher than future picks.
Considering those 2 differences, I think a reasonable trade would be the #4, #22 and one of our 4th round picks this year for the #2 spot, which doesnt seem that outrageous if our front office is sold on RGIII.. But if the Redskins, or whoever, offer way more than that, obviously the past trades go out the window so Im not sure. But that value for the trade makes sense to me...
-
Most expensive Browns jersey ever. But damn, it sure is snazzy.
-
I would give up this year #4, #22 a 3rd and a 5th to move up and be done with it. Eli Manning, who I actually think is overrated, still has won two Super Bowls. So the trade was worth it. I wouldn't advocate gambling like this on any position other than QB. I think the Falcons gave up too much just for a WR in Julio Jones. I would never trade everything for a WR or RB.
-
I just watched RGIII on NFL network in an interview with Mariucci (however you spell it) and he was damn impressive in diagramming a play that the coach had done 5 minutes before with him talking the whole time asking him questions and trying to distract him.
If the kid can play like he interviews and runs, I make the trade.
-
I would give up this year #4, #22 a 3rd and a 5th to move up and be done with it. Eli Manning, who I actually think is overrated, still has won two Super Bowls. So the trade was worth it. I wouldn't advocate gambling like this on any position other than QB. I think the Falcons gave up too much just for a WR in Julio Jones. I would never trade everything for a WR or RB.
^ Still not there, but have to admit the kid does present himself well...
Eli Manning, who I actually think is overrated, still has won two Super Bowls.
That's the first time I've ever seen Eli and "overrated" in the same sentence.
"Under-appreciated", more times than I can count.
-
I would give up this year #4, #22 a 3rd and a 5th to move up and be done with it. Eli Manning, who I actually think is overrated, still has won two Super Bowls. So the trade was worth it. I wouldn't advocate gambling like this on any position other than QB. I think the Falcons gave up too much just for a WR in Julio Jones. I would never trade everything for a WR or RB.
I would give up this year #4, #22 a 3rd and a 5th to move up and be done with it. Eli Manning, who I actually think is overrated, still has won two Super Bowls. So the trade was worth it. I wouldn't advocate gambling like this on any position other than QB. I think the Falcons gave up too much just for a WR in Julio Jones. I would never trade everything for a WR or RB.
Never trade up for a RB... PERIOD!!! Finding a serviceable RB isn't hard, their careers are usually short, and they don't win Superbowls. QBs/WRs win Superbowls.
-
Being reported on twitter that the Rams will trade the #2 pick.
Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
Rams will trade No. 2 pick. Only question is where. Chargers once got two 1s, a 3 and a 5 for Eli Manning. Rams likely to get similar deal.
So I know the draft chart is being "thrown out the window" with the new contracts for rookies and competition driving up prices for the #2 slot this year, but I wanted to compare this 2004 trade to the one that will occur this year.
1st of all, in 2004, the Chargers picked Eli Manning with the #1 pick overall in the draft (not the #2 like the Rams will) as we know, the draft picks are exponentially more valuable closer to the top of the draft. The Giants traded their 2004 round 1, 3, and 5 picks and their 2005 round 1 pick to move from #4 to #1 to get Eli.
So if this year's trade is going to mirror the trade in 2004, there are 2 big differences. One, as mentioned we would trade from #4 to #2 (not #1) and for the "second best QB" in the draft and not the "best QB" (in Luck). Secondly, we would be able to offer the Rams 2 first round picks THIS year, experts say current draft picks are valued much higher than future picks.
Considering those 2 differences, I think a reasonable trade would be the #4, #22 and one of our 4th round picks this year for the #2 spot, which doesnt seem that outrageous if our front office is sold on RGIII.. But if the Redskins, or whoever, offer way more than that, obviously the past trades go out the window so Im not sure. But that value for the trade makes sense to me...
So I know the draft chart is being "thrown out the window" with the new contracts for rookies and competition driving up prices for the #2 slot this year, but I wanted to compare this 2004 trade to the one that will occur this year.
1st of all, in 2004, the Chargers picked Eli Manning with the #1 pick overall in the draft (not the #2 like the Rams will) as we know, the draft picks are exponentially more valuable closer to the top of the draft. The Giants traded their 2004 round 1, 3, and 5 picks and their 2005 round 1 pick to move from #4 to #1 to get Eli.
So if this year's trade is going to mirror the trade in 2004, there are 2 big differences. One, as mentioned we would trade from #4 to #2 (not #1) and for the "second best QB" in the draft and not the "best QB" (in Luck). Secondly, we would be able to offer the Rams 2 first round picks THIS year, experts say current draft picks are valued much higher than future picks.
Considering those 2 differences, I think a reasonable trade would be the #4, #22 and one of our 4th round picks this year for the #2 spot, which doesnt seem that outrageous if our front office is sold on RGIII.. But if the Redskins, or whoever, offer way more than that, obviously the past trades go out the window so Im not sure. But that value for the trade makes sense to me...
That is the reasonable and fair price to move up. Should the Skins push it into the stupid category, we respectfully pass- and hold Blackmon hostage to the Rams.
-
Most expensive Browns jersey ever. But damn, it sure is snazzy.
Most expensive Browns jersey ever. But damn, it sure is snazzy.
You mean you would be willing to allow RGIII to wear Brady Quinn's number? Blasphemy!
-
Looking at our current roster we have 12 or 13 legit starters on this team, giving up 3 or 4 potential starters for one guy just seems crazy. The kid isnt even the best QB in the draft and we are talking about paying more than when the NYG traded up to get the BEST QB in the draft. Plain and simple good teams dont make moves like this, we are talking about getting into a bidding war with the Redskins. Let that sink in and tell me that this is the right move... Yea well be competing against the same team that gave Haynesworth 100 mil.
-
Most expensive Browns jersey ever. But damn, it sure is snazzy.
You mean you would be willing to allow RGIII to wear Brady Quinn's number? Blasphemy!
You mean you would be willing to allow RGIII to wear Brady Quinn's number? Blasphemy!
Come on Gip- he did wear #10 in college. Sure would have to hope he turns out better than Quinn.
-
Looking at our current roster we have 12 or 13 legit starters on this team, giving up 3 or 4 potential starters for one guy just seems crazy. The kid isnt even the best QB in the draft and we are talking about paying more than when the NYG traded up to get the BEST QB in the draft. Plain and simple good teams dont make moves like this, we are talking about getting into a bidding war with the Redskins. Let that sink in and tell me that this is the right move... Yea well be competing against the same team that gave Haynesworth 100 mil.
Looking at our current roster we have 12 or 13 legit starters on this team, giving up 3 or 4 potential starters for one guy just seems crazy. The kid isnt even the best QB in the draft and we are talking about paying more than when the NYG traded up to get the BEST QB in the draft. Plain and simple good teams dont make moves like this, we are talking about getting into a bidding war with the Redskins. Let that sink in and tell me that this is the right move... Yea well be competing against the same team that gave Haynesworth 100 mil.
All drafts aren't created equal. RGIII would be the number 1 pick in any draft in the last 13 years except this one.
That's why you make the deal.
-jj
-
The Browns 1st round picks this year trump anything the skins can offer. By offerring 2nd and 3rd round picks, they are just trying to keep you from the RG3 market. Trading back to the 4th overall slot, still gives the Rams a shot at Kalil or Blackmon, trading back further does not.
In all reality, if Cleveland throws in a 3rd rounder with the two first round picks, the Rams would have trouble going with the Redskins offer. More than likely, they will try to convince your GM to upgrade the 3rd rounder to your 2nd rounder. Something tells me you shouldn't pass on RG3. You've got some of the most room under the cap. Get your QB and bring in some free agents, you should have the pick of the FA litter.
-
You mean you would be willing to allow RGIII to wear Brady Quinn's number? Blasphemy!
Come on Gip- he did wear #10 in college. Sure would have to hope he turns out better than Quinn.
-
Looking at our current roster we have 12 or 13 legit starters on this team, giving up 3 or 4 potential starters for one guy just seems crazy. The kid isnt even the best QB in the draft and we are talking about paying more than when the NYG traded up to get the BEST QB in the draft. Plain and simple good teams dont make moves like this, we are talking about getting into a bidding war with the Redskins. Let that sink in and tell me that this is the right move... Yea well be competing against the same team that gave Haynesworth 100 mil.
All drafts aren't created equal. RGIII would be the number 1 pick in any draft in the last 13 years except this one.
That's why you make the deal.
-jj
All drafts aren't created equal. RGIII would be the number 1 pick in any draft in the last 13 years except this one.
That's why you make the deal.
-jj
JJ I asked you this by PM, so I'll post it here instead. I know you're extremely high on RGIII. But every player has a max limit- so what's your opinion on just how much the Browns should give up to land him?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login