Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. How likely, now, do you'all think it is, that the Browns trade down from #2?

How likely, now, do you'all think it is, that the Browns trade down from #2?

The Browns Board
96 28 3.4k
  • hoortaH hoorta

    @suomi said:

    Witness the collapse of one of the most storied franchises in the NFL. The poor folks of Cleveland deserve much better than the camel shit that's been shoveled on them for the past decade.

    I've been waiting for a turnaround long enough. Face it folks - it won't happen in our lifetime.

    Yup- welcome to the level of Cubs fandom. Maybe Harlem Globetrotters, because right now we're only good for a few laughs to the rest of the NFL.

    @mudfly said:

    or....maybe the players just wouldnt sign because they wanted more $ or just to leave....considering Mack and Schwartz signed for less than we offered, Id say thats the more likely scenario......and Benji has been "negotiating for 5 months now, with BOTH FO's, yet didnt sign.....5 months.....and Gipson?....you think he's a $7 million safety?.....seriously?....

    Right now I don't know what to think Mud. If the bold is true- we have one toxic situation brewing on the shore of Lake Erie.

    MudflyM Mudfly wrote on
    #15

    @hoorta said:

    Yup- welcome to the level of Cubs fandom. Maybe Harlem Globetrotters, because right now we're only good for a few laughs to the rest of the NFL.

    Right now I don't know what to think Mud. If the bold is true- we have one toxic situation brewing on the shore of Lake Erie.

    It is true......we offered both of them better deals and they passed......and we had enough sense to draw the line with the other 2 ...

  • MudflyM Mudfly

    @hoorta said:

    Yup- welcome to the level of Cubs fandom. Maybe Harlem Globetrotters, because right now we're only good for a few laughs to the rest of the NFL.

    Right now I don't know what to think Mud. If the bold is true- we have one toxic situation brewing on the shore of Lake Erie.

    It is true......we offered both of them better deals and they passed......and we had enough sense to draw the line with the other 2 ...

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on
    #16

    @mudfly said:

    It is true......we offered both of them better deals and they passed......and we had enough sense to draw the line with the other 2 ...

    Well that does not bode well for the persuasive powers of the new regime then does it.

  • T TexasAg1969

    @mudfly said:

    It is true......we offered both of them better deals and they passed......and we had enough sense to draw the line with the other 2 ...

    Well that does not bode well for the persuasive powers of the new regime then does it.

    LogicIsForSquaresL LogicIsForSquares wrote on
    #17

    @texasag1969 said:

    Well that does not bode well for the persuasive powers of the new regime then does it.

    Or players get tired of having new coaches/GMs every two years.

    Mack wanted out a few years ago. It should have shocked no one that he left.

  • MudflyM Mudfly wrote on
    #18

    I dont know Ag....Im not drawing conclusions after only 1/2 day on the job......Mack was gone and we all knew it.....I agree with letting the other 2 go....so, to me, Schwartz was the one deal I hoped and expected them to really work on....and they didnt get it done.....does that mean they suck?....I think it would be irrational to conclude that today.....

    If they sigh another decent C and T, then no big deal.....right?.....

    Dont forget, we have yet another new guy on the job....so, again, just like every 2 years here, there is yet another learning curve to endure.....thats how it goes when you hire a completely new staff every other year.....especially staff that has no experience at the job they are now doing....

  • MudflyM Mudfly wrote on
    #19

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    hoortaH Tour2maT 2 Replies
  • LogicIsForSquaresL LogicIsForSquares wrote on
    #20

    Erving will step right in and replace Mack. I believe in him.

    /mommairving

  • LogicIsForSquaresL LogicIsForSquares

    Erving will step right in and replace Mack. I believe in him.

    /mommairving

    MudflyM Mudfly wrote on
    #21

    @logicisforsquares said:

    Erving will step right in and replace Mack. I believe in him.

    /mommairving

    HA!....Ive been with you all the way......until now.....😉

  • LogicIsForSquaresL LogicIsForSquares wrote on
    #22

    I would like to see Wisnewski brought in or, worst case, a rookie takes the job.

  • MudflyM Mudfly

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on
    #23

    @mudfly said:

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    Well sure- the Donkeys just won the SB- so what if they currently don't have a QB who's worth a damn?

    The difference? They won't have to overpay to attract talent.

  • MudflyM Mudfly

    @texasag1969 said:

    Maybe if they had negotiated better before open season then those things would not be happening now.

    or....maybe the players just wouldnt sign because they wanted more $ or just to leave....considering Mack and Schwartz signed for less than we offered, Id say thats the more likely scenario......and Benji has been "negotiating for 5 months now, with BOTH FO's, yet didnt sign.....5 months.....and Gipson?....you think he's a $7 million safety?.....seriously?....

    J Johnny Fingers Farmer wrote on
    #24

    @mudfly said:

    or....maybe the players just wouldnt sign because they wanted more $ or just to leave....considering Mack and Schwartz signed for less than we offered, Id say thats the more likely scenario

    I was unaware that the guaranteed money the Browns offered was public knowledge. The overall value of a contract might have been higher but I'm guessing the most important part "guaranteed money" might have been less. Then again one or both of them could have had enough of the Browns BS.
  • W Westside Steve wrote on
    #25

    I'm usually a fan of trading down. The draft is a crapshoot and the more times you can roll the dice the better chance you have for a winner.

    We have more glaring holes today and we did 2 days ago and logically if you get two or three guys in the draft that can even play in the league you are lucky.

    WSS

    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
  • C CaineDeSoulis wrote on
    #26

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    T 1 Reply
  • MudflyM Mudfly

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on
    #27

    @mudfly said:

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    Nah... not weird... just consistent with the narative of "Broncos genius; Browns bad."

    @cainedesoulis said:

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    Don't know about Joe, but certainly has a shot of equally Mitch with a lil' seasoning.

    Unfortunately that's why he now appears to be headed into the bottom half of the 1st round.

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
  • C CaineDeSoulis

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on
    #28

    @cainedesoulis said:

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    Springs won't be there @3, so it's 2 or not at all.

  • C calfoxwc wrote on
    #29

    Wentz's left tackle could easily be there in the third...top of the fourth.... if you read up on

    both players, there isn't that much difference in their physical abilities, imho.

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on
    #30

    Haeg ain't bad, cal, but if you watch a little of both, you'll see a difference.

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
  • C calfoxwc wrote on
    #31

    I'm not good at scouting, so... lol

    I'm going more on cost-effectiveness. The cost of drafting Spriggs would be higher,

    as in, top of the second at latest, than drafting Haeg in the third. I don't think he'll be there

    in the fourth... we're talking RT anyways. I think Haeg has quicker feet...

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

  • C calfoxwc

    I'm not good at scouting, so... lol

    I'm going more on cost-effectiveness. The cost of drafting Spriggs would be higher,

    as in, top of the second at latest, than drafting Haeg in the third. I don't think he'll be there

    in the fourth... we're talking RT anyways. I think Haeg has quicker feet...

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on
    #32

    @calfoxwc said:

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

    lol... in that case the least I can do is recommend one, 2015 tape each that demos their difference...

    For Spriggs watch FIU... good early season form... http://draftbreakdown.com/video/jason-spriggs-vs-fiu-2015/

    For Haeg check out his Montana game... http://draftbreakdown.com/video/joe-haeg-vs-montana-2015/

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
  • C calfoxwc wrote on
    #33

    Spriggs is rated higher, but he got beat on a spin move badly... fell down on a good block when

    the defender backed off...

    Haeg nearly gave up a sack on a bull rush. but saved it...

    hard to see the difference great enough to warrant the Browns picking Spriggs at 2, if he's there,

    and Haeg in the third, assuming he may be.

    The Patriots are seriously looking at Haeg... since obviously Spriggs would be gone.

    Not seeing enough difference, cost-effectively... but what do I know, I ain't no profesunul on this stuff.

  • Opal312O Opal312 wrote on
    #34

    They should have kept Mitchell Schwartz. He's the one we will miss. We get compensory picks for next year? Is that how it works? Next year we would have more leverage?

    DAMN THE TORPEDOES! FULL SPEED AHEAD!
Log in to reply