hamster wrote:

Butzmark wrote: I bet that if Wright was still there, in fact anybody other than RG3 or Luck and including Tannehill they still would have taken Weeden at 22 and were sweating all the way that somebody else might take him.

Not according to our insiders but I don't care either way.  They picked who they valued the most.  We will see by the results how good the evaluation was one way or the other.

PROSECUTOR wrote: Lane says they went in hoping for Richardson at 3, Kendall Wright at 22, and Weeden at 37. When Tennessee snatched Wright at #20 the Browns had to switch gears on the fly. Rather than wait on Weeden and risk missing out on two of their top three targets, they pulled the trigger on Weeden at 22.

Lane also says they had Reiff and Schwartz rated about equally, so taking Reiff at 22 and risking losing Weeden would not have been real smart.

They also had Weeden rated above Tannehill, so enough about taking Tannehill at #4.

SoulDawg74 wrote:

PROSECUTOR wrote: Lane says they went in hoping for Richardson at 3, Kendall Wright at 22, and Weeden at 37. When Tennessee snatched Wright at #20 the Browns had to switch gears on the fly. Rather than wait on Weeden and risk missing out on two of their top three targets, they pulled the trigger on Weeden at 22.

Lane also says they had Reiff and Schwartz rated about equally, so taking Reiff at 22 and risking losing Weeden would not have been real smart.

They also had Weeden rated above Tannehill, so enough about taking Tannehill at #4.

SD:

They took Tannehill  over the younger man rated higher who' they'd have to invest a year to train and mature , because they need to win now  after f u c k i n g up the RG3 derby so bad , Randy put all them Jackasses on notice, , so enough of the smug superiority display for picking a guy rated a round lower with 7 years burned off his career calendar before he starts .

I agree there is an urgency to win now after starting off with 5- and 4-win seasons. But Lane reported that the Browns had Weeden ranked higher than Tannehill (we're going with their rankings, not Kiper's or Mayock's). Their choice was Richardson and Weeden instead of Tannehill and somebody else at 22, probably Reiff. I got no complaints with that.

Its like your whack take on Hillis , once a team devalues its own goods , they depress the market for his services , same as everybody knew Colt was a dead man walking after the failed RG3 bid , and not even worth a bologna sandwich after the Weeden pickup , for a guy they can soon pick up off the streets as a camp cut.

I don't buy your whole "they devalued his services" argument. Players set their own value by what they do on and off the field. Teams interested in acquiring that player study the film, assess his strengths and weaknesses, how he'll fit or not fit their system, and whether his contract fits under their cap and how soon he'll become a free agent. Then they determine how much they're willing to offer.

The fact that the Browns decided to make a play for RG3 didn't suddenly devalue McCoy from being worth a 5th round pick to being a 7th rounder or less. And I doubt the Browns alienated Hillis by offering him $4 million when nobody else offered more than 3.



SoulDawg

PROSECUTOR wrote:

SoulDawg74 wrote:

PROSECUTOR wrote: Lane says they went in hoping for Richardson at 3, Kendall Wright at 22, and Weeden at 37. When Tennessee snatched Wright at #20 the Browns had to switch gears on the fly. Rather than wait on Weeden and risk missing out on two of their top three targets, they pulled the trigger on Weeden at 22.

Lane also says they had Reiff and Schwartz rated about equally, so taking Reiff at 22 and risking losing Weeden would not have been real smart.

They also had Weeden rated above Tannehill, so enough about taking Tannehill at #4.

SD:

They took Tannehill  over the younger man rated higher who' they'd have to invest a year to train and mature , because they need to win now  after f u c k i n g up the RG3 derby so bad , Randy put all them Jackasses on notice, , so enough of the smug superiority display for picking a guy rated a round lower with 7 years burned off his career calendar before he starts .

I agree there is an urgency to win now after starting off with 5- and 4-win seasons. But Lane reported that the Browns had Weeden ranked higher than Tannehill (we're going with their rankings, not Kiper's or Mayock's). Their choice was Richardson and Weeden instead of Tannehill and somebody else at 22, probably Reiff. I got no complaints with that.

Its like your whack take on Hillis , once a team devalues its own goods , they depress the market for his services , same as everybody knew Colt was a dead man walking after the failed RG3 bid , and not even worth a bologna sandwich after the Weeden pickup , for a guy they can soon pick up off the streets as a camp cut.

I don't buy your whole "they devalued his services" argument. Players set their own value by what they do on and off the field. Teams interested in acquiring that player study the film, assess his strengths and weaknesses, how he'll fit or not fit their system, and whether his contract fits under their cap and how soon he'll become a free agent. Then they determine how much they're willing to offer.

The fact that the Browns decided to make a play for RG3 didn't suddenly devalue McCoy from being worth a 5th round pick to being a 7th rounder or less. And I doubt the Browns alienated Hillis by offering him $4 million when nobody else offered more than 3.



SoulDawg

daddywags wrote: Just two quick points:

- The Rams let the guy who was their best WR (Brandon Lloyd) walk away in FA and then turned around and used the 33rd pick on a WR.

- Two teams traded back up into the late first round to take RBs.  Yet the best Hillis could do on the open market is a back-up deal at less $ than the Browns were offering.  If he's so good teams in need of a stud RB wouldn't pass on him just because of something the Browns did or didn't do in negotiations. 

Oh, one other:

- The Browns aren't good enough or well enough respected around the league to denegrate any player's rep.

hamster wrote:

daddywags wrote: Just two quick points:

- The Rams let the guy who was their best WR (Brandon Lloyd) walk away in FA and then turned around and used the 33rd pick on a WR.

- Two teams traded back up into the late first round to take RBs.  Yet the best Hillis could do on the open market is a back-up deal at less $ than the Browns were offering.  If he's so good teams in need of a stud RB wouldn't pass on him just because of something the Browns did or didn't do in negotiations. 

Oh, one other:

- The Browns aren't good enough or well enough respected around the league to denegrate any player's rep.

Are you talking about Hillis, errrr Fumble-leana?
Are you talking about Hillis, who pissed his own teamsmates off with his antics?
Are you talking about Hillis, who couldn't even keep an agent?
Are you talking about Hillis, who couldn't turn a corner?
Are you talking about Hillis, who needed 10 minutes to get to the hole?
Are you talking about Hillis, who made Kelly Holcomb look like an iron man?

Thought so....  Yep, looks like HIS own doings proceeded himself in FA

The Kansas City Star expects Peyton Hillis to play some fullback in addition to his No. 2 tailback job with the Chiefs.

The Chiefs lost Le'Ron McClain in free agency and don't have a true lead blocker on the roster. Hillis, of course, was the fullback for Darren McFadden and Felix Jones at Arkansas. Both coach Romeo Crennel and Hillis himself have hinted that they expect lead blocking to be among Hillis' duties. If Jamaal Charles starts hot, we wouldn't expect Hillis to be a significant drain on his workload. May 4 - 2:07 PM

Hillis couldn't sniff TRs jock (of course he might like to but that another story....)  We got a REAL RB now who is not handicapped by physical limitations or MENTAL.  GREAT job by Heckert and MH.