Red Mosquito

Orpheus wrote:IMO Buffalo will trade up to #2 with the Giants or the Browns #4, that is if the Giants are telling the truth about rolling with Eli. Browns will take their QB of choice at #1 and have their best QB group in 20 years, Bills will get the 2nd or 3rd best prospect.

How do the Browns pass on Barkley at #1? I feel like that's a total no-brainer. Taylor, though not a permanent solution, gives them enough flexibility and stability to wait to draft a QB. Especially IF they don't trade the #4.

That would be the dumbest thing they could do IMO. One thing people don't think about with taking an RB #1 is that their salary is going to be very high, and you still need to pay a QB. Yeah the Browns have a lot of cap room, but they've still basically had to trade for anyone they wanted because people will only sign for them for astronomical contracts. They're going to need that space to throw money at people and hopefully extend Garret and others down the line.

Zeke and Fournette made more sense for the Cowboys and Jags because they had elite complimentary units to help those players--Cowboys with their O-line and Jags with their defense. The Browns aren't going to get as much out of Barkley if they're down 20 points every game because they still have no pass defense and a mediocre QB situation.

And I should say I like Barkley more than most RBs since he could be an LT-level passing weapon, it just seems like such a Browns way to take a great draft situation and fuck it up.

I'm not sure I understand how an "LT-level passing weapon" does nothing for a team that's down 20 points.

I hear what you're saying. But I just don't understand how passing on a generational talent, when the franchise has won only a single game in two years and needs to make a splash right now, is in the team's best interest. Also John Dorsey doesn't give a fuck about cap space. It's the thing he's worst at as a GM. He will overload the team with young, fast talent and worry about the dollars later, just like he did with the Chiefs.

He will take advantage of the cap situation now so the team can win and make a legitimate run at the playoffs within the next three years. If he can get The Browns to 7 or 8 wins this upcoming season, the fan base will explode. It'll be great for the fans and the city. And Barkley could be a huge part of that. He could be Cleveland's own Berry Sanders.

And if you can get Barkley AND one of the top three QB's in the draft, why not? They'll have a dozen more picks to beef up their O-line. And Dorsey's really good at finding those 3rd round guys that turn into explosive starters on D.

You make very good, sound, points, though. I just don't see how Barkley doesn't help them immediately. Of course, I say that and then he'll tear an ACL in training camp and it'll all be meaningless.

Orpheus wrote:That would be the dumbest thing they could do IMO. One thing people don't think about with taking an RB #1 is that their salary is going to be very high, and you still need to pay a QB. Yeah the Browns have a lot of cap room, but they've still basically had to trade for anyone they wanted because people will only sign for them for astronomical contracts. They're going to need that space to throw money at people and hopefully extend Garret and others down the line.

Zeke and Fournette made more sense for the Cowboys and Jags because they had elite complimentary units to help those players--Cowboys with their O-line and Jags with their defense. The Browns aren't going to get as much out of Barkley if they're down 20 points every game because they still have no pass defense and a mediocre QB situation.

One of the few things the Browns have right is their O-line. Bitonio/Tretter/Zeitler is a solid middle that they paid a lot of money to get. Plus they still have some guy named Joe Thomas.

Also, I think Barkley comps much more to a Christian McCaffrey type multiple threat than a traditional RB like Zeke or Fournette. He chalked up half as many receiving yards as he did rushing yards, and also made big plays as a returner too.

I don't know if I'd take Barkley with a top 4 pick but I think it's far from the "dumbest thing they could do".

I said that about them taking Barkley #1, not #4. The thought of them missing out on a franchise QB AGAIN is just maddening.

I don't really disagree with anything you're saying GH or Durds, I just don't want them to fuck this up, and picking an RB #1 seems like the best way to take them down that path.

Orpheus wrote:I said that about them taking Barkley #1, not #4. The thought of them missing out on a franchise QB AGAIN is just maddening.

I don't really disagree with anything you're saying GH or Durds, I just don't want them to fuck this up, and picking an RB #1 seems like the best way to take them down that path.

I mean, isn't Duke Johnson their 3rd down back? Sign Jeremy Hill and you're O is ready to roll. No?

They should continue to draft on D after they go QB at #1.

Orpheus wrote:I said that about them taking Barkley #1, not #4. The thought of them missing out on a franchise QB AGAIN is just maddening.

I don't really disagree with anything you're saying GH or Durds, I just don't want them to fuck this up, and picking an RB #1 seems like the best way to take them down that path.

I'm not sure if there's that much of a difference in this case. Yes, taking Barkley at #1 means the Giants will get the first crack at the QBs, but there's no clear cut top QB prospect in this draft, and it's quite deep too. I suppose Indy could trade with DEN or NYJ at #5 or #6 to try to jump them for another QB, but with the Colts letting Frank Gore walk they will be very much in the market for Barkley if he falls to him.

CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Green Habit wrote:

Orpheus wrote:I said that about them taking Barkley #1, not #4. The thought of them missing out on a franchise QB AGAIN is just maddening.

I don't really disagree with anything you're saying GH or Durds, I just don't want them to fuck this up, and picking an RB #1 seems like the best way to take them down that path.

I'm not sure if there's that much of a difference in this case. Yes, taking Barkley at #1 means the Giants will get the first crack at the QBs, but there's no clear cut top QB prospect in this draft, and it's quite deep too. I suppose Indy could trade with DEN or NYJ at #5 or #6 to try to jump them for another QB, but with the Colts letting Frank Gore walk they will be very much in the market for Barkley if he falls to him.

Like I said, if it was a team other than the Browns I would like this idea more. They just have so much at stake with this draft. Get it right and they could be contenders for years. Get it wrong again and all that losing was for absolutely nothing. They need to find a way to get players to want to sign a 2nd contract with them, and to attract FA players for more than just a stack of cash and a year off ala Dwayne Bowe. They have to get rid of the stink that's been on the team forever.

Orpheus wrote:IMO Buffalo will trade up to #2 with the Giants or the Browns #4, that is if the Giants are telling the truth about rolling with Eli. Browns will take their QB of choice at #1 and have their best QB group in 20 years, Bills will get the 2nd or 3rd best prospect.

The Giants could use Barkley (anyone could). But they need a franchise QB if they think one of these guys is one anyway.

Bills go QB I would think? I don’t know how much difference there is between the two California QBs, Josh Allen has the size, I have no idea how he plays, and Jackson is the wild card. I’m warming to Him as potentially a good answer in the 2nd or 3rd or even later if teams don’t know what to make of him. I just don’t know him as well as I knew Watson.

elliseamos wrote:CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Why would they do that? Hey, NE could use a big DT, let’s trade our former 1st rounder for some mid to late round pick to be named later..... good idea.

Electromatic wrote:

Orpheus wrote:IMO Buffalo will trade up to #2 with the Giants or the Browns #4, that is if the Giants are telling the truth about rolling with Eli. Browns will take their QB of choice at #1 and have their best QB group in 20 years, Bills will get the 2nd or 3rd best prospect.

The Giants could use Barkley (anyone could). But they need a franchise QB if they think one of these guys is one anyway.

Bills go QB I would think? I don’t know how much difference there is between the two California QBs, Josh Allen has the size, I have no idea how he plays, and Jackson is the wild card. I’m warming to Him as potentially a good answer in the 2nd or 3rd or even later if teams don’t know what to make of him. I just don’t know him as well as I knew Watson.

I think one of the few guarantees in this draft is Buffalo trading up for a QB. They have two picks in the 20s and several others before #100 or so that a team like the Giants or Colts could use to re-up their roster in a huge way.

Electromatic wrote:

elliseamos wrote:CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Why would they do that?

Easiest answer is "Browns gonna Brown".

Green Habit wrote:

Electromatic wrote:

elliseamos wrote:CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Why would they do that?

Easiest answer is "Browns gonna Brown".

And more specifically, Dorsey gonna Dorsey.

Green Habit wrote:

Electromatic wrote:

elliseamos wrote:CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Why would they do that?

Easiest answer is "Browns gonna Brown".

watch them draft Vita Vea.......

Electromatic wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

Electromatic wrote:

elliseamos wrote:CLE just sent Shelton to NE!

Thank you!

Why would they do that?

Easiest answer is "Browns gonna Brown".

watch them draft Vita Vea.......

It wouldn't be the worst idea...

The fact that it's a 3rd next year, means it will likely be replenished by a comp. pick for either Solder or Butler's FA contract.

elliseamos wrote:The fact that it's a 3rd next year, means it will likely be replenished by a comp. pick for either Solder or Butler's FA contract.

Excellent point. I should note this on Twitter.

Green Habit wrote:

elliseamos wrote:The fact that it's a 3rd next year, means it will likely be replenished by a comp. pick for either Solder or Butler's FA contract.

Excellent point. I should note this on Twitter.

Somebody should.