<![CDATA[Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins"]]>http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2017/05/02/sashi-brown-we-have-never-engaged-in-trade-talks-about-kirk-cousins/

In a related story there was a "report" that we had made an offer that WSH "laughed at". Turns out that they were indeed laughing, but it was at reports that we were in serious negotiations with them for Cousins...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/46742/sashi-brown-we-have-never-engaged-in-trade-talks-about-kirk-cousinsRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 04:55:16 GMTWed, 03 May 2017 14:34:40 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sun, 07 May 2017 14:56:45 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Of course, we won't know if it is a mistake for some time. Even a great QB can't save a bad team. I for one DO believe that Andrew Luck can be a great QB, but, even he can't save the bad team around him. Bad defense, bad OL....limited weapons.

It won't help MT if the Bears are of the same mold. And right now I think they are of the same mold.

agreed: the Bears are a shit roster that lost their best receiver in the offseason. Mitch has a long row to hoe, which is why I'm in favor of how the Browns went about it. The Bears panicked and surrendered a lot of assets that could've been used to help build the team around their rookie QB. The Browns were patient and picked a high upside guy at a great value and still added a lot of talent to the roster.

My prediction: the Bears will be drafting ahead of the Browns in 2018.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705304https://brownsboard.com/post/705304Sun, 07 May 2017 14:56:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sun, 07 May 2017 14:55:23 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Bottom line though is this: those of you who pooh poohed my belief that MT was perceived as a franchise type player can go suck it. Clearly a few teams saw that potential as well.....enough for one of them to give away some substantial assets to move up one slot.

Such a grand display of self-serving illogic and supposition must be saluted...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705303https://brownsboard.com/post/705303Sun, 07 May 2017 14:55:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sun, 07 May 2017 14:28:00 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Not necessarily. I do believe they settled on Garrett at #1 and did not want to miss out on taking him. But I also think if it were possible they would have if they could have moved up to #2 to take MT. But clearly the Browns may have been in a bidding match with the Bears for him....and the Bears had something the Browns could not give: the #3 pick. The Niners did NOT want to lose out on Solomon Thomas...assuming Garrett was gone, and they would have lost out on him by trading with the Browns. Only an incredible haul of draft picks would have likely gotten them to drop from #2 to #12 and the likelihood of losing Thomas....a price the Browns did not want to pay.

Bottom line though is this: those of you who pooh poohed my belief that MT was perceived as a franchise type player can go suck it. Clearly a few teams saw that potential as well.....enough for one of them to give away some substantial assets to move up one slot.

I was right there with you, I expect that in the near future we will be having the conversation that we had the chance to take him at 1 and we blew it. For all of us in Mentor we won't have to drive far to see him get his gold jacket. Watching him grow up, his talents always seemed as if he was 3 years older than the rest around him. I expect that will continue at the NFL level. I now have to hope that Kizer is just as good and missing on MT won't sting as much.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705300https://brownsboard.com/post/705300Sun, 07 May 2017 14:28:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sat, 06 May 2017 15:13:08 GMT]]>

@roycerolls said:

Let's thank god it wasn't the Browns that made that mistake

Of course, we won't know if it is a mistake for some time. Even a great QB can't save a bad team. I for one DO believe that Andrew Luck can be a great QB, but, even he can't save the bad team around him. Bad defense, bad OL....limited weapons.

It won't help MT if the Bears are of the same mold. And right now I think they are of the same mold.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705195https://brownsboard.com/post/705195Sat, 06 May 2017 15:13:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sat, 06 May 2017 15:07:55 GMT]]>Let's thank god it wasn't the Browns that made that mistake

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705192https://brownsboard.com/post/705192Sat, 06 May 2017 15:07:55 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sat, 06 May 2017 15:05:31 GMT]]>

@roycerolls said:

I think the whole "trade up for Trubisky" was just smoke the whole time. If they thought he was worth an early 1st plus extra picks, they would've taken him at 1. If Trubisky was there at 52, they would've taken him there.

Not necessarily. I do believe they settled on Garrett at #1 and did not want to miss out on taking him. But I also think if it were possible they would have if they could have moved up to #2 to take MT. But clearly the Browns may have been in a bidding match with the Bears for him....and the Bears had something the Browns could not give: the #3 pick. The Niners did NOT want to lose out on Solomon Thomas...assuming Garrett was gone, and they would have lost out on him by trading with the Browns. Only an incredible haul of draft picks would have likely gotten them to drop from #2 to #12 and the likelihood of losing Thomas....a price the Browns did not want to pay.

Bottom line though is this: those of you who pooh poohed my belief that MT was perceived as a franchise type player can go suck it. Clearly a few teams saw that potential as well.....enough for one of them to give away some substantial assets to move up one slot.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705190https://brownsboard.com/post/705190Sat, 06 May 2017 15:05:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Sat, 06 May 2017 13:30:29 GMT]]>I think the whole "trade up for Trubisky" was just smoke the whole time. If they thought he was worth an early 1st plus extra picks, they would've taken him at 1. If Trubisky was there at 52, they would've taken him there.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/705177https://brownsboard.com/post/705177Sat, 06 May 2017 13:30:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 19:15:20 GMT]]>yo-mamma-joke.jpg

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704886https://brownsboard.com/post/704886Thu, 04 May 2017 19:15:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 19:14:51 GMT]]>4799636-352-k486705.jpg

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704885https://brownsboard.com/post/704885Thu, 04 May 2017 19:14:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 17:58:51 GMT]]>

@texasag1969 said:

Here is the real question. Had Kizer come out after the 2015 season would he have gone a lot higher than 2nd round?

No... ya know why?

Because...

Wait for it....

... he would've only had 13 starts...

lmao... sometimes I just kill myself...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704866https://brownsboard.com/post/704866Thu, 04 May 2017 17:58:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 16:01:09 GMT]]>

@nickers said:

The Browns could've saved them selves the trouble and just drafted Trubisky.. As usual.. they outsmart themselves..

Ghoolie will give you a firm pat on the head for that one. You might even get to sleep at the foot of the bed.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704854https://brownsboard.com/post/704854Thu, 04 May 2017 16:01:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 15:28:18 GMT]]>It just goes to show you that the NFL writers literally don't know anything. Reporters can say anything they want and then claim "unnamed sources" or "a person involved with the team" or some crap, and then say, "I would never reveal my sources!" It's crap.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704852https://brownsboard.com/post/704852Thu, 04 May 2017 15:28:18 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:48:35 GMT]]>

@texasag1969 said:

Chicago would have taken him for nothing @ #3, so Browns had no move "a bit further down".

Right.....but the Browns could have had a move UP to the Niners. That is what the Bears wanted to avoid...ergo their offer.

Now, maybe Niners would not have taken a chance on losing Thomas...or maybe they would have taken such a chance if the Browns offer were sweet enough, but Browns apparently did not want to get completely raked...and thus declined what the Niners may have been asking for.

We all don't know what was going on in the backrooms. There was clearly some wheeling and dealing....as the pick took right up to the last moment to be made....and the Bears didn't even call MT to let them know they were taking him. He heard it from the podium. It was probably that close of a deal.

Here is the real question. Had Kizer come out after the 2015 season would he have gone a lot higher than 2nd round?

Its not a real question at all. It didn't happen so the question is completely moot.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704849https://brownsboard.com/post/704849Thu, 04 May 2017 14:48:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:38:08 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

No, getting both of them would have been the ideal scenario. Bears got a guy to compete with Aaron Rodgers in that division. (or..to take over from his as the supreme QB there.) Bears made big move to get him. Browns would have made a big move to do so just a bit further down, but were trumped by the Bears.

Chicago would have taken him for nothing @ #3, so Browns had no move "a bit further down".

Here is the real question. Had Kizer come out after the 2015 season would he have gone a lot higher than 2nd round?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704840https://brownsboard.com/post/704840Thu, 04 May 2017 14:38:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:24:44 GMT]]>

@texasag1969 said:

Just more words to eat as he bombs in Chicago and the Browns build a defense to contend with. Chicago screwed the pooch in this draft. I think the Browns played a great smoke game and scared a lot of teams into taking QBs from a mediocre class too early and increasing their own options for great players in the process.

No, getting both of them would have been the ideal scenario. Bears got a guy to compete with Aaron Rodgers in that division. (or..to take over from his as the supreme QB there.) Bears made big move to get him. Browns would have made a big move to do so just a bit further down, but were trumped by the Bears.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704835https://brownsboard.com/post/704835Thu, 04 May 2017 14:24:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:22:45 GMT]]>

@nickers said:

The Browns could've saved them selves the trouble and just drafted Trubisky.. As usual.. they outsmart themselves..

Water over the Bridge now. We gotta roll with what we got.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704834https://brownsboard.com/post/704834Thu, 04 May 2017 14:22:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:13:48 GMT]]>

@nickers said:

The Browns could've saved them selves the trouble and just drafted Trubisky.. As usual.. they outsmart themselves..

Just more words to eat as he bombs in Chicago and the Browns build a defense to contend with. Chicago screwed the pooch in this draft. I think the Browns played a great smoke game and scared a lot of teams into taking QBs from a mediocre class too early and increasing their own options for great players in the process.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704827https://brownsboard.com/post/704827Thu, 04 May 2017 14:13:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 14:04:50 GMT]]>The Browns could've saved them selves the trouble and just drafted Trubisky.. As usual.. they outsmart themselves..

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704823https://brownsboard.com/post/704823Thu, 04 May 2017 14:04:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 12:45:57 GMT]]>

@westside-steve said:

For some reason it's hard to put any stock whatsoever in anything that anybody in the front office says. Call me a cynic.

After disparaging our FO, why would you expect us to be so nice?

@gumby73 said:

MKC--ok. ok. Yes I Do you have Cousins on speed dial also 😛

Hay... apparently we called NE one last time on Day 2...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704810https://brownsboard.com/post/704810Thu, 04 May 2017 12:45:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 01:33:28 GMT]]>

@gumby73 said:

MKC--ok. ok. Yes I Do you have Cousins on speed dial also 😛

Yeah...ONEIL Cousins!!! LOL

Mike

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704760https://brownsboard.com/post/704760Thu, 04 May 2017 01:33:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 01:02:31 GMT]]>MKC--ok. ok. Yes I Do you have Cousins on speed dial also 😛

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704752https://brownsboard.com/post/704752Thu, 04 May 2017 01:02:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 00:44:14 GMT]]>The national media makes shit up about teams constantly, just to reel everybody in. Unless those teams are the beloved Packers, Steelers, Broncos,Patriots, Cowboys or Giants...then it's probably true.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704745https://brownsboard.com/post/704745Thu, 04 May 2017 00:44:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 00:35:16 GMT]]>In corporate speak that means " We have had extensive discussions regarding discussions but couldn't get it done"

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704743https://brownsboard.com/post/704743Thu, 04 May 2017 00:35:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Sashi Brown: "We Have Never Engaged In Trade Talks About Kirk Cousins" on Thu, 04 May 2017 00:18:13 GMT]]>For some reason it's hard to put any stock whatsoever in anything that anybody in the front office says. Call me a cynic.

?

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/704740https://brownsboard.com/post/704740Thu, 04 May 2017 00:18:13 GMT