For a roster like the Browns its an even truer statement.

Will a playmaker be there at 4? Yes.

Whether its TR JB its a immediate improvement. We could throw darts at a draft board for our first three picks and end up with 3 starters.

lemme see if i got this right.....

this guy rufio, offers up his opinion as to why TR is not worth the pick, while providing some justification for his view. according to you, this guy has no credibility and is basically an idiot.

you then, post a retort in the form of another opinion piece by a guy that happens to agree with you. somehow, this is valid evidence? how is whats good for the goose not good for the gander?

i think i can make the claim that you are worse with your player man-crushes than shep ever was....

now, when we dont draft TR, you'll likely get a free day to whine and cry. if you try to take over the board like shep used to, then we're gonna have a major fucking problem.

Cleveland Browns shouldn't run away from taking Trent Richardson: Terry Pluto

Published: Thursday, April 26, 2012, 1:00 AM

By Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Browns absolutely, positively must draft Trent Richardson with the No. 4 pick in the NFL draft.

They do need a cornerback, and LSU's Mo Claiborne has a chance to be a star. But even more than adding another good player to an already solid defense, the Browns must do something dramatic to improve their desperate offense.

It would not be a massive mistake to select Justin Blackmon, the receiver from Oklahoma State. But when considering Blackmon (a chance to be good) vs. Richardson (a chance to be great), make a play for greatness.

There has to be a player whose jersey the fans can not only wear proudly on Sunday, but who brings them at least to the edge of their seats (if not on their feet) every time he touches the ball. Richardson has a chance to be that player. If you can't have a powerhouse passing attack (and the Browns won't), then why not run the ball with authority?

Is there a risk taking a running back so high in the draft? It's a fact that Reggie Bush (No. 2 in 2006) was the last running back selected in the top five. In 2005, Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson and Cadillac Williams were running backs picked in the first five.

In 2007, Adrian Peterson was the No. 7 pick. He should have been in the top 5. The same with Maurice Jones-Drew, who was the 60th pick in 2006.

Richardson is that type of player, where the eye test and the stats reveal the same thing -- a back with power, with sharp cuts and patience as he waits for holes to open. He's a back who set a single Alabama season record for rushing (1,679 yards) and gained 96 yards in 20 carries in the NCAA championship game against LSU.

He also had 181 yards rushing against Florida, 203 against rival Auburn, and he even caught 29 passes last season.

You can find a running back in the later rounds, but it's doubtful that back will match everything that Richardson can bring to the Browns from the moment he steps on the field.

Yes, he is that gifted, that special ... and he belongs in an orange helmet.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tick...Tick...Tick...

@socalbamafan said:

Urban owned us, really? He played us twice in Tuscaloosa and did not score a touchdown either game. And the last time tebow played us he ended up crying at the end of the game, then urban had a heart attack.

You didn't answer my earlier question....how would you like it if...or when...the Browns decide to blow things up again, they choose Saban to come to the Browns and be the coach?

One concern I may have if they did that is that he might go on a megalomania binge, like Butch Davis or BB....he may want total control like he has an 'Bama. We have experience here that that model does not work so well.

@poeticg said:

This is a bunch of nonsense, by a guy named Rufio? WTF! First off VALUE- it's something you get at WalMart or the Dollar Store, not to be used when talking about game changing runningbacks... Second- is this guy really comparing a Franchise Changing Elite Running Back to drafting the best punter? Third- Trent Richardson is possibly already better than Frank Gore, LeSean McCoy, Ray Rice, Arian Foster, Matt Forte, Jamaal Charles, Ahmad Bradshaw and Michael Turner... And he's yet to step on an NFL feild. He'll be 21 years old when the season starts and Rookie deals are what 4 years? So he'll be 25 when his rookie deal needs renewing- that's hardly on the downside of his career. If he lights it up and requires a lot of money to resign then so what, that just means we did the right thing and have drafted a franchise changing runningback. What we can't do is pass on him because we only want to pay Elite money to Offensive lineman and cornerbacks- you get what you pay for.

Get your head out of your ass (or TR's) and try to understand what the other side is saying. I have no idea who Rufio is... no idea of his credentials. I was looking for anything to rebut all the crap you were citing and up he popped in a Google. But he laid out logical, rational, unemotional case against drafting TR that rang true for me. That it would tweak your beak was simply a bonus...

I even figured that you would fixate on the money as it is the weakest of the points made...

The salient point of the article is that the production gap between elite RB's and the next tier (call them what you like) is not as great as your perception of the physical talent gap.

The AP example Rufio sites is telling. It renders your assessment of TR's potential moot...

@the-gipper said:

My French Bidet Actually Tickles Rearend?

Not bad

@socalbamafan said:

As an Alabama fan all I can say is Trent is a great guy and a hellava football player. This would a great pick for u guys. btw, we refer to Trent on our boards as MFBATR. Figure it out.

My French Bidet Actually Tickles Rearend?

@tour2ma said:

And now for something completely different...

===========================================================================================================

http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2012/4/12/2907735/an-exercise-in-value-why-the-browns-still-should-not-draft-trent

An Exercise in Value: Why the Browns Still Should Not Draft Trent Richardson

by rufio on Apr 12, 2012 1:50 AM EDT

I think Trent Richardson will go extremely high in this April's NFL draft. I see him as easily one of the top 10 players available, I think he'll be a great running back in the NFL, and he reminds me more of Jamal Lewis than Cedric Benson. Recently, experts like Mike Mayock have agreed that Richardson is pretty damn good.

I still don't think we should draft him.

The prospect of adding a weapon of that caliber to this talent-thirsty offense is hard to pass up. But the NFL draft does not occur in a vacuum; every time you choose a player you are also passing on all of the other available players. You also aren't magically adding a player to your roster, you are spending limited resources (draft picks) in order to acquire him.

I'd like to highlight some of the thinking that goes into my desire to pass on Richardson. It boils down to one word: value.

Value I: What are you "spending"?

4th overall

We would have to spend the fourth overall pick on Richardson. 4th overall isn't just another draft pick, it's a potentially franchise-altering pick, and it carries weight that no other pick we currently possess does.

Cutting a former top-10 pick isn't an easy thing for competitors like coaches and GMs to do, and former top draft choices carry that legacy throughout their careers--especially if they play well. Once Richardson's rookie contract would be up, we would be forced to sign him for a record-breaking deal and have a huge cap number invested in an aging running back. Or we could let a star player walk. Not to mention that in 2011, top tier RBs were overpaid by 50%***. Does 6 million/year sound like the kind of deal a former 4th overall pick who has performed well would sign?

Value is especially important at the very top of the draft because of the plethora of alternate choices available. If you consider classic coachspeak line of "its not just who you take, its who you don't take," you are not taking hundreds of other players with the 4th overall pick.

The cost of this pick simply cannot be understated.

Where can you find good players?

If you look at the rounds in which good players are chosen at a given position it can tell you a few things. Looking at Quarterback, the good ones historically are taken in the first round. The same goes with cornerback.

But if you look at running back, you'll see players like Frank Gore (3rd), LeSean McCoy (2nd), Ray Rice (2nd), Arian Foster (Undrafted), Matt Forte (3rd), Jamaal Charles (3rd), Ahmad Bradshaw (7th), Michael Turner (5th), and all are doing more than getting the job done.

This doesn't tell us that we can just draft any guy in the 3rd round and he'll magically end up being that good, but it does tell us that good running backs can be found later on. Good quarterbacks, cornerbacks, and left tackles, not so much. If you want a great player at one of those positions, you almost assuredly have to pick him in the first round.

Value II: What are you getting for the "money"?

Disparity in talent between top of the NFL and average

At any given position, NFL starters are only going to be so good and they are only going to be so bad. At some positions, the disparity is enormous; a pass rusher like DeMarcus Ware, for example, is much better than a starter like Jayme Mitchell. At other positions (like punter) there isn't a whole lot of dropoff from the top all the way to the bottom.

Even if you can draft the best punter in the league, so what?

There simply isn't a world of difference athletically between good NFL running backs. While Adrian Peterson is a great player and a probable hall of famer, how much better is he than LeSean McCoy? Ray Rice? Maurice Jones Drew? I can probably list a dozen backs who aren't quite as good as Peterson, but are able to deliver only slightly less production.

While there certainly are positions with less disparity in talent between the top and bottom (punter), no running back we are seeing right now is truly able to take over a game by himself. There simply aren't human beings alive today who are physically capable of being able to run over and around NFL defenses like they used to. We aren't living in an era when we'll see another Jim Brown who is that much bigger, that much faster, and able to run the ball that much better than the next guy.

Talent over other available

This should factor in not only other players available in the draft, but also players that typically come available in free agency and trades. For example, it is extremely rare for a franchise QB to be found anywhere at all, and once teams do find them they typically don't let them go. In recent years I can only think of Jay Cutler as a relatively young franchise QB to switch teams. Meanwhile, it seems like very good OGs and WRs hit the market every year.

Obviously, other players available in the draft and their relative talent levels should be considered. There appears to be a huge dropoff at the QB position after Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III--which is exactly why the St. Louis Rams were able to get so much for the 2nd overall pick (and the last superstar QB draft prospect).

I just don't see so much of a dropoff between Richardson and a more easily-assembled backfield by committee to warrant the pick. He's good, but how much more than Lamar Miller, David Wilson, Isaiah Pead, or Doug Martin does he give us?

Length of career

While it shouldn't be the primary consideration, the potential length of a player's career should come into play when making a selection. You don't even know if the guy is going to be good yet, but you at least want an idea of a best-case scenario.

A quarterback can be "your guy" for 10-15 years, as can a lineman. Running backs have relatively short careers in the NFL, and even shorter periods of time when they "carry the load" and do it well.

Running backs have the shortest average career length in the NFL. If you see that stat being heavily influenced by training camp roster filler, I'd agree with you. But I would also point you to the rule of 370. While not a magical barrier of 370 carries, the "rule of 370" is statistical analysis that reinforces common sense: relatively small guys who get hit hard by bigger guys tend to wear down and wear out. A rough analysis also details that RBs peak (and decline) earlier in their careers than other offensive players.

370 carries/year is 23.125 carries/game. With a 4.5 YPC average, that's just over 100 yards per game.

Value III: How much is your "purchase" worth to you?

Current roster composition

Obviously, the more the Browns' roster lacks talent at a given position, the more "impact" a draft choice at that position would have. This is the one area that I think makes Richardson more valuable to us. We need offensive talent, and we could really use another running back.

Still, other positions on the team are clearly more lacking than RB. With the release of Tony Pashos, RT became a pressing need and probably the most urgent one on the entire depth chart. Yet, because of the reasons cited in the rest of this article I do not believe RT would be a wise pick at 4th overall.

Positional impact

How much a position impacts the game can vary widely. Quarterbacks touch the ball every play. Monster defensive tackles and other "unblockable" players can shred your entire gameplan.

How much impact does a running back bring to a team? I would say about an average amount. Sure, they can break big plays now and then, but unless you call 200 yards of total offense a good day no individual RB will be the engine that makes your offense go. Walter Peyton had the most all purpose yards per game of any RB in NFL history,and he only averaged 114.7 per game. Even Barry Sanders averaged under 120 total yards/game.

Blueprint

The Browns simply do not want to be a running team. They are comfortable with the passing game, they've hired coaches who like to pass, and the organizations who's success we'd like to model (the Green Bay Packers and the Philadelphia Eagles) both pass the ball a lot.

Yes, Mike Holmgren ran the ball a lot with Shaun Alexander (who is the poster boy for the rule of 370, by the way). Yes, "the" West Coast Offense can be a run-first offense. But Holmgren didn't draft Alexander with a top-5 pick, and he didn't even start him in his rookie season.

We want a back like Ahman Green (3rd round), LeSean McCoy (2nd), or Brian Westbrook (3rd). We don't necessarily want a back that can pound the rock between the tackles, we are looking for a back to run effectively but also to be effective in the passing game. Spending such a high pick on the downhill running of Richardson simply wouldn't be a good match. We just don't want or need a back that good at pounding the rock.

Putting it all together

When examining the combination of the franchise-level of importance of the 4th overall pick, the availability of other good running backs, the lack of extreme difference in talent between the top running backs in the league and other good ones, and the short length of careers for running backs, I can only determine that drafting Trent Richardson is not worth it.

If there are people out there who believe Richardson is an all-time talent who is just tremendously better than other prospects in this draft, I can see why they would want us to take him. But the lack of value at the fourth spot in the draft cannot be debated.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

***though I think he clings to his "kooky made-up" stats too closely, this is solid analysis by Burke. I tend to believe total yardage is actually a good measure of a back, but that debate is best saved for another time.

==========================================================================================================

This is a bunch of nonsense, by a guy named Rufio? WTF! First off VALUE- it's something you get at WalMart or the Dollar Store, not to be used when talking about game changing runningbacks... Second- is this guy really comparing a Franchise Changing Elite Running Back to drafting the best punter? Third- Trent Richardson is possibly already better than Frank Gore, LeSean McCoy, Ray Rice, Arian Foster, Matt Forte, Jamaal Charles, Ahmad Bradshaw and Michael Turner... And he's yet to step on an NFL feild. He'll be 21 years old when the season starts and Rookie deals are what 4 years? So he'll be 25 when his rookie deal needs renewing- that's hardly on the downside of his career. If he lights it up and requires a lot of money to resign then so what, that just means we did the right thing and have drafted a franchise changing runningback. What we can't do is pass on him because we only want to pay Elite money to Offensive lineman and cornerbacks- you get what you pay for.

As an Alabama fan all I can say is Trent is a great guy and a hellava football player. This would a great pick for u guys. btw, we refer to Trent on our boards as MFBATR. Figure it out.

Mother Fuckin Bad Ass Trent Richardson?

U r correct, sir

===========================================================================================================

http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2012/4/12/2907735/an-exercise-in-value-why-the-browns-still-should-not-draft-trent

An Exercise in Value: Why the Browns Still Should Not Draft Trent Richardson

by rufio on Apr 12, 2012 1:50 AM EDT

I think Trent Richardson will go extremely high in this April's NFL draft. I see him as easily one of the top 10 players available, I think he'll be a great running back in the NFL, and he reminds me more of Jamal Lewis than Cedric Benson. Recently, experts like Mike Mayock have agreed that Richardson is pretty damn good.

I still don't think we should draft him.

The prospect of adding a weapon of that caliber to this talent-thirsty offense is hard to pass up. But the NFL draft does not occur in a vacuum; every time you choose a player you are also passing on all of the other available players. You also aren't magically adding a player to your roster, you are spending limited resources (draft picks) in order to acquire him.

I'd like to highlight some of the thinking that goes into my desire to pass on Richardson. It boils down to one word: value.

Value I: What are you "spending"?

4th overall

We would have to spend the fourth overall pick on Richardson. 4th overall isn't just another draft pick, it's a potentially franchise-altering pick, and it carries weight that no other pick we currently possess does.

Cutting a former top-10 pick isn't an easy thing for competitors like coaches and GMs to do, and former top draft choices carry that legacy throughout their careers--especially if they play well. Once Richardson's rookie contract would be up, we would be forced to sign him for a record-breaking deal and have a huge cap number invested in an aging running back. Or we could let a star player walk. Not to mention that in 2011, top tier RBs were overpaid by 50%***. Does 6 million/year sound like the kind of deal a former 4th overall pick who has performed well would sign?

Value is especially important at the very top of the draft because of the plethora of alternate choices available. If you consider classic coachspeak line of "its not just who you take, its who you don't take," you are not taking hundreds of other players with the 4th overall pick.

The cost of this pick simply cannot be understated.

Where can you find good players?

If you look at the rounds in which good players are chosen at a given position it can tell you a few things. Looking at Quarterback, the good ones historically are taken in the first round. The same goes with cornerback.

But if you look at running back, you'll see players like Frank Gore (3rd), LeSean McCoy (2nd), Ray Rice (2nd), Arian Foster (Undrafted), Matt Forte (3rd), Jamaal Charles (3rd), Ahmad Bradshaw (7th), Michael Turner (5th), and all are doing more than getting the job done.

This doesn't tell us that we can just draft any guy in the 3rd round and he'll magically end up being that good, but it does tell us that good running backs can be found later on. Good quarterbacks, cornerbacks, and left tackles, not so much. If you want a great player at one of those positions, you almost assuredly have to pick him in the first round.

Value II: What are you getting for the "money"?

Disparity in talent between top of the NFL and average

At any given position, NFL starters are only going to be so good and they are only going to be so bad. At some positions, the disparity is enormous; a pass rusher like DeMarcus Ware, for example, is much better than a starter like Jayme Mitchell. At other positions (like punter) there isn't a whole lot of dropoff from the top all the way to the bottom.

Even if you can draft the best punter in the league, so what?

There simply isn't a world of difference athletically between good NFL running backs. While Adrian Peterson is a great player and a probable hall of famer, how much better is he than LeSean McCoy? Ray Rice? Maurice Jones Drew? I can probably list a dozen backs who aren't quite as good as Peterson, but are able to deliver only slightly less production.

While there certainly are positions with less disparity in talent between the top and bottom (punter), no running back we are seeing right now is truly able to take over a game by himself. There simply aren't human beings alive today who are physically capable of being able to run over and around NFL defenses like they used to. We aren't living in an era when we'll see another Jim Brown who is that much bigger, that much faster, and able to run the ball that much better than the next guy.

Talent over other available

This should factor in not only other players available in the draft, but also players that typically come available in free agency and trades. For example, it is extremely rare for a franchise QB to be found anywhere at all, and once teams do find them they typically don't let them go. In recent years I can only think of Jay Cutler as a relatively young franchise QB to switch teams. Meanwhile, it seems like very good OGs and WRs hit the market every year.

Obviously, other players available in the draft and their relative talent levels should be considered. There appears to be a huge dropoff at the QB position after Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III--which is exactly why the St. Louis Rams were able to get so much for the 2nd overall pick (and the last superstar QB draft prospect).

I just don't see so much of a dropoff between Richardson and a more easily-assembled backfield by committee to warrant the pick. He's good, but how much more than Lamar Miller, David Wilson, Isaiah Pead, or Doug Martin does he give us?

Length of career

While it shouldn't be the primary consideration, the potential length of a player's career should come into play when making a selection. You don't even know if the guy is going to be good yet, but you at least want an idea of a best-case scenario.

A quarterback can be "your guy" for 10-15 years, as can a lineman. Running backs have relatively short careers in the NFL, and even shorter periods of time when they "carry the load" and do it well.

Running backs have the shortest average career length in the NFL. If you see that stat being heavily influenced by training camp roster filler, I'd agree with you. But I would also point you to the rule of 370. While not a magical barrier of 370 carries, the "rule of 370" is statistical analysis that reinforces common sense: relatively small guys who get hit hard by bigger guys tend to wear down and wear out. A rough analysis also details that RBs peak (and decline) earlier in their careers than other offensive players.

370 carries/year is 23.125 carries/game. With a 4.5 YPC average, that's just over 100 yards per game.

Value III: How much is your "purchase" worth to you?

Current roster composition

Obviously, the more the Browns' roster lacks talent at a given position, the more "impact" a draft choice at that position would have. This is the one area that I think makes Richardson more valuable to us. We need offensive talent, and we could really use another running back.

Still, other positions on the team are clearly more lacking than RB. With the release of Tony Pashos, RT became a pressing need and probably the most urgent one on the entire depth chart. Yet, because of the reasons cited in the rest of this article I do not believe RT would be a wise pick at 4th overall.

Positional impact

How much a position impacts the game can vary widely. Quarterbacks touch the ball every play. Monster defensive tackles and other "unblockable" players can shred your entire gameplan.

How much impact does a running back bring to a team? I would say about an average amount. Sure, they can break big plays now and then, but unless you call 200 yards of total offense a good day no individual RB will be the engine that makes your offense go. Walter Peyton had the most all purpose yards per game of any RB in NFL history,and he only averaged 114.7 per game. Even Barry Sanders averaged under 120 total yards/game.

Blueprint

The Browns simply do not want to be a running team. They are comfortable with the passing game, they've hired coaches who like to pass, and the organizations who's success we'd like to model (the Green Bay Packers and the Philadelphia Eagles) both pass the ball a lot.

Yes, Mike Holmgren ran the ball a lot with Shaun Alexander (who is the poster boy for the rule of 370, by the way). Yes, "the" West Coast Offense can be a run-first offense. But Holmgren didn't draft Alexander with a top-5 pick, and he didn't even start him in his rookie season.

We want a back like Ahman Green (3rd round), LeSean McCoy (2nd), or Brian Westbrook (3rd). We don't necessarily want a back that can pound the rock between the tackles, we are looking for a back to run effectively but also to be effective in the passing game. Spending such a high pick on the downhill running of Richardson simply wouldn't be a good match. We just don't want or need a back that good at pounding the rock.

Putting it all together

When examining the combination of the franchise-level of importance of the 4th overall pick, the availability of other good running backs, the lack of extreme difference in talent between the top running backs in the league and other good ones, and the short length of careers for running backs, I can only determine that drafting Trent Richardson is not worth it.

If there are people out there who believe Richardson is an all-time talent who is just tremendously better than other prospects in this draft, I can see why they would want us to take him. But the lack of value at the fourth spot in the draft cannot be debated.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

***though I think he clings to his "kooky made-up" stats too closely, this is solid analysis by Burke. I tend to believe total yardage is actually a good measure of a back, but that debate is best saved for another time.

==========================================================================================================

@socalbamafan said:

As an Alabama fan all I can say is Trent is a great guy and a hellava football player. This would a great pick for u guys. btw, we refer to Trent on our boards as MFBATR. Figure it out.

Mother Fuckin Bad Ass Trent Richardson?

@miktoxic said:

and TR is not mark ingram 2.0? really?

AND

poetic G. can you stop reposting evey fucking story about this guy? you're already repeating yourself 2fold.

do you know how gay u guys look?

man i'd hate to be around you MFers on thursday night if the browns DON'T pick him. tell your girlfriends (well in your guy's case.....your boyfriends) to stay out of the house that night.

Richardson is leaps and pounds more talented than Ingram is and it doesn't take a genius to see it.

Honestly though the closer we get to the draft, if the guy we get isn't Richardson I really think it will and should be Claiborne or a trade back.

I love Defense as well! I'd be okay with drafting all defense in all 7 rounds if we have any kind of offense last year. It's vital that we surround Colt with weapons and find out if he can be our Franchise guy or not. Until we give him weapons then we're just spinning our wheels. If we give him a couple targets at WR and an Elite runningback, an Oline that can provide him the time a QB needs to run a play he might be something special.

In any case by going offense early this year it really paints the picture of where we go from here. If Richardson, Martin, and Jeffery prove to be enough to get this offense going again and they score points and win games, then next year we can go back to making this defense Elite.

If Colt fails with a bunch of talent around him then we know that Colt just can't hack it in the Big Leauges. We then KNOW that we've gotta go and get a Franchise QB that can do it.

I believe in Colt, that if given a Runningback that won't take plays off, if WRs catch the ball when given the chance to do so, if our line holds up and does their jobs, and Colt makes accurate throwns like we all know he should be able to- then we might have ourselves a nice little offense.

How nice would it be if RB, OL, WR fixes this offense and Colt throwns for 4500 yards? Little will be a number 1 WR this year, I've got a good feeling about that. He'll be in his second NFL season- he got work last year and I think that he'll be twice the player come week 1 this year. Momass can still contribut here and there, he just has to get back to not playing scared- I think the hits by Harrison made him somewhat timid. Cribbs will be a lot better this year, he's growing up into a fine #2/#3 WR... plus we're not sure how good Mitchell and Norwood could be. Add one more WR in the second and this group could be set.

Runningback would be set nicely with Richardson. Plus it gives us insurance on Hardesty if he should continue to get injured. But between Hardesty, Jackson and Smith it should provide Trent with some rest here and there. Owen needs to get stronger and bulk up or it's gonna be a long year for him.

I'd like to snag Brock Osweiler latter in the draft because I see him as being a good QB to groom and could be an excellent backup to Colt.

Our Oline is not that bad, it's pretty good. Who knows maybe Eric comes back in a limited role? But even without ES we're still pretty solid with Mack and Thomas. Pinkston looks good at LG and hoping Lava does work at RG- he's supposed to be really strong! I think that Jonathan Martin could be a solid RT for us. He protected Andrew Lucks blindside and moving to RT should allow him to continue to be dominant on the Oline and protect Colt.

Thomas, Pinkston, Mack, Lava, Martin - I can't find too many problems with that, can you?

The D line is set up nicely with depth and talent this year so there's no need there. Benard is gonna beast this year, I think.

The linebackers appear to be set with some depth. Add Burfict in the latter rounds to groom and train him up and he could be a steal learning behind DQ.

Corner is set up nicely with Dockery, Patterson, Skrine, Brown and Haden. Hoping TJ gets it and becomes that Elite guy we hope he does! We just need a FS- I like Chase Minnifield in this spot. He's pretty fast and instinctive, catches well and isn't afraid to stick his nose in there and tackle either. I think this gives us a really good team with no glaring needs or weaknesses!

@poeticg said:

7 days to go... then it will all be over toxic.

can't wait brother!

i won't hate richardson at 4. but you also have got to keep an open mind and think about value....as in what is the position on the team in the most need of help. some say RB, then richardson. some say WR, then blackmon. not QB or TE. sure IMO i like defense first so i'd take claiborn. but hey, they might just trade down and be able to address all 3 of those positions with great talent. who knows?

maybe i'll see you in the browns tavern and we can tip one to whoever we pick, may it be @4 @8 or @157.....................

it will be exciting, that's for sure.

@miktoxic said:

and TR is not mark ingram 2.0? really?

AND

poetic G. can you stop reposting evey fucking story about this guy? you're already repeating yourself 2fold.

do you know how gay u guys look?

man i'd hate to be around you MFers on thursday night if the browns DON'T pick him. tell your girlfriends (well in your guy's case.....your boyfriends) to stay out of the house that night.

Some people are afraid to click on links, so instead of having them go "off site" I'm just posting the articles I find in here for the fans to read... at least I'm not starting new threads for each of these articles. Give me a break yo. Some really like Richardson and want him to be in Cleveland and enjoy reading the articles about him. Yes I agree, not all are captivated by his strength and talents but those who aren't are in the minority.

7 days to go... then it will all be over toxic.

AND

poetic G. can you stop reposting evey fucking story about this guy? you're already repeating yourself 2fold.

do you know how gay u guys look?

man i'd hate to be around you MFers on thursday night if the browns DON'T pick him. tell your girlfriends (well in your guy's case.....your boyfriends) to stay out of the house that night.

@mike-h said:

That's right, no other second round or later running back has ever out-performed a first rounder...lmao

Not one line this. Who out performed AP that was drafted behind him, who out performed LT? This is the type of RB we would be drafting, a truely elite talent. Last year when NO draft Ingrem they knew they were not drafting an elite talent, he was just the highest guy on their board in a position where they had need so they traded back up to get him. Same can be said about other backs in other years. C.J. Spiller was a known luxury pick for the Bills who had a lot of question marks surrounding him. If Spiller didn't have return ability he would have went in the 2nd half of the first round.

Regardless of what people think about the RB position there is such a thing as elite talent and as much of a pre draft sure thing as you can get just like with other positions (Luck for QB, Green for WR, Long and Thomas for LT, Williams for DE, ect). I think Martin is going to have a good career that point I am not arguing. But is his career, especially his first season or two, going to be on par or better than Richardson's. I highly doubt it.

they will have a better plan.

I just can't imagine what the better plan is. LOL

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Link: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--rb-trent-richardson-exception-to-rule-as-positional-value-keeps-sliding-.html

RB Trent Richardson exception to the rule as positional value keeps sliding

..By Jason Cole | Yahoo! Sports – 8 hours ago...

Trent Richardson cradles the national championship trophy after Alabama beat LSU. (US …It appears that just about anybody who plays running back is the new Mr. Irrelevant of the NFL draft.

Even someone as good as Trent Richardson of Alabama.

"I love Trent Richardson, everything about him," a personnel executive with an NFC team said in March. "Great football player, loves the game. Great kid, very mature, a leader. Physically, he reminds me of George Rogers and I mean the good George Rogers …"

That's high praise considering that Rogers was the No. 1 pick of the 1981 draft, was the 1980 Heisman Trophy winner and later helped the Washington Redskins win Super Bowl XXII.

Of course, all of that was build-up to the eventual, "But …"

"If you're asking me if I'd take him in the top 10 picks, the answer is no. Not the way the game is played today," said the executive, who is also a former NFL player. "It kind of hurts me to say it, but that's just reality. Look around the league: It's not a running back league anymore."

The 2012 NFL draft figures to further illustrate the accelerating decline in the value of running backs. In 2011, Mark Ingram was the only running back selected in the first round. The only other time that happened since the NFL and AFL merged drafts was in 1984.

This year, it may happen again. Richardson is the only running back considered a lock to go in the first round. Many people believe Richardson will go either No. 4 to the Cleveland Browns or No. 5 to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Sources with both teams strongly hinted that Richardson is a consideration at those spots.

Then again, if he doesn't go one to one of those teams, Richardson could be on the board for awhile. After the Bucs, no team has an overwhelming need for a running back until the Cincinnati Bengals at No. 17. And even if Richardson is joined by Boise State's Doug Martin in the first round, this will mark the fewest running backs to go in the opening stanza in back-to-back years.

In other words, one of the most dominant positions in the game's history has become little more than an afterthought.

"You spread people out, try to get the defense out of position, look for a mismatch and then try to hit a crease," said St. Louis Rams coach Jeff Fisher, who coached Chris Johnson in Tennessee when Johnson ran for 2,006 yards in 2009. Johnson, only 195 pounds, excels in large part because of his exceptional quickness and speed.

"We don't line up and run out of I-formation that much anymore" Fisher said. "The days when you lined up with the running back deep in the backfield and let him watch the blocking develop, that's done. Maybe once in a while or after you've been lucky enough to build up a lead and you're grinding it out in the second half. But that's situational stuff, not your base offense."

The evolution of the NFL as an elaborate seven-on-seven league has been obvious by the explosion of passing numbers. Not only did New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees obliterate the single-season record with 5,476 passing yards (breaking Dan Marino's mark of 5,084 in 1984) in 2011, but Tom Brady (5,235) would have and Matthew Stafford (5,038) was close. Until last year, Marino and Brees were the only passers to eclipse the 5,000-yard mark).

Trent Richardson approaches the goal line in the national championship vs. LSU. (US Presswire)"The idea that you throw to score and run to win has been taken to the extreme," said Atlanta Falcons coach Mike Smith, whose cowbell rusher Michael Turner finished third in ground yards (1,340) last season. "It's hard, especially for a defensive coach like me, to sometimes accept that, but that's the nature of the game. It's four and five wideouts, and the short passing game has become the running game."

Receivers such as Wes Welker, Roddy White, Brandon Marshall and Marques Colston have become the extension of the running game. That is particularly true in the regular season, when the officiating tends to tilt toward the passing game.

"You throw it up there and you either get 15 or 20 yards or you get a pass-interference call half the time," New York Jets coach Rex Ryan said, half-joking.

All of that means the running back has become an endangered species, the in-line blocking tight end is no more than a reserve and the true fullback is all but a dinosaur.

[ Jason Cole: Winners and losers from NFL free agency ]

During the five drafts from 2007 to 2011, only 14 first-round running backs were selected and just 28 total drafted in the first two rounds. Only Darren McFadden in 2008 was taken with one of the top five picks.

By comparison, from 1988 to 1992 – when eventual Hall of Famers Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith were chosen – 21 running backs were taken in the first round and 38 in the first two. From 1978 to 1982, the numbers were 26 in the first round and 44 overall. Both of those five-year periods came when the NFL had only 28 teams rather than the current 32.

While teams shy away from drafting workhouse-type backs, they're also very protective of their veteran rushers.

"If you have a good running back, you don't want to burn him out. It's all about keep him fresh now," said San Francisco 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh, who limited bullish running back Frank Gore to 282 carries last season. "Frank wants the ball every down and I love that mentality. But you have to be smart, too, and it's my job to make sure he's healthy all season."

Which gets back to Richardson. He's a fabulously talented runner who might have been an overwhelming candidate to be the No. 3 overall pick … 20 years ago.

"Even 10 years ago, you see a player like that and you don't think twice about him," an AFC executive said. "You watch the way he played in those two games against LSU last season [including the national title game] and that's all you really need to know about him. He was everything for Alabama. He was their whole offense. LSU knew it, all the fans knew it and it didn't matter. He was the best offensive player on the field."

For all that praise, the executive stopped short of saying Richardson was a lock to go in the top 10.

"It really just all depends on how you want to build your team," the AFC executive said. "If you're in the minority and you try to build around the running game and defense or you're trying to protect your quarterback because he's limited, then maybe you do it. But there's a lot of thinking that goes into it."

[ Jason Cole: Important issues still linger going into NFL draft ]

General managers such as Cleveland's Tom Heckert and Tampa Bay's Mark Dominik have to weigh the value of a running back that high in the draft against players who might help the passing game.

Or help defend against it.

"You have to look at all the angles of how a player can help you today versus over the long haul," Dominik said. "I think that one thing that helps is the new structure for rookie contracts. Without the burden of the big signing bonus and making sure that player is going to be with you for five or six years because of the money, you can focus a little more on today."

So, that means the pick is Richardson?

Dominik flashed a wicked grin and walked off without even a hint of an answer.