Okay, after the initial shock has worn off, and I've had a chance to listen to quite a few "experts" say that this is actually a better trade for the Browns, I'm sort of coming around on this trade. Here's why I like and don't like it ...
Reasons why I don't like it:
1) The obvious reason ... here we are hitting the "reset" button just 2-week into another season and we've given up on a top 3 pick just 17 games into his career. For us fans, that have to deal with a reset every 2-3 years, it would be nice if we just STUCK with something for a few years, and actually give it a chance to work.
2) We essentially used a 2012 #3 pick, a 4th rounder, 5th rounder and 7th rounder to trade DOWN to a #20'ish pick in the 2014 draft. And since it's happened so close to the actual draft, it feels a lot like hearing "There has been a trade" on Draft Day, and finding out that this was the trade we made. We're pretty much throwing up the white flag here and saying, "Yup ... we screwed up the 2012 draft royally"
Reasons why I DO like it:
1) We essentially screwed up the 2012 draft royally. We gave up three later picks to move up a few slots and take a RB in a QB-controlled league, then over-drafted a 29 year old QB in the late first round. The Front Office was pretty much screaming, "we've got one year left to prove ourselves before we get canned, so we're just going to go all-out in trying to build instant offense". So we ended up with an over-drafted RB, that we're trying to fit into a league that wants you to pass the ball 50+ times a game, and a rookie quarterback that's older than Aaron Rodgers.
2) You don't win Super Bowls with franchise runningbacks! Seriously, who was the last franchise-type RB to win one? The two biggest "Franchise-type" RBs of the last 10 years are so are Peterson and LT, and they couldn't even make it to the Super Bowl. LT came the closest, and that was because Philip Rivers had become a franchise-type QB by then. I really didn't like the TR pick back when we made it. Not because I didn't like TR, but because i didn't want us to build an offense around a RB.
3) Trent was starting to get William Green Disease already, and is a potential bust. On top of the 3.5 YPC/65 yards per game stats that have been tossed out there already, you could sort of see hesitation in Trent's running already. He wasn't hitting creases. He wasn't taking what there was and squeezing out 4 yards with momentum. He was dancing around and waiting for big holes to open up. This is what Green used to do. Dance in the backfield and wait for some giant hole to open up, rather than hit he hole that was there and squeeze out a few yards just by moving his weight forward. Even when he did get the holes, he didn't seem like he could burst through to the second level or get loose.
4) Trent was already starting to be a bit "injury prone". Not much to say here, but he was already showing signs that he wasn't as durable as we were hoping.
5) RBs are replaceable and have short shelf-lives anyway. Of the top 20 rushing leaders last year, only about a third were drafted in the first round. Of the top 20 QBs, only Brady, Romo and Fitzpatrick were draft later than the first round or very early 2nd round. It's just a QB driven league. Of the top 20 rushers, only AP had a QB that WASN'T as equally good (or better) and still made the playoffs.
6) We got something of value back. This is what the pundits are talking about. Rather than sit on a #3 pick and HOPING he turns into Adrian Peterson in a league that needs QBs not RBs, we're taking the bold move of cutting our losses while we can still get something of value back. If we were to wait till the end of the year, or even another season or two ... it's doubtful we get a first round pick for a guy that's averaging 3.5 YPC and seems to be prone to injury. Now we've got two first rounders, it what is supposed to be a pretty strong draft. Honestly though, if TR continues to do in Indy what he was doing here, what do you think his trade value becomes? What if he picks up another major injury?
