Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Would you trade our two first round picks for Philip Rivers?

Would you trade our two first round picks for Philip Rivers?

Locked The Browns Board
100 37 3.6k

  • I'd trade our second round pick, Manziel, and Haslam for Phillip Rivers, Maybe even throw in Josh Gordon

    Hope has two beautiful daughters: Their names are Anger and Courage. Anger that things are the way they are. Courage to make them the way they ought to be. - St. Augustine. Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their vision. - Ayn Rand

  • "I love the smell of smoke screens in the morning. Smells like............Victory!"

  • Tough call but I might. Five years as a contender would be good for business

    This shit ain't nothing to me, man.

  • 19 and thats it. He stated that he isnt going t rene his contract next year. So the ball is not in the Chargers court. If he doesnt agree to sign an extension, then F him. Rivers is an asshole, but would be the best qb we have had in a long time.

  • L LondonBrown

    @vagitron said:

    If this happened and I were a Browns fan I would burn all my gear and find a new team. Seriously.

    You are one annoying fellow.

    @londonbrown said:

    You are one annoying fellow.

    If you'd trade the Browns two firsts this year for Rivers you are a dumb one. You don't trade two firsts for any franchise qb pushing mid 30's and Rivers sure as hell isn't the answer in Cleveland. The Browns would maybe be .500 with him under center. You've got a bunch of journeyman at wr, no proven tight end. Trading two firsts for Rivers would be absolutely mindless.
    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)

  • Rivers couldn't win with a hall of famer at rb and tight end. The chargers would probably jump at two firsts to send rivers somewhere.

    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)

  • Hall of famer at RB? What am I forgetting?

    Also, you think our record only improves by one win adding Phillip freaking Rivers? Wow.

  • W wargograw

    Hall of famer at RB? What am I forgetting?

    Also, you think our record only improves by one win adding Phillip freaking Rivers? Wow.

    @wargograw said:

    Hall of famer at RB? What am I forgetting?

    Also, you think our record only improves by one win adding Phillip freaking Rivers? Wow.

    You trade those two firsts. There goes Shelton for example. You have who at receiver to draw coverage? Gordon can't stay on the field. Cameron is gone. You replaced him with housler who is an athletic freak of sorts but isn't an accomplished receiver. The Browns also play in a tough division. Sure he may equate to more than one win but he's not going to make the browns contenders. He may not even get the Browns to a divison title. If you ask me he's an overrated qb, that has never won anything. He throws for a lot of yards which gets him in pro bowls. He's a serial whiner as well. Tomlinson will be in the hall of fame, so will gates. I meant future hall of famers.
    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)

  • No. That is the kind of move a team that lacks only a QB would make. By the time the Browns could build a contender around him he'd hang up his spikes.

    On the other hand, with the success rate of the Browns number ones, maybe it is not a bad idea to just trade them away. At least you know what you're getting.

    And the Browns will probably have two good number one picks in 2016 as well.

  • B Buck The Frowns

    No. That is the kind of move a team that lacks only a QB would make. By the time the Browns could build a contender around him he'd hang up his spikes.

    On the other hand, with the success rate of the Browns number ones, maybe it is not a bad idea to just trade them away. At least you know what you're getting.

    And the Browns will probably have two good number one picks in 2016 as well.

    @buck-the-frowns said:

    By the time the Browns could build a contender around him he'd hang up his spikes.

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers.

    http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    VagitronV 1 Reply
    👍

  • Columbus, when can we see that for this year? That's crazy that they predicted the Cowboys success off of an 8-8 year.

  • W wargograw

    Columbus, when can we see that for this year? That's crazy that they predicted the Cowboys success off of an 8-8 year.

    @wargograw said:

    Columbus, when can we see that for this year? That's crazy that they predicted the Cowboys success off of an 8-8 year.

    Well I believe that is for teams on the upcoming year, notice how they left out Seattle and New England, the super bowl teams? Maybe they just didn't have time to analyze the 2014 teams.

  • ColumbusKingC ColumbusKing

    @buck-the-frowns said:

    By the time the Browns could build a contender around him he'd hang up his spikes.

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers.

    http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    @columbusking said:

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers. http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.
    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)
    The GipperT ColumbusKingC MudflyM 4 Replies
  • VagitronV Vagitron

    @columbusking said:

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers. http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    @vagitron said:

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    Does it put zero stock in them....or does it say that they are unproven...which is really what they are.

    Shazier and Jones in particular are as equally unproven as Barkevious Mingo and Christian Kirksey. (You wouldn't disagree with the assessment that Mingo and Kirksey are unproven would you?)

    Like I said, you have a tantrum if anyone doesn't think some Steeler player isn't Hall of Fame talent.

  • The GipperT The Gipper

    @vagitron said:

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    Does it put zero stock in them....or does it say that they are unproven...which is really what they are.

    Shazier and Jones in particular are as equally unproven as Barkevious Mingo and Christian Kirksey. (You wouldn't disagree with the assessment that Mingo and Kirksey are unproven would you?)

    Like I said, you have a tantrum if anyone doesn't think some Steeler player isn't Hall of Fame talent.

    @the-gipper said:

    Does it put zero stock in them....or does it say that they are unproven...which is really what they are.

    Shazier and Jones in particular are as equally unproven as Barkevious Mingo and Christian Kirksey. (You wouldn't disagree with the assessment that Mingo and Kirksey are unproven would you?)

    Like I said, you have a tantrum if anyone doesn't think some Steeler player isn't Hall of Fame talent.

    I said its a bad article and it is because it puts no stock in draft picks. Yes they are unproven, but those players were drafted in the first or second round to fill voids that they want to criticize in the article and this goes for all teams. It was a fluff piece designed to create a stir and get hits on their website. ESPN for the most part is garbage.
    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)
  • VagitronV Vagitron

    @columbusking said:

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers. http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    @vagitron said:

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    Well, it says that the Browns were 7 players away from serious contention....and that the Steelers were 11 players away.

    Again, I believe that they may have done the same roster analysis I did....and I think they were probably accurate.

    They are giving "average grades" to those unproven players we discussed. The one gripe you have would be re DeCastro, who should probably be upgraded to the "Good" category.

    But, if you have gripes....the Browns have more gripes. This put Joe Haden in the average category. He is certainly the best DB in the AFCN. And I can only assume Alex Mack is listed as average because he was hurt.

  • VagitronV Vagitron

    @columbusking said:

    I don't want to do the trade but from the looks of ESPN the Browns are closer to building a contender then the Stoolers. http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-was-team

    So try and know more about the rival team if you are gonna come on their forum...

    Also Fuck the Steelers

    Any self respecting football fan can see right through this article that was written and posted smack in the middle of the offseason. It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. It was a shit article then and its a shit article now. If they put the steelers at the top I'd still be saying its a shit article. ESPN is also garbage. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    @vagitron said:

    It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    Yeah it doesn't consider how good Shazier MIGHT be it considers how good players are.... And PFF knows more then both of us, and I don't think it is an accident that the Browns are closer then the Stoolers. Also you are "The Vag of Columbus"

    King is a term reserved for me

  • ColumbusKingC ColumbusKing

    @vagitron said:

    It puts zero consideration in the pedigree and potential of players. If I rmemeber correctly it puts almost zero stock in guys like tuitt, Shazier and Jarvis Jones for example for the steelers. Edit: and I'm the king of Columbus.

    Yeah it doesn't consider how good Shazier MIGHT be it considers how good players are.... And PFF knows more then both of us, and I don't think it is an accident that the Browns are closer then the Stoolers. Also you are "The Vag of Columbus"

    King is a term reserved for me

    @columbusking said:

    Yeah it doesn't consider how good Shazier MIGHT be it considers how good players are.... And PFF knows more then both of us, and I don't think it is an accident that the Browns are closer then the Stoolers. Also you are "The Vag of Columbus"

    King is a term reserved for me

    PFF is fine but their algorithm isn't perfect. I'm definitely the king of columbus. I have a squire position open if you are interested.

    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)
    FlugelF 1 Reply

  • You are the Vag I am the King that is just how things work around here, sorry

  • ColumbusKingC ColumbusKing

    You are the Vag I am the King that is just how things work around here, sorry

    @columbusking said:

    You are the Vag I am the King that is just how things work around here, sorry

    Nope.

    AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month)
Log in to reply