TRICH traded to colts
-
You guys knew I'd have a strong opinion on this...
The Browns trading Richardson is NOT tanking the season. He hasn't made them winners during his 18-game career. He hasn't carried the team. He isn't a game-changer or elite player, partially because of the position he plays, partially because he isn't among the best at that position.
The Browns were 0-2 because they were awful on offense. An offense featuring an overdrafted running back, something everybody in the local media (including Pluto and Ridenour) were starting to nut up and point out. Although Pluto never liked the pick, didn't see the sense of drafting a back that high in a league where running backs aren't the X-factor on winning teams.
In the 8 games since his last 100-yard outing, Richardson has gained 3.3 yards per carry. The thought was that he'd look better healthy... but he hasn't. He doesn't look explosive or difficult to tackle. He looks ordinary.
It's because everybody is stacking the box? Nope. Richardson faces BELOW THE AVERAGE in stacked boxes according to PFF, tweeted by Higdon today. So it isn't health or stacked boxes. It's because Jim Brown was right: Trent Richardson isn't a special running back. He hasn't been since he came into the league.
The Colts came calling and offered a first round pick because they already have their elite quarterback. And I think the Browns fleeced the hell out of them. Where would I personally place Richardson's value? I'd say early round 3. I've watched Bernard Pierce, backup in Baltimore and third round pick, and I think he looks like a better NFL running back. He hits the hole faster and with more authority. He averages 5.0 per carry. He'd be the best running back on a lot of teams headed to the playoffs this year... just about all of them who aren't SF or his own, frankly.
Bottom line: The Browns would turn around like the Colts when they got their Andrew Luck. Not because of a running back. The brass in Berea has all but taken out an ad and said, "The 2012 draft made absolutely no sense, partially because it happened in 2012, not 1974."
They looked at their starting QB and this year's draft crop and since then have brought in two "dirty starters" in Campbell and Hoyer, traded 4th and 5th round picks for 3 and 4th in next year's draft, stated that Weeden might not start even when he's healthy, and finally traded their starting running back for a first round pick.
Does ANYBODY doubt that the Browns FINALLY know they need an elite quarterback to compete in this league? That they believe if they had Andrew Luck on this exact team they could win 10 games because last year's Colts team was NOT better than this year's Browns team? Do you know about the banner in the War Room, that states flat out that they need to find a "championship level quarterback?"
Oh, and along the way, the Browns cut veterans in favor of UDFAs and cut even more cap in the Richardson trade. They know they might have to trade picks to get to #1 but in addition to 10 draft picks (including 7 in the first 4 rounds) they'll have the most cap room in the NFL to surround Bridgewater (or whoever they love) with as many as five serious new starters.
Of course, one of those will be a running back, probably selected in round 2 or 3 and paired with a free agent. Like winning NFL teams usually do it.
The Browns didn't tank the 2013 season by trading a running back with a 3.5 YPC for a 1st round pick. They may have laid the foundation for about a decade of winning. Because the Richardson-Weeden combo draft was NOT the answer. It was a very, VERY bad draft.
-
And let me add: The Colts had access to Andrew Luck because they went 1-15. To get to number one, you can't win 4 or 5 games. And if you do, you better hope the team at #1 wants to trade and you have a literal shitload of picks to send them... and maybe Jabaal Sheard, too.
If the Jags get the first pick and then both Hundley and Mariota stay in school? That's where the trouble starts. The Browns better love Tajh a lot if that happens. I do.
-
Excellent post. I agree.
-
I agree, this is a brilliant move. Would I trade a horrible season this year for sustained winning seasons starting two years from now? Absolutely, and that's what the FO is going for here. The most important thing for a successful football team is QB, OL, Pass Rush. They've nailed down pass rush with Mingo, Kreuger, and the rest of the front 7. They have all the OL components except for RG. Now they need QB. With 10 picks in a very talented upcoming draft class, they will be able to address QB, RG, WR, and CB all with third-round or earlier picks.
Most importantly, they are trying to keep the core talent pool of the team under 30. That means that by the time picks from last year and the 2014 draft start producing, we'll still have production from the components of the team that are productive today.
Let me tell you, if I could find a Joe Banner Browns Jersey, I'd buy it.
I agree, this is a brilliant move. Would I trade a horrible season this year for sustained winning seasons starting two years from now? Absolutely, and that's what the FO is going for here. The most important thing for a successful football team is QB, OL, Pass Rush. They've nailed down pass rush with Mingo, Kreuger, and the rest of the front 7. They have all the OL components except for RG. Now they need QB. With 10 picks in a very talented upcoming draft class, they will be able to address QB, RG, WR, and CB all with third-round or earlier picks.
Most importantly, they are trying to keep the core talent pool of the team under 30. That means that by the time picks from last year and the 2014 draft start producing, we'll still have production from the components of the team that are productive today.
Let me tell you, if I could find a Joe Banner Browns Jersey, I'd buy it.
No, the OL and 2nd CB are not the reasons we lost BOTH games. Against both teams, the biggest plays given up in the passing game were poor coverages by LBs and Ss, which happens occasionally against teams now. The OL looked better in week 2, but the WRs couldn't get open.
If we drafted an OLineman and a CB with our first 2 picks... we are sitting in the bottom AGAIN and AGAIN. Do I think we need to improve at G? yes, but we won't see such a weakness once Lauvao is back. Do I think we could get a better CB2? yes, but it is not costing us games.
We NEED WRs!!! Badly. AND, you can already tell this team is going in a new direction at QB. If we use our 2 1st rounders on a QB and WR, we can use our next 3 picks to grab a CB, another WR or TE, and maybe a OG or S. Then we have late draft to add a MLB and RB, and if we hit on at least the first 2 and get a starter out of the next 3, this team is ready to compete NEXT year.
As for this year, we did not get any worse b/c of this trade. Now we can use somebody else to run against 9-man fronts and get 3.3 YPC.
Like a lot of Browns fans I was initially shocked by the trade but after reflection it actually makes sense. Richardson didn't pass the eyeball test even when healthy and with our current QB play he ran the risk of getting injured by the end of the season. If the FO weren't impressed by him they did the right thing by trading him when his perceived value is highest. Given his ypc inserting McGinnis in there will not really hurt the Browns running game this year.
Another important point is that last year we saw Hardesty hitting the hole much harder than T-Rich and who does the FO keep despite his injury? He would have been cut if the FO didn't think he was good.
I'd projected a 6 win season which they can still make with this roster but now they get an additonal first and fourth round pick which they could use to trade up for the franchise QB if necessary.
I've got to give it to this front office they make bold and decisive moves which we haven't seen since the return.
-
And if Chud's announcement that Weeden may not start again even with healthy didn't make it clear enough... he's toast. He's finished. The coaches wanted to see if he had anything but a big arm, hoped he would show quicker eyes, more leadership, more maturity, more downfield accuracy... and they didn't see anything along those lines.
They saw a team without a top 20-25 quarterback and an overrated, overdrafted RB. A team that might scramble to 4 or 5 wins because of their front 7. They saw absolutely no reason to believe they were going to the playoffs... and then a team came calling with a first round pick for their overrated back.
I totally get it. And totally agree.
-
Excellent post. I agree.
Thanks, man. And also remember that the Colts needed a back because their starter went down for the season.
His name was Vic Ballard. Who the hell is Vic Ballard? Exactly.
Excellent post. I agree.
-
Chances of next year's "RB by committee" committee being the two guys on IR this year? Hardesty and Lewis?
-
You guys knew I'd have a strong opinion on this...
The Browns trading Richardson is NOT tanking the season. He hasn't made them winners during his 18-game career. He hasn't carried the team. He isn't a game-changer or elite player, partially because of the position he plays, partially because he isn't among the best at that position.
The Browns were 0-2 because they were awful on offense. An offense featuring an overdrafted running back, something everybody in the local media (including Pluto and Ridenour) were starting to nut up and point out. Although Pluto never liked the pick, didn't see the sense of drafting a back that high in a league where running backs aren't the X-factor on winning teams.
In the 8 games since his last 100-yard outing, Richardson has gained 3.3 yards per carry. The thought was that he'd look better healthy... but he hasn't. He doesn't look explosive or difficult to tackle. He looks ordinary.
It's because everybody is stacking the box? Nope. Richardson faces BELOW THE AVERAGE in stacked boxes according to PFF, tweeted by Higdon today. So it isn't health or stacked boxes. It's because Jim Brown was right: Trent Richardson isn't a special running back. He hasn't been since he came into the league.
The Colts came calling and offered a first round pick because they already have their elite quarterback. And I think the Browns fleeced the hell out of them. Where would I personally place Richardson's value? I'd say early round 3. I've watched Bernard Pierce, backup in Baltimore and third round pick, and I think he looks like a better NFL running back. He hits the hole faster and with more authority. He averages 5.0 per carry. He'd be the best running back on a lot of teams headed to the playoffs this year... just about all of them who aren't SF or his own, frankly.
Bottom line: The Browns would turn around like the Colts when they got their Andrew Luck. Not because of a running back. The brass in Berea has all but taken out an ad and said, "The 2012 draft made absolutely no sense, partially because it happened in 2012, not 1974."
They looked at their starting QB and this year's draft crop and since then have brought in two "dirty starters" in Campbell and Hoyer, traded 4th and 5th round picks for 3 and 4th in next year's draft, stated that Weeden might not start even when he's healthy, and finally traded their starting running back for a first round pick.
Does ANYBODY doubt that the Browns FINALLY know they need an elite quarterback to compete in this league? That they believe if they had Andrew Luck on this exact team they could win 10 games because last year's Colts team was NOT better than this year's Browns team? Do you know about the banner in the War Room, that states flat out that they need to find a "championship level quarterback?"
Oh, and along the way, the Browns cut veterans in favor of UDFAs and cut even more cap in the Richardson trade. They know they might have to trade picks to get to #1 but in addition to 10 draft picks (including 7 in the first 4 rounds) they'll have the most cap room in the NFL to surround Bridgewater (or whoever they love) with as many as five serious new starters.
Of course, one of those will be a running back, probably selected in round 2 or 3 and paired with a free agent. Like winning NFL teams usually do it.
The Browns didn't tank the 2013 season by trading a running back with a 3.5 YPC for a 1st round pick. They may have laid the foundation for about a decade of winning. Because the Richardson-Weeden combo draft was NOT the answer. It was a very, VERY bad draft.
You guys knew I'd have a strong opinion on this...
The Browns trading Richardson is NOT tanking the season. He hasn't made them winners during his 18-game career. He hasn't carried the team. He isn't a game-changer or elite player, partially because of the position he plays, partially because he isn't among the best at that position.
The Browns were 0-2 because they were awful on offense. An offense featuring an overdrafted running back, something everybody in the local media (including Pluto and Ridenour) were starting to nut up and point out. Although Pluto never liked the pick, didn't see the sense of drafting a back that high in a league where running backs aren't the X-factor on winning teams.
In the 8 games since his last 100-yard outing, Richardson has gained 3.3 yards per carry. The thought was that he'd look better healthy... but he hasn't. He doesn't look explosive or difficult to tackle. He looks ordinary.
It's because everybody is stacking the box? Nope. Richardson faces BELOW THE AVERAGE in stacked boxes according to PFF, tweeted by Higdon today. So it isn't health or stacked boxes. It's because Jim Brown was right: Trent Richardson isn't a special running back. He hasn't been since he came into the league.
The Colts came calling and offered a first round pick because they already have their elite quarterback. And I think the Browns fleeced the hell out of them. Where would I personally place Richardson's value? I'd say early round 3. I've watched Bernard Pierce, backup in Baltimore and third round pick, and I think he looks like a better NFL running back. He hits the hole faster and with more authority. He averages 5.0 per carry. He'd be the best running back on a lot of teams headed to the playoffs this year... just about all of them who aren't SF or his own, frankly.
Bottom line: The Browns would turn around like the Colts when they got their Andrew Luck. Not because of a running back. The brass in Berea has all but taken out an ad and said, "The 2012 draft made absolutely no sense, partially because it happened in 2012, not 1974."
They looked at their starting QB and this year's draft crop and since then have brought in two "dirty starters" in Campbell and Hoyer, traded 4th and 5th round picks for 3 and 4th in next year's draft, stated that Weeden might not start even when he's healthy, and finally traded their starting running back for a first round pick.
Does ANYBODY doubt that the Browns FINALLY know they need an elite quarterback to compete in this league? That they believe if they had Andrew Luck on this exact team they could win 10 games because last year's Colts team was NOT better than this year's Browns team? Do you know about the banner in the War Room, that states flat out that they need to find a "championship level quarterback?"
Oh, and along the way, the Browns cut veterans in favor of UDFAs and cut even more cap in the Richardson trade. They know they might have to trade picks to get to #1 but in addition to 10 draft picks (including 7 in the first 4 rounds) they'll have the most cap room in the NFL to surround Bridgewater (or whoever they love) with as many as five serious new starters.
Of course, one of those will be a running back, probably selected in round 2 or 3 and paired with a free agent. Like winning NFL teams usually do it.
The Browns didn't tank the 2013 season by trading a running back with a 3.5 YPC for a 1st round pick. They may have laid the foundation for about a decade of winning. Because the Richardson-Weeden combo draft was NOT the answer. It was a very, VERY bad draft.
Excellent post sir!
-
Meanwhile all us fans are left with our dick in our hands looking forward to a "bright" future. They're going to do absolutely shit this year and next year at least. I never liked the pick and I know well replace Richardson easily. But its about us fans, all the people that bought Richardson jerseys, all the season ticket holders. It will never stop and it seems like a never ending process. We have a boat load of draft picks next year and an epically horendous drafter pulling the trigger.
-
Now that I've thought about it some, I'm pretty 'eh' on the whole trade. On principle I agree with the fact #3 was too high to take a running back. The only thing I felt was how frikin inhibited this guy was in Shurmer's offense. I mean I think everyone can agree that offensive scheme was flat out destined for bad things. I know Trent didn't look great in two games but I kind of wanted to see what he was gonna do over a season in this scheme. I mean even with the lousy offense TR is on pace to score around 100 TD's and rush for around 9-10k yards in his career. It's obvious to me that this pick will be packaged to get a QB next year unless Hoyer becomes the next Kurt Warner (I'm not holding my breath).
It's also obvious the QB position makes the world go round, you're not really saying anything astute there. Weeden has the tools to be above average on a perfect team but the Browns have too many holes to play into his strengths. Oh well, here's to hoping Hoyer throws for 3 TD's and Rainey rushes for another one (he's already picked up on the fantasy team).
-
You guys knew I'd have a strong opinion on this...
The Browns trading Richardson is NOT tanking the season. He hasn't made them winners during his 18-game career. He hasn't carried the team. He isn't a game-changer or elite player, partially because of the position he plays, partially because he isn't among the best at that position.
The Browns were 0-2 because they were awful on offense. An offense featuring an overdrafted running back, something everybody in the local media (including Pluto and Ridenour) were starting to nut up and point out. Although Pluto never liked the pick, didn't see the sense of drafting a back that high in a league where running backs aren't the X-factor on winning teams.
In the 8 games since his last 100-yard outing, Richardson has gained 3.3 yards per carry. The thought was that he'd look better healthy... but he hasn't. He doesn't look explosive or difficult to tackle. He looks ordinary.
It's because everybody is stacking the box? Nope. Richardson faces BELOW THE AVERAGE in stacked boxes according to PFF, tweeted by Higdon today. So it isn't health or stacked boxes. It's because Jim Brown was right: Trent Richardson isn't a special running back. He hasn't been since he came into the league.
The Colts came calling and offered a first round pick because they already have their elite quarterback. And I think the Browns fleeced the hell out of them. Where would I personally place Richardson's value? I'd say early round 3. I've watched Bernard Pierce, backup in Baltimore and third round pick, and I think he looks like a better NFL running back. He hits the hole faster and with more authority. He averages 5.0 per carry. He'd be the best running back on a lot of teams headed to the playoffs this year... just about all of them who aren't SF or his own, frankly.
Bottom line: The Browns would turn around like the Colts when they got their Andrew Luck. Not because of a running back. The brass in Berea has all but taken out an ad and said, "The 2012 draft made absolutely no sense, partially because it happened in 2012, not 1974."
They looked at their starting QB and this year's draft crop and since then have brought in two "dirty starters" in Campbell and Hoyer, traded 4th and 5th round picks for 3 and 4th in next year's draft, stated that Weeden might not start even when he's healthy, and finally traded their starting running back for a first round pick.
Does ANYBODY doubt that the Browns FINALLY know they need an elite quarterback to compete in this league? That they believe if they had Andrew Luck on this exact team they could win 10 games because last year's Colts team was NOT better than this year's Browns team? Do you know about the banner in the War Room, that states flat out that they need to find a "championship level quarterback?"
Oh, and along the way, the Browns cut veterans in favor of UDFAs and cut even more cap in the Richardson trade. They know they might have to trade picks to get to #1 but in addition to 10 draft picks (including 7 in the first 4 rounds) they'll have the most cap room in the NFL to surround Bridgewater (or whoever they love) with as many as five serious new starters.
Of course, one of those will be a running back, probably selected in round 2 or 3 and paired with a free agent. Like winning NFL teams usually do it.
The Browns didn't tank the 2013 season by trading a running back with a 3.5 YPC for a 1st round pick. They may have laid the foundation for about a decade of winning. Because the Richardson-Weeden combo draft was NOT the answer. It was a very, VERY bad draft.
You guys knew I'd have a strong opinion on this...
The Browns trading Richardson is NOT tanking the season. He hasn't made them winners during his 18-game career. He hasn't carried the team. He isn't a game-changer or elite player, partially because of the position he plays, partially because he isn't among the best at that position.
The Browns were 0-2 because they were awful on offense. An offense featuring an overdrafted running back, something everybody in the local media (including Pluto and Ridenour) were starting to nut up and point out. Although Pluto never liked the pick, didn't see the sense of drafting a back that high in a league where running backs aren't the X-factor on winning teams.
In the 8 games since his last 100-yard outing, Richardson has gained 3.3 yards per carry. The thought was that he'd look better healthy... but he hasn't. He doesn't look explosive or difficult to tackle. He looks ordinary.
It's because everybody is stacking the box? Nope. Richardson faces BELOW THE AVERAGE in stacked boxes according to PFF, tweeted by Higdon today. So it isn't health or stacked boxes. It's because Jim Brown was right: Trent Richardson isn't a special running back. He hasn't been since he came into the league.
The Colts came calling and offered a first round pick because they already have their elite quarterback. And I think the Browns fleeced the hell out of them. Where would I personally place Richardson's value? I'd say early round 3. I've watched Bernard Pierce, backup in Baltimore and third round pick, and I think he looks like a better NFL running back. He hits the hole faster and with more authority. He averages 5.0 per carry. He'd be the best running back on a lot of teams headed to the playoffs this year... just about all of them who aren't SF or his own, frankly.
Bottom line: The Browns would turn around like the Colts when they got their Andrew Luck. Not because of a running back. The brass in Berea has all but taken out an ad and said, "The 2012 draft made absolutely no sense, partially because it happened in 2012, not 1974."
They looked at their starting QB and this year's draft crop and since then have brought in two "dirty starters" in Campbell and Hoyer, traded 4th and 5th round picks for 3 and 4th in next year's draft, stated that Weeden might not start even when he's healthy, and finally traded their starting running back for a first round pick.
Does ANYBODY doubt that the Browns FINALLY know they need an elite quarterback to compete in this league? That they believe if they had Andrew Luck on this exact team they could win 10 games because last year's Colts team was NOT better than this year's Browns team? Do you know about the banner in the War Room, that states flat out that they need to find a "championship level quarterback?"
Oh, and along the way, the Browns cut veterans in favor of UDFAs and cut even more cap in the Richardson trade. They know they might have to trade picks to get to #1 but in addition to 10 draft picks (including 7 in the first 4 rounds) they'll have the most cap room in the NFL to surround Bridgewater (or whoever they love) with as many as five serious new starters.
Of course, one of those will be a running back, probably selected in round 2 or 3 and paired with a free agent. Like winning NFL teams usually do it.
The Browns didn't tank the 2013 season by trading a running back with a 3.5 YPC for a 1st round pick. They may have laid the foundation for about a decade of winning. Because the Richardson-Weeden combo draft was NOT the answer. It was a very, VERY bad draft.
Yes, last night I was shocked by the Richardson trade, this morning, it all clicked in my head. The front office has laid out a plan to build a winner, and they are making good on it. The Browns got the better deal here.
-
Chances of next year's "RB by committee" committee being the two guys on IR this year? Hardesty and Lewis?
-
There's prolly about 8 threads I could ask this question, or it has already been asked, IDK. But...
Is it possible that with this trade the 4th Rounder we got from the Colts could become conditional, based upon how Trent and/or the Colts perform this season. I.E. Trent rushes for 1200 yards and 10 TDs it becomes a 3rd rounder. The Colts make the playoffs it becomes a 3rd rounder. If Trent rushes for 1200 and 10 and the Colts win the Superbowl it becomes a second...
It's a long shot, but sure would be nice to cover our asses depending on how low they pick in the draft.
-
There's prolly about 8 threads I could ask this question, or it has already been asked, IDK. But...
Is it possible that with this trade the 4th Rounder we got from the Colts could become conditional, based upon how Trent and/or the Colts perform this season. I.E. Trent rushes for 1200 yards and 10 TDs it becomes a 3rd rounder. The Colts make the playoffs it becomes a 3rd rounder. If Trent rushes for 1200 and 10 and the Colts win the Superbowl it becomes a second...
It's a long shot, but sure would be nice to cover our asses depending on how low they pick in the draft.
There's prolly about 8 threads I could ask this question, or it has already been asked, IDK. But...
Is it possible that with this trade the 4th Rounder we got from the Colts could become conditional, based upon how Trent and/or the Colts perform this season. I.E. Trent rushes for 1200 yards and 10 TDs it becomes a 3rd rounder. The Colts make the playoffs it becomes a 3rd rounder. If Trent rushes for 1200 and 10 and the Colts win the Superbowl it becomes a second...
It's a long shot, but sure would be nice to cover our asses depending on how low they pick in the draft.
We got their first rounder, unconditionally, for TR. We got their 4th rounder, unconditionally, for our 5th rounder last year.
-
So now this makes sense, doesn't it ? :
#1 - Handful of Carries Pre Season
#2 - 13 Carries game 1
#3 - 18 Carries game 2
#4 - Keep Trent Healthy
-
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Need I remind ya'all?
God.... that list you posted makes me sick to my stomach....
-
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Need I remind ya'all?
God.... that list you posted makes me sick to my stomach....
God.... that list you posted makes me sick to my stomach....
To be fair, that was one hell of a year in 2000 for the Raiders in special teams production. But that's also what I've been trying to tell people. The guy we have leading the draft charge has an equally crappy record of drafting people as our previous regimes.
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