@miktoxic said:

I mean, was the the original argument? That there's never been a good UDFA QB?

I read it as "the only way to get one on your team is to draft him".

@gumby73 said:

Seattle D is a Hit and Stick defense that don't miss a tackle. Browns D must improve on Hit and Fall Off Tackling. Truth Hurts.

Sorry, gum... but this drives me crazy.

While "bad tackling" does exists, e.g., the infamous "roll-block" tackle often favored by DBs, more missed tackles are a result of never getting in position to make the tackle than not making an effort to execute the tackle.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

which means they were drafted.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

@gftchris said:

Also, the Browns are basically modelled on the Seahawks. Not saying Crowell/West are Lynch, but we have a similarly built D, strong OL and rushing attack. He would do fine.

"similarly built D" ?

Except for that RUN D thing. Maybe Shelton will help with that.

@wargograw said:

Alternatively, might we see pro-offences running more of the spread, to get more out of the college QBs?

@comeonman said:

Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

@tour2ma said:

... and this year should show that. If McCown has a good year, then would there be any doubt that Wilson would?

Wilson may be the ultimate game manager in the league and is perfectly content in that role. But he has the upside of being able to put a team on his back every once in a while and carry them to victory.

The ultimate scenario would be Manziel assuming a Wilson-esque role here.

The small stature and maneuvarability behind the line similarities are there...everything else, though, needs to be refined.

Including fielding shotgun snaps.

Granted we don't have one RB to match Lynch's contribution, but we don't need one... Yardage-wise we got close with two rookies while Seattle's only other significant rusher was Wilson who ran for 2/3's of Lynch's total. Tougher to match Lynch's TDs and power, red-zone running, but we'll see what 2015 brings.

@gftchris said:

exactly.....thats pretty much what I was trying to say.....

@mudfly said:

hence the 'now' part. I don't disagree that we're probably better in some areas than they, and vice versa, and overall roughly the same - just with the 'man for man' part, because that's just not the case, as you've just said.

@gftchris said:

right....we have better players in some areas and they have better players in some areas......though Im not counting Graham, as he hasn't played with them yet, so he cant really be factored into Wilson(or Seattles) past performance....

@mudfly said:

Except Lynch, and now Graham.

Wilson may be the ultimate game manager in the league and is perfectly content in that role. But he has the upside of being able to put a team on his back every once in a while and carry them to victory.

@tour2ma said:

agreed......would say the Browns have comparable man for man offensive talent to the Hawks.....and the system being put in place is designed to diminish the requirements on the QB.....whomever it may be....sooooo.....

dont really see it as a drop off for him....

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Taylor, D. Bryant, McCown, and Dray would all be worthy cap casualties to ensure we have enough room to bring on a mega contract.

Don't forget Mack... there's $8mm/yr.

@mld-woody said:

Would be interesting to see Wilson on another team. He's obviously in a very good Seahawks team. How would he do on a team where it all depends on him?

Huh? We're building the opposite of an everything on the QB roster.

@tour2ma said:

@gftchris said:

http://www.scout.com/nfl/browns/story/1555044-what-if-russell-wilson-is-franchised-browns

The Cleveland Browns are still seeking an answer at the most important position on the field: Quarterback. Super Bowl winning QB Russell Wilson is in a contract dispute with the Seattle Seahawks. What if they Franchise Tag him? How much would he be worth to the Browns?

Obviously, it won't happen. But, assuming that all of the chips somehow magically fell into place, I think you offer 50% more than whatever Wilson is asking for. Money is no object.

@tour2ma said:

But isn't the maximum pick compensation for signing away a RFA is one 1st?

EDIT: Two 1sts, if signed away under the "non-exclusive" franchise tag.

The real issue is the contract offer. It'd have to be high enough that the Seahawks would (could) not match it without hamstringing ourselves. Since the hang up appears to be guaranteed money, might be able to frontload enough to do just that...

Interesting indeed... and yes, not likely...

I would be happy with a Roethlisberger-type monster contract. Taylor, D. Bryant, McCown, and Dray would all be worthy cap casualties to ensure we have enough room to bring on a mega contract.

I have a feeling that multiple players, including Thomas and Haden, would restructure to bring in a player of Wilson's caliber, it would be no different than them signing with a contender once FA hits.

@londonbrown said:

Wilson is in a specifically built system to get the best out of him. He is obviously a good QB but no guarantee that if you take him out of Seattle, he plays to the same level.

That specifically built system centers around a strong running game, a stifling defense, and an overacheiving offensive line - similar to what we're seemingly trying to implement here.

Granted, we don't have a Marshawn Lynch, but we do have a better offensive line (on paper).

For 2 firsts and the rest of our payroll, Id say Wilson wouldnt be my first choice....but beggars cant be choosers.....

Im keeping an eye on the Phillip Rivers sweepstakes too......may be available for much cheaper than 2 firsts.....