<![CDATA[Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation]]>http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/report-browns-will-try-to-trade-for-patriots-backup-qb-jimmy-garoppolo/

Despite drafting quarterbacks in the first round on three occasions since 2007 -- including Johnny Manziel in 2014 -- the Browns are in desperate need of ... a franchise quarterback.

Rookie Cody Kessler was serviceable under trying circumstances in 2016 -- the third-round pick completed 66 percent of his passes and had six touchdowns versus two interceptions, but he was also winless in eight starts. (Yes, we know, QB wins aren't the be-all end-all, but the point remains: The Browns could stand to upgrade the position.) The other quarterbacks to see the field last season are, for various reasons, short-term solutions (Josh McCown is 37 and Robert Griffin III shows no signs of returning to the form that made him Offensive Rookie of the Year with the Redskins in 2012).

MORE ON SUPER BOWL LI

Which brings us back to the Browns' ongoing search for a quarterback. Perhaps the most popular candidate to be in Cleveland in 2017: Patriots backup Jimmy Garoppolo. He started the first two games of the 2016 season, while Tom Brady served his Deflategate suspension, and led the Patriots to two wins. In those games, Garoppolo completed 42 of 59 attempts (71 percent) for 469 yards, four touchdowns and no interceptions before getting hurt just before halftime in Week 2 against the Dolphins.

Cleveland.com's Mary Kay Cabot reports that "the Browns' interest in Garoppolo is real and that they'll try to trade for him depending on how their draft evaluations go over the next five weeks or so."

More from Cabot:

If the Browns decide to draft Mitch Trubisky or Deshaun Watson in the first round, they'll be much less likely to pursue the Patriots' backup -- but wouldn't rule it out.
But they'll have competition for Garoppolo that will drive up the price.
Falcons
offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan liked him coming out of the draft, and might pursue a deal once he formally becomes the 49ers' head coach.
The 49ers have the No. 2 pick in the draft, and are also looking for a quarterback. But the Browns are intrigued, sources say, and they'll strongly consider it. The cost could be the No. 12 overall pick and more.

If the Garoppolo-to-Cleveland stuff sounds familiar it should; in December, former Browns executive Mike Lombardi -- who worked with Bill Belichick in Cleveland in the mid-1990s and was a front-office assistant in New England from 2014-2016 -- said this:

"The next quarterback that'll be the Cleveland Browns' quarterback perhaps is Jimmy Garoppolo in New England," Lombardi said during a television appearance at the time. "I think Cleveland understands, Hue Jackson specifically understands he needs a quarterback. I think they'll be very aggressive. I think Jimmy Garoppolo's on top of their list, and I think they'll go hard after him. I think the Patriots will decide whether [to trade Garoppolo] based on the deal they're offered and Cleveland has enough assets to entice them."

And just last week, NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reported that the Pats were certainly open to trading Garoppolo, though the going rate would be a first-round pick.

In case you're wondering, both Rob Rang and Dane Brugler have the Browns taking Texas A&M defensive end Myles Garrett first overall in latest CBSSports.com mock draft, though 11 picks later Rang has the Browns taking Notre Dame quarterback DeShone Kizer, while Brugler likes Florida cornerback Teez Tabor.

This information is nothing new for Browns fans, but it's interesting to see an official report being made by a journalist (well, a wannabe journalist anyways). At this point, trading for Garoppolo is my #1 solution to fixing our QB quandry...a problem we haven't solved in 17 years. My opinion is subject to change, as it's only February and I haven't really dissected the incoming QB prospects. However, I don't expect it to change because Garoppolo has lived the NFL life for a couple of years, knows how to prepare as a starter (no matter how brief), and was highly regarded coming out of college. People are quick to point out that Hoyer, Mallet, and Cassel didn't exactly tear it up, but these guys aren't an apples to oranges comparison. As I've stated in a previous post, Garoppolo was a second round pick. Compare that to Hoyer (undrafted) and Cassell (7th round), and you begin to understand that the comparison doesn't hold water. Hell, Cassell didn't even START in college at USC, and I believe he had just 40 career passing attempts. Mallet was a third round pick, and that's where the similarities end. He's a big, slow guy with a glacial delivery and a known subpar work ethic. Additionally, he was eventually traded for a conditional 7th round pick I think, and that's just a TINY BIT different from the proposed asking price for JG.

Signing a free agent QB or trading for a veteran doesn't guarantee success, in fact, many people tend to think of the many failures instead of the ones of have gone on to find success or even moderate play. How about Alex Smith? How many people wrote this guy off? Anyone know what his record is in Kansas City since he got there? Sure, he may not have the greatest playoff record, but would anybody here NOT trade places with the Chiefs? I could be mistaken, but the Chiefs were the worst team in the league before hiring Andy Reid and signing Alex Smith, and I THINK they went to the playoffs the next year. Obviously this wasn't ONLY because of Alex Smith, and he did have a season where he didn't complete a single TD pass to a WR (so weird), but again...would anybody here NOT want Alex Smith's success? How about Drew Brees going to the Saints? A bit different because he had an amazing year at San Diego before being traded, but still a veteran starting for another team. Even Jay Cutler had moderate success before things fell off the rails. Maybe not "good", but he didn't always play poorly either. Tyrod Taylor had a decent couple of years as well, although nothing spectacular. In two starting years with the Bills, I think he had something like 37 passing TD's, 4 rushing TD's, and only around 15 INT's. Anybody else be ok with that?

Point is, no matter HOW a team acquires a QB, there's a risk. Drafting one early, especially in a year where many experts say nobody is ready to immediately start, has it's own risk. Does our coaching staff and front office really have the needed 2-3 years for that guy to develop? After the worst year in franchise history? Probably not. Is the NFL LITTERED with examples of backup QB's going to other teams and failing to find success? Yep. But the league ALSO has many examples of QB needy teams reaching high in the draft for QB's that either weren't ready or simply didn't possess the required ability. Hell, look at our own damn team. Garoppolo has a quick release, a sturdy looking build, and is rumored to be desired by multiple teams. He doesn't have a long NFL resume, but he HAS shown the ability to process information and make accurate throws. Is JG the perfect solution? Nope, not even close. But is he better than using potentially the #1 overall pick on somebody? I think he is...ESPECIALLY if we can arrange a deal with the Patriots that doesn't include one of our first rounders.

The main obstacle in the Browns completing this deal is the San Francisco 49's. They are rumored to be hiring Kyle Shanahan (if they haven't already...I forget). Shanahan is on record for liking JG out of college, and many analysts expect Shanahan to go hard after him. If the 49's offer the Patriots a deal that stupidly involves the #2 pick of the damn draft, that will likely knock the Browns out of contention. There's NO WAY we package the #1 overall in a deal (Jesus...at least I HOPE NOT), and nothing we offer would compete with that. It's hard to imagine the 49's offering the #2, but who knows? Could the Browns package the #12 and other picks needed to make a better deal? Of course it's possible, but our team has SO MANY other needs, it's difficult to imagine us parting ways with that many assets.

Garoppolo is far from the only option, and we could definitely draft a QB early, sign somebody like Tyrod Taylor, and try to solve the QB equation that way. Maybe we draft a QB early and simply start Kessler or RG III? I expect the QB room to look VERY different, and my current hope is that it involves Jimmy Garoppolo.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/45681/jimmy-garoppolo-speculationRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 17:38:37 GMTWed, 01 Feb 2017 14:07:10 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:45 GMT]]>

@bigalow80 said:

Personally, I think the Browns would prefer to have Jimmy G as their starting qb, but they won't overpay for him. They have shown especially in Free Agency, they are willing to do things on their terms only and won't bend no matter what the public pressure or outside forces are saying. I think this is a very good quality in a front office, especially considering they are fairly young in the game. I believe they have made what they believe to be more than a fair offer to NE for his services, but NE just isn't ready to part with him yet. I truly think they are going to hold onto him through next year, tag him, and then trade him away. he may lose draft pick value overall, but in their eyes, it's super bowl or bust. If they lose brady, Jimmy g still can get them a super bowl win. I'm not sure Jacoby Brisset can do that at this point of his career. Once again, it's the value of the player to the organization. Different teams have different terms of value. Each team holds different players at different positions with a certain value marker. NE is holding their back-up qb, with a very strong sense of value and understand his loss could be detrimental to the overall team's success. That being said, with the Jamie Collins deal, NE saw that even though his value was very high as a player, their defense could survive without him. With both him and Hightower being unrestricted FA's, they knew they would only be able to afford one of them. They placed a higher value on retraining Hightower than Collins. When the Browns called about his services, they reached a deal that was in their minds reasonable value for him. I don't think it has anything to do with being a good trade/bad trade type scenario but simply, a matter of how to maintain team success within the current structure of the nfl. The patriots have proven this time and time again. How does this all tie back to JImmy G and the Browns? To me, it's two teams who are largely working in very similar manners evaluating the value of each player and what it is worth to them. For the patriots, a very good back-up qb is more important to retain than a very good linebacker. To the browns, they were able to obtain a very good linebacker for a reasonable price. They would like to get Jimmy G, but they also recognize that they are not in a position to mortgage the future of the team for one player no matter whom the player maybe.

A fair and unbiased take.

OK guys this has gone on long enough. The lines are drawn in the sand, about everyone has their minds made up about Jimmy, one way or another. This is turning into a debate squad event. The relative merits of the guy, as well as the risks to the Browns have been gone over ad nauseum. Boo is just cooking up regurgitated crap that's been refuted 10X over. So I'm closing the thread- 800+ posts about a backup quarterback who's not even on the Browns- and who may never be is plain crazy. Unless and until there's definitive information from the Browns or Patriots let's just give it a rest. In another thread.

Please- Thank you.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/694003https://brownsboard.com/post/694003Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:00:14 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

To reap as many high draft picks as possible to load the Patriots for bear.

Only told you 20X already the Browns won't be that stupid.

@boo-fagley said:

It was the Steelers and Packers choice to pass on Collins when both teams are Super Bowl contenders.

There was no place on the Packers or Steelers rosters with Mathews and Timmons respectively already in place.

@boo-fagley said:

There were other offers. Lower than the Browns.

Collins must be not very good.

Yeah, he's so bad the Browns decided he was worth more than Hightower- and hey cap guru- if the Browns had wanted to, they had the the money to sign Hightower to reunite him with Collins. But they happen to think Kirksey will do just fine for a lot less money.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/694001https://brownsboard.com/post/694001Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:00:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:57:12 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

There were other offers. Lower than the Browns.

Collins must be not very good.

How the fuck do you know that? You don't. As he said, you are just making this shit up it seems. Show a link to something legitimate that even speculated that there were other offers.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693999https://brownsboard.com/post/693999Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:57:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:00:48 GMT]]>

@bigalow80 said:

Personally, I think the Browns would prefer to have Jimmy G as their starting qb, but they won't overpay for him. They have shown especially in Free Agency, they are willing to do things on their terms only and won't bend no matter what the public pressure or outside forces are saying. I think this is a very good quality in a front office, especially considering they are fairly young in the game. I believe they have made what they believe to be more than a fair offer to NE for his services, but NE just isn't ready to part with him yet. I truly think they are going to hold onto him through next year, tag him, and then trade him away. he may lose draft pick value overall, but in their eyes, it's super bowl or bust. If they lose brady, Jimmy g still can get them a super bowl win. I'm not sure Jacoby Brisset can do that at this point of his career. Once again, it's the value of the player to the organization. Different teams have different terms of value. Each team holds different players at different positions with a certain value marker. NE is holding their back-up qb, with a very strong sense of value and understand his loss could be detrimental to the overall team's success. That being said, with the Jamie Collins deal, NE saw that even though his value was very high as a player, their defense could survive without him. With both him and Hightower being unrestricted FA's, they knew they would only be able to afford one of them. They placed a higher value on retraining Hightower than Collins. When the Browns called about his services, they reached a deal that was in their minds reasonable value for him. I don't think it has anything to do with being a good trade/bad trade type scenario but simply, a matter of how to maintain team success within the current structure of the nfl. The patriots have proven this time and time again. How does this all tie back to JImmy G and the Browns? To me, it's two teams who are largely working in very similar manners evaluating the value of each player and what it is worth to them. For the patriots, a very good back-up qb is more important to retain than a very good linebacker. To the browns, they were able to obtain a very good linebacker for a reasonable price. They would like to get Jimmy G, but they also recognize that they are not in a position to mortgage the future of the team for one player no matter whom the player maybe.

Pats ain't winning no Super Bowl next year without Brady. JG is unproven...and ain't no Tom Brady.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693963https://brownsboard.com/post/693963Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:00:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:58:39 GMT]]>Personally, I think the Browns would prefer to have Jimmy G as their starting qb, but they won't overpay for him. They have shown especially in Free Agency, they are willing to do things on their terms only and won't bend no matter what the public pressure or outside forces are saying. I think this is a very good quality in a front office, especially considering they are fairly young in the game. I believe they have made what they believe to be more than a fair offer to NE for his services, but NE just isn't ready to part with him yet. I truly think they are going to hold onto him through next year, tag him, and then trade him away. he may lose draft pick value overall, but in their eyes, it's super bowl or bust. If they lose brady, Jimmy g still can get them a super bowl win. I'm not sure Jacoby Brisset can do that at this point of his career. Once again, it's the value of the player to the organization. Different teams have different terms of value. Each team holds different players at different positions with a certain value marker. NE is holding their back-up qb, with a very strong sense of value and understand his loss could be detrimental to the overall team's success. That being said, with the Jamie Collins deal, NE saw that even though his value was very high as a player, their defense could survive without him. With both him and Hightower being unrestricted FA's, they knew they would only be able to afford one of them. They placed a higher value on retraining Hightower than Collins. When the Browns called about his services, they reached a deal that was in their minds reasonable value for him. I don't think it has anything to do with being a good trade/bad trade type scenario but simply, a matter of how to maintain team success within the current structure of the nfl. The patriots have proven this time and time again. How does this all tie back to JImmy G and the Browns? To me, it's two teams who are largely working in very similar manners evaluating the value of each player and what it is worth to them. For the patriots, a very good back-up qb is more important to retain than a very good linebacker. To the browns, they were able to obtain a very good linebacker for a reasonable price. They would like to get Jimmy G, but they also recognize that they are not in a position to mortgage the future of the team for one player no matter whom the player maybe.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693960https://brownsboard.com/post/693960Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:58:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:57:18 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

How do we know that he was shopped around to any team other than the Browns? Steelers/Packers/Gladiators/Banana Slugs?

Is every time a trade is discussed between two teams for a player, does the team that holds his rights go off seeking other offers? I don't think that is the case.

I doubt BB is calling a perennial threat in the AFC up offering them his players.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693959https://brownsboard.com/post/693959Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:57:18 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:49:34 GMT]]>

@londonbrown said:

How do you know the Patriots didn't refuse to trade him to the Steelers? You constantly report your guesswork as facts on here.

How do we know that he was shopped around to any team other than the Browns? Steelers/Packers/Gladiators/Banana Slugs?

Is every time a trade is discussed between two teams for a player, does the team that holds his rights go off seeking other offers? I don't think that is the case.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693956https://brownsboard.com/post/693956Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:49:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:35:04 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

It was the Steelers and Packers choice to pass on Collins when both teams are Super Bowl contenders.

How do you know the Patriots didn't refuse to trade him to the Steelers? You constantly report your guesswork as facts on here.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693951https://brownsboard.com/post/693951Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:35:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:30:43 GMT]]>. Timmons is gone with Harrison right behind him.

HGHarrison has signed a 2 year extension.

To me...that move smacks of desperation. He turns 39 years old on Star Wars Day. (born May 4, 1978)

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693949https://brownsboard.com/post/693949Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:30:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:50:18 GMT]]>If you work on the theory that the Pats are in full, win-now mode for Brady's final seasons, and their FA moves tend to say they are, then why would they trade away their primo backup?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693926https://brownsboard.com/post/693926Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:50:18 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:18:30 GMT]]>I'm one of the fools that completely believes we'll be trading multiple picks for Garoppolo. It just makes too much sense. We've been acquiring picks for the past two years, and we've kept up that mantra already in this offseason. We're getting as much ammo as we possibly can to make a trade. Garoppolo is ready to start right now. He's got a quick release, scans the field, and isn't afraid to attack the middle. I think he's almost exactly what Hue is looking for. This is just my wild-ass opinion, and I obviously don't have a shred of insider knowledge or anything, but I think JG is the direction we're at least TRYING to go. I believe the ONLY hold up is whether or not the Patriots even WANT to trade the guy. However, with them not having a first or second round pick...I think they'd be CRAZY for not making the move.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693897https://brownsboard.com/post/693897Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:18:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:04:50 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

If Jamie Collins is really that good.

Why were there not more teams interested?

Why would Pittsburgh let Collins go to a rival when they are thin at LB?

Green Bay is wasting away the Rodgers years. Why didnt GB go all in and get Collins when they have the draft pick?

The answer is that there were no good teams that wanted Collins.

In regards to Houston the answer is so simple. Romo will be cut and cost nothing. Garrapolo wont.

He might well cost almost nothing, or other teams might tell you to keep him. In regards to the Steelers, they had Timmons at the time and Headhunter Harrison had found the Fountain of Youth, or you forget they could have had Hightower this month for the price of his contract? The Browns seriously needed LB help and getting a pro bowl linebacker for a comp third round pick was a bargain. Just another thing for you to realize in light of the previous, the Browns Front Office isn't going to be overpaying the Patriots for Garropolo either.

Two QB needy teams have essentially passed on Garropolo already. 49ers (Hoyer), and Bears (Glennon). LOL, if you're saying Brissett is the backup now, making Jimmy expendable seriously devalues him in the eyes of other GMs. That's what the 49ers and Bears already told you, he's sort of on the level of Hoyer and Glennon. OR, as I opined- they both thought the Patriots were asking way too damn much.

Ex GM's like Casserly saying "well this is what I would do" doesn't mean squat what the Browns might do. Face it, the Browns could easily go with Ostrich and Kessler, tank again for Darnold- or wait & see if the Patriots will franchise Garropolo, assuming that he's still on the roster.

Here's some media chatter for you to digest after North Carolina's Pro Day. Trubisky isn't getting past #12. He'll only cost the Browns one pick, not a bunch. Another reason the Browns will wait until the draft.

BTW- this media garbage is just as believable as the garbage floating around that the Browns will trade multiple picks for Garropolo. https://dawgpounddaily.com/2017/03/22/cleveland-browns-settling-brock-osweiler-quarterback-2017/

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693754https://brownsboard.com/post/693754Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:04:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:10:09 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

If Jamie Collins is really that good.

Why were there not more teams interested?

Why would Pittsburgh let Collins go to a rival when they are thin at LB?

Green Bay is wasting away the Rodgers years. Why didnt GB go all in and get Collins when they have the draft pick?

The answer is that there were no good teams that wanted Collins.

In regards to Houston the answer is so simple. Romo will be cut and cost nothing. Garrapolo wont.

It wasn't the Steelers' decision to trade Jamie Collins.

Nor was it the Packers'.

No one "let" anyone do anything.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693711https://brownsboard.com/post/693711Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:10:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:56:14 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

If Jamie Collins is really that good.

Why were there not more teams interested?

Why would Pittsburgh let Collins go to a rival when they are thin at LB?

Green Bay is wasting away the Rodgers years. Why didnt GB go all in and get Collins when they have the draft pick?

The answer is that there were no good teams that wanted Collins.

In regards to Houston the answer is so simple. Romo will be cut and cost nothing. Garrapolo wont.

So why was he the best player on the Browns defense?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693708https://brownsboard.com/post/693708Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:56:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 04:46:51 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

Belichick does not want to make the Jets stronger with a good QB. Let them keep drafting busts. This draft is full of them.

HAHA

No, who wants to win this year or next. Having the most cap space and draft picks is what its all about. Ask any wannabe NFL GM.

Says here Cousins wants to go to the 49ers. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/14/cleveland-may-make-a-run-at-kirk-cousins/

Brisset is the back up now. Some team is getting Garropolo like I stated. NE is not going into this draft with no picks in the 1st and 2nd.

The Patriots going to put a gun to other teams heads and force them to give you picks? Doesn't work that way. It would bring much joy and happiness to the other 31 teams if the Patriots don't have any first or second round picks. We'd be more than happy to see that the Patriots have Garropolo so drastically overvalued they screwed up giving away too much to land Cooks.

First, supposedly the Bears kicked the Jimmy tires and thought either- the asking price for Garropolo was too high or Glennon was a better option. They're not the only Franchise to be in the wait and see mode. The 49ers are waiting on Cousins, who possibly IS worth the #2 overall pick.

I pilfered this from another forum because it makes too much sense.....

IF Garoppolo is really this guy that all the GM's and HC's love, and

IF he is as ready to step in day 1 and be the starter,

THEN...

Why is it Houston is willing to wait around for a broken down war horse like Romo?

Why is it Denver is poking around offering a 1st for Joe Thomas when they could use it to get JG?

Why is it Washington doesn't just go after him and trade Cousins away to SF?

The reality is NO GOOD TEAM is connected to JG. Only a poor team with tons of assets. Now...there is only 1 reason I can think of for that...and that is NE and their team is filling the air waves (with shills like Lombardi and LaCanforya) trying to get someone to bite on BS rumors about the Browns wanting him.

Fact that trade value goes way down on draft day, and the Browns will bide their time.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693699https://brownsboard.com/post/693699Wed, 22 Mar 2017 04:46:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:17:58 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

Belichick does not want to make the Jets stronger with a good QB. Let them keep drafting busts. This draft is full of them.

HAHA

No, who wants to win this year or next. Having the most cap space and draft picks is what its all about. Ask any wannabe NFL GM.

Says here Cousins wants to go to the 49ers. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/14/cleveland-may-make-a-run-at-kirk-cousins/

Brisset is the back up now. Some team is getting Garropolo like I stated. NE is not going into this draft with no picks in the 1st and 2nd.

So? When is this Cousins deal supposed to go down? Dan Snyder basically says no way in hell is he trading Cousins.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693610https://brownsboard.com/post/693610Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:17:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:29:33 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

No, who wants to win this year or next. Having the most cap space and draft picks is what its all about. Ask any wannabe NFL GM.

Win what?

During his stint with us Saint Belichick built the Browns over 4 years before we made a playoff appearance. Why do you persist in your fantasy that we are on some other schedule?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693597https://brownsboard.com/post/693597Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:29:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:01:16 GMT]]>Correct they aren't as NO are going to give them back #32 for Butler

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693589https://brownsboard.com/post/693589Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:01:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Tue, 21 Mar 2017 06:01:30 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

Garroplo will never go the Jets. Ridiculous. The Bears already have Glennon which was a stupid move. He sucks. What did the 49ers offer? Do you know?

Sashi hoarding his cap money and draft picks is unlikely to produce wins sooner than later. Weak QB draft with the usual Russian roulette choices at QB.

Agreed, Bill isn't stupid enough to trade Garropolo in the division to the Jets. Browns aren't in a "win now" mode either. You're just reiterating media dumbspeak, if you think Jimmy is our only option. Just said it in the original post- "Browns lots of picks- New England needs picks". Aw shucks, the Browns have out maneuvered the Patriots in amassing draft picks and cap room. But, but- it's SO obvious- no it isn't. Already said it- the Browns aren't paying more than market value for a BACKUP QB, regardless of what the media or Patriot fans think. If we want to blow some cap room and draft picks, I'll spend it on a guy like Kirk Cousins- happens to be 10X the proven commodity than Garropolo, and I dare you to say otherwise. I don't know (neither does anyone else) what Sashi and DePo's opinion of Garropolo is, but I'm confident of this- unless they see Jimmy as the next Aaron Rodgers- you're not getting any more than (a) second round pick for his services.

Jimmy isn't Russian Roulette? Har, har- if he isn't- go keep him as your backup when Brady gets hurt. Hate to break it to you but JG definitely IS. After how many New England backups have flamed out? It's going to be different this time? He's got a smaller resume than Matt Cassell. This particular Browns fan has seen the media hype over New England backup qbs too many times to get sucked in again. Us Cleveland fans saw what can happen after defensive coordinators get a handle on a qb- like Derek Anderson. Pro Bowl to toilet bowl.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693542https://brownsboard.com/post/693542Tue, 21 Mar 2017 06:01:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:27:17 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

Right

Who would want a QB like Garrapolo who is smart, can make all throws and reads defenses?

Gee, why don't you ask the 49ers, Bears, and Jets the same question? The media (and some Patriot fans) are looking with tunnel vision at the Golden Fruit Tree of multiple draft picks Cleveland and no one else has, hoping the Browns will be stupid enough to gift a bunch of them to the Patriots. You may have noticed Boo- Sashi didn't overpay for Pryor- though it can be argued he was more of an immediate need than a "right now" qb. He sure as hell isn't paying more than market value for a backup qb that might have starter potential. And have to sign him to a long term contract with at least top 50% qb money. Taking a qb at #12 is looking better and cheaper by the day.

@the-gipper said:

First....you don't really know if he can do all that on more than a temporary basis....and B. even if you think he could do that...at what price?

#52 is my price. Take it or leave it.

Nailed it Gip- we've both been saying that from the get-go. We'll even throw the Brockstrich in and pick up $10 million of his salary, but that may reduce our offer. 🙂

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693367https://brownsboard.com/post/693367Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:27:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:25:21 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

I've already said it a bunch of times guy. The Browns will thoroughly evaluate the 2017 QB class first. The Browns hold all the high cards in this scenario, NOT the Patriots. We have zero rush to get a trade done, if at all. MHO is Cleveland will wait and see how the draft is unfolding before they MIGHT make a move. You're 100% right the Patriots are in a bad way come draft day- so make 'em sweat. Bill panicked and took Clifford Charlton out of desperation once upon a time.

What you're missing out on- this isn't a seller's market for Garropolo, it's a buyers market. With more draft "cash" available than anyone the Browns can and will set the price for Jimmy- that's if they're even interested. It's curious the media is so gung-ho to get this trade done has ONLY linked Garropolo to the Browns and no one else- for that exact (simplistic) reason. Sashi and company can tell Bill to go pound salt if they think he's asking too much for a backup quarterback who's only thrown 90 some passes and got hurt after 1-1\2 games.

Nailed it

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693352https://brownsboard.com/post/693352Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:25:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:22:39 GMT]]>

@boo-fagley said:

Right

Who would want a QB like Garrapolo who is smart, can make all throws and reads defenses?

First....you don't really know if he can do all that on more than a temporary basis....and B. even if you think he could do that...at what price?

#52 is my price. Take it or leave it.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693351https://brownsboard.com/post/693351Mon, 20 Mar 2017 17:22:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:28:14 GMT]]>

@jiggins7919 said:

I'm still pretty sure the trade for JG is going to happen, but my concern about it is...why hasn't it happened? In my mind, the Patriots would want to know where they're picking for the upcoming draft. They would want as much time as possible to plan, evaluate, and scheme it up. As of right now, they don't even HAVE a first or second round pick in a draft that is heavy on defensive talent. The Patriots are in NEED of defensive talent. I'm a little concerned that there basically is ZERO chatter regarding this trade scenario, but then again, that doesn't mean anything.

EDIT :

Jiggins- I usually enjoy your takes, but the bolded is laughable. Can you give me one valid reason why we should be "nice" to the Patriots? The NFL is a cut throat business, and if I'm the Browns, I'm giving them as little time as possible to plan.

I've already said it a bunch of times guy. The Browns will thoroughly evaluate the 2017 QB class first. The Browns hold all the high cards in this scenario, NOT the Patriots. We have zero rush to get a trade done, if at all. MHO is Cleveland will wait and see how the draft is unfolding before they MIGHT make a move. You're 100% right the Patriots are in a bad way come draft day- so make 'em sweat. Bill panicked and took Clifford Charlton out of desperation once upon a time.

What you're missing out on- this isn't a seller's market for Garropolo, it's a buyers market. With more draft "cash" available than anyone the Browns can and will set the price for Jimmy- that's if they're even interested. It's curious the media is so gung-ho to get this trade done has ONLY linked Garropolo to the Browns and no one else- for that exact (simplistic) reason. Sashi and company can tell Bill to go pound salt if they think he's asking too much for a backup quarterback who's only thrown 90 some passes and got hurt after 1-1\2 games.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693345https://brownsboard.com/post/693345Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:28:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Jimmy Garoppolo Speculation on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 14:20:44 GMT]]>

@tour2ma said:

Wow... and it's been a long time since Bill was a teenager...

LOL

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/693305https://brownsboard.com/post/693305Mon, 20 Mar 2017 14:20:44 GMT