Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup
by Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:16 pm
by Prosecutor » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:19 pm
Before contract negotiations broke down, the sides were wide apart in their estimation of Hillis' value. Reportedly, Hillis was looking for $10 million in guarantees and the Browns were offering about $4 million.
by motherscratcher » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:34 pm
peeker643 wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Absolutely.
Maybe a bit vulgar, but who am I to judge?
I'm eating venison smokies and venison and cheddar smokies while talking sports here. Doesn't get much more manly than that. I bet FUDU and mscratcher are eating salads w/walnuts and raisins in them and picking out needlepoint patterns right now.
by FUDU » Tue May 01, 2012 12:49 am
by comish » Tue May 01, 2012 6:25 am
motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Absolutely.
Maybe a bit vulgar, but who am I to judge?
I'm eating venison smokies and venison and cheddar smokies while talking sports here. Doesn't get much more manly than that. I bet FUDU and mscratcher are eating salads w/walnuts and raisins in them and picking out needlepoint patterns right now.
Fuck you, im a man. Salad with walnuts? You must be out of your mind if you thnk I'm using weight watchers points on walnuts.
What's needlepoint?

by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:41 am
Prosecutor wrote:Let's say the Browns followed Peeker's advice and decided to live dangerously, holding off on Weeden until #37. Who would they have taken at #22? I think the most likely guy by far is Reiff. We know they needed a RT who can start immediately, and Reiff went with the very next pick at #23.
So if Weeden is there at #37 they won the gamble and ended up with Reiff at RT instead of Schwartz. That's the best case scenario. The big payoff for living dangerously. A somewhat better RT. The tackle who went at #23 instead of the tackle who went at #37. How many extra wins is that going to be worth?
The worst case scenario is if Weeden was picked before #37 and the Browns are all dressed up with nowhere to go, looking at another year of McCoy at QB like we looked at another year of Mangini after H&H showed up. Dead man walking.
I understand a strong case can be made that nobody would have traded up for Weeden, but even so, was it worth the risk considering the importance of the QB position? And considering the upside was Reiff rather than Schwartz?
I think the chances of somebody jumping ahead of us for Weeden were real. KC hosted him and I was reading rumors that they were very interested. They're stuck with Matt Cassell and by this point I can't imagine they have any hope he'll lead them to a Super Bowl. Same with Arizona and Kolb. Same with Buffalo and Fitzpatrick.
Those guys are just OK as starting QB's. They all should ideally be backups, which they all were for years before coming to their current teams. It's realistic to think one of those three teams may have fallen hard enough for Weeden to move up a few spots to #36. There was a ton of trading going on.
IMO it wasn't worth taking the risk, even a remote risk, of losing a potential franchise QB to try and get a slightly better right tackle.
Just like it wasn't worth the risk of trying to save a 2nd round pick by lowballing the RG3 offer. They tried to get their franchise QB on the cheap and it blew up in their faces. They weren't going to risk having it happen again in the same draft class.
They ended up with 10 picks instead of 13, but they got the main guys they wanted and there's no way 13 rookies make the 53 man roster. Yeah they gave up a 4th and 5th to make sure they got Richardson. BFD. We're talking guys like Cameron Jordan, Owen Marecic, and Buster Skrine. That's what you get in rounds 4 and 5.
Peeker wanted the Browns to sign Hillis, draft Blackmon (I assume), then Reiff, then Weeden. Well, that might have been a better package than Richardson, Weeden, Schwartz, and whoever starts opposite Little. That's assuming Hillis stays healthy and doesn't let whoever his agent is this week decide when he plays or calls in sick.
Grossi reported in January that Hillis wanted a lot more money than the Browns were willing to offer:Before contract negotiations broke down, the sides were wide apart in their estimation of Hillis' value. Reportedly, Hillis was looking for $10 million in guarantees and the Browns were offering about $4 million.
Would you have given him the $10 million guaranteed and go with him as our primary RB rather than drafting Trent Richardson?
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:45 am

by motherscratcher » Tue May 01, 2012 11:20 am
peeker643 wrote:I'm sure this will get poo-pooed by those unwilling to get a grip on reality , but when you shock and surprise the guy you take in the 3rd round.... I mean stun him and cause him to move his Sunday party to Saturday night because he never thought in a million years someone was taking him on Saturday, well, you mighta reached.
Forget us, forget the experts, they stunned the shit outta the guy they picked.
But I'm sure they turned it all around.
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 11:29 am
motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:I'm sure this will get poo-pooed by those unwilling to get a grip on reality , but when you shock and surprise the guy you take in the 3rd round.... I mean stun him and cause him to move his Sunday party to Saturday night because he never thought in a million years someone was taking him on Saturday, well, you mighta reached.
Forget us, forget the experts, they stunned the shit outta the guy they picked.
But I'm sure they turned it all around.
Yeah, it's going to stun all of the people around here posting that the Hughes pick wasn't a reach. Those guys are stupid.
I was wondering what he did with his draft party. I wondered if it got moved, or cancelled, or what. I figured it would have just gone on as planned. I mean, what else are you supposed to do with all of those tiny little ham/turkey/roast beef sandwich things they make at Giant Eagle?
Besides, I can't imagine the logistics involved in moving a draft party, and if there's one thing the scouting report made clear, it's that Hughes is a lazy fuck who takes off plays.
But, not any more. I know that becasue he said so.
) then isn't that a reach?
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 2:15 pm
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 2:15 pm
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 2:29 pm
JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 2:41 pm
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 2:45 pm
peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
Agreed. But that's why it concerned me in the first place. That's why I called it 'panic'.
The reaching and the questionable decision making in general is very worrisome. Unless you're sleeping
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 2:50 pm
Hikohadon wrote:peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
Agreed. But that's why it concerned me in the first place. That's why I called it 'panic'.
The reaching and the questionable decision making in general is very worrisome. Unless you're sleeping
I agree it's worrisome. Still, I really wanted Richardson and Weeden, so I can't bring myself to cry myself to sleep about it. Holmgren should not be involved in personnel decisions. They reached some on Weeden. They'll probably suck regardless. Wah.
by comish » Tue May 01, 2012 2:53 pm
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 2:57 pm
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 3:06 pm
JCoz wrote:I think that it could be both, or serveral times Peek. He used the word "typical" with regards to that scenario. We already know he's all over QB decisions.
That's the part that gives me the creeps. If its for T-Rich, that means his grubby little fingers are on a LOT more than just an overriding opinion on QB's, that means essentially we have a multiheaded GM and the one with the veto power is the one who doesn't have GM in his job description.
And its also the one with a pretty shitty record in that dept.
Whatever you think of this draft, and I'm in the middle of the pack probably, it felt different in some regards to previous years, and not in a good way. And it looks like the Walrus has taken resonsibility for that not-so-good feeling I'm getting.
Sink or swim fatty, thats all I can say. It's on you now.
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 3:09 pm
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 3:17 pm
JCoz wrote:Why would that matter? Between Weeden and Richardson selections I mean?
I edited above, do you really think Heckert pulled that trigger on Weeden at #22 after he wanted no part of the Richardson trade up?
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 3:19 pm
(On looking back on the trade with Atlanta in last year's draft):
Holmgren: "If you remember, I kind of banged Tom on that last year because I really liked the player I thought we were going to get with the pick. But, he said I can make this deal and it is a monumental deal. We spent a couple days talking about it and I just wanted him to make sure. I was just playing my role a little bit. He convinced me and he knew why he wanted to do it and it was a great, great deal for us. He did a nice job. We haven't been together very long, but he has great connections in the league. People like him, his cohorts in other places. He can get deals done and he can do this. They trust him. He is good at it. It worked out for us."
(On if there is a greater sense of urgency because this is his third year):
Holmgren: "It's funny you should say that Tom (Withers) because I thought it was just the opposite. First off, I have tremendous trust in Tom and in Pat, and while we had all those meetings that I was kind of watching it, smiling and enjoying it as much as anything else. If I'm going to suggest something or push it's going to happen long before this weekend. A discussion as an example, I won't tell you exactly what it was about, but this is typical of what might happen. I said Tom, 'Do you want to do this?' He said I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever. Then I said well we may have to. Then he goes well if we have to then you have to tell me because I won't do it. I said okay, then I might have to tell you. Fine. But that's a healthy way to go about it, no one's strangling anybody or pushing anybody and we've talked about that. Pat is kind of the peace maker in the group, but we all have our moments. It's real healthy and I trust him a lot."
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 3:20 pm
peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:Why would that matter? Between Weeden and Richardson selections I mean?
I edited above, do you really think Heckert pulled that trigger on Weeden at #22 after he wanted no part of the Richardson trade up?
My thinking is that Heckert is more competent than Holmgren and that my faith in Heckert would be somewhat restored if that trade up for TR was forced down his throat. It doesn't matter and it doesn't mean shit at this point. Just wondering if Heckert was for either pick. I have a hard time believing he wanted to trade up for Richardson or draft Weeden where he did given his history.
I think (right or wrong) he'd have been fine with Claiborne at #4, the OL at 22 and Weeden at 37 (because there's value then IMO) and with Pead or someone like that w/their own pick in 3rd.
That seems more like what he's done in the past. That's all. In some meaningless world I want to believe Chubby's hands were all over this.
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 3:22 pm
peeker643 wrote:Hikohadon wrote:peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
Agreed. But that's why it concerned me in the first place. That's why I called it 'panic'.
The reaching and the questionable decision making in general is very worrisome. Unless you're sleeping
I agree it's worrisome. Still, I really wanted Richardson and Weeden, so I can't bring myself to cry myself to sleep about it. Holmgren should not be involved in personnel decisions. They reached some on Weeden. They'll probably suck regardless. Wah.
You guys think JCoz's sig is regarding the trade up or the Weeden selection? I believe it's the trade up for TR myself. Just wondering if that's the prevailing sentiment given they didn't give up 'too much' in terms of picks, etc for Weeden.
And I don't cry myself to sleep anymore, Hiko. There's bourbon for the sleep issues.
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 3:26 pm
peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:Why would that matter? Between Weeden and Richardson selections I mean?
I edited above, do you really think Heckert pulled that trigger on Weeden at #22 after he wanted no part of the Richardson trade up?
My thinking is that Heckert is more competent than Holmgren and that my faith in Heckert would be somewhat restored if that trade up for TR was forced down his throat. It doesn't matter and it doesn't mean shit at this point. Just wondering if Heckert was for either pick. I have a hard time believing he wanted to trade up for Richardson or draft Weeden where he did given his history.
I think (right or wrong) he'd have been fine with Claiborne at #4, the OL at 22 and Weeden at 37 (because there's value then IMO) and with Pead or someone like that w/their own pick in 3rd.
That seems more like what he's done in the past. That's all. In some meaningless world I want to believe Chubby's hands were all over this.
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 3:27 pm
by pup » Tue May 01, 2012 3:28 pm
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 3:31 pm
JCoz wrote:Hiko, for me, I always thought Mike's deal regarding the personnell was almost entire relegated to the QB position.
Call me as dumb as a rock for believing that, but thats why it bothers me. Now I know for sure that is not the case at all, and it was far more apparent in 2011 than the last two drafts that Mike was using his muscle in the draft room IYAM.
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 3:40 pm
Hikohadon wrote:peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:Why would that matter? Between Weeden and Richardson selections I mean?
I edited above, do you really think Heckert pulled that trigger on Weeden at #22 after he wanted no part of the Richardson trade up?
My thinking is that Heckert is more competent than Holmgren and that my faith in Heckert would be somewhat restored if that trade up for TR was forced down his throat. It doesn't matter and it doesn't mean shit at this point. Just wondering if Heckert was for either pick. I have a hard time believing he wanted to trade up for Richardson or draft Weeden where he did given his history.
I think (right or wrong) he'd have been fine with Claiborne at #4, the OL at 22 and Weeden at 37 (because there's value then IMO) and with Pead or someone like that w/their own pick in 3rd.
That seems more like what he's done in the past. That's all. In some meaningless world I want to believe Chubby's hands were all over this.
I would feel that way too, but it's meaningless since I don't think Heckert survives a Holmgren firing. So we'll probably never know.
by Gradysmanldy » Tue May 01, 2012 4:02 pm
JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
by mattvan1 » Tue May 01, 2012 4:04 pm
by mattvan1 » Tue May 01, 2012 4:07 pm
Gradysmanldy wrote:JCoz wrote:I don't know that its that people dont think it was a reach as much as maybe people are accustomed to seeing reaches at the QB position.
Reach or no reach I think Walrus hitting the red button and using veto power with one or both of the first two picks is much more concerning to me.
I'm praying that the pick Holmie got involved on is the Hughes pick, not the Weedon pick. I dont mind blowing a third rounder, I mind blowing the first rounder and then giving him the keys to the teams success the following season.
(because lets face it, this year basically hangs on whether Weedon is the real deal or not)
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 4:14 pm
by Gradysmanldy » Tue May 01, 2012 4:31 pm
by Prosecutor » Tue May 01, 2012 6:03 pm
Well, if you don't give away your wallet to move up to 4 and you really want Weeden despite your own draft board saying he's not a first round guy, then use your draft ammo there and move back up to get him.
And even though they gave up their wallet to move up one spot they could have still packaged their 2, 3 and 4, 5, 6, 6, 7 to make that move.
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 6:14 pm
peeker643 wrote:Hikohadon wrote:peeker643 wrote:JCoz wrote:Why would that matter? Between Weeden and Richardson selections I mean?
I edited above, do you really think Heckert pulled that trigger on Weeden at #22 after he wanted no part of the Richardson trade up?
My thinking is that Heckert is more competent than Holmgren and that my faith in Heckert would be somewhat restored if that trade up for TR was forced down his throat. It doesn't matter and it doesn't mean shit at this point. Just wondering if Heckert was for either pick. I have a hard time believing he wanted to trade up for Richardson or draft Weeden where he did given his history.
I think (right or wrong) he'd have been fine with Claiborne at #4, the OL at 22 and Weeden at 37 (because there's value then IMO) and with Pead or someone like that w/their own pick in 3rd.
That seems more like what he's done in the past. That's all. In some meaningless world I want to believe Chubby's hands were all over this.
I would feel that way too, but it's meaningless since I don't think Heckert survives a Holmgren firing. So we'll probably never know.
Maybe not. I'd hate to think so but maybe not. I do think he survives a Holmgren 'retirement' though. Semantics? Maybe. But I still have a respect for Heckert while I don't have any for Holmgren.
by rk » Tue May 01, 2012 6:27 pm
pup wrote:Not sure if Mike is "protecting" Heckert or if he does just decide when to interject. I just hope this time his interjection works better than last time.
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 6:33 pm
by pup » Tue May 01, 2012 7:50 pm
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 8:54 pm
Prosecutor wrote:Well, if you don't give away your wallet to move up to 4 and you really want Weeden despite your own draft board saying he's not a first round guy, then use your draft ammo there and move back up to get him.
And even though they gave up their wallet to move up one spot they could have still packaged their 2, 3 and 4, 5, 6, 6, 7 to make that move.
Sorry, not sure I follow. Are you saying they should have stayed at 4, drafted Blackmon (thus not giving away their wallet to move up to 4), then taken Reiff at 22 and used their wallet to move up from 37 to take Weeden?
If they did that we would have Blackmon, Reiff, and Weeden. Instead we have Richardson, Schwartz, and Weeden. And fewer draft picks on the back end in both cases.
Either scenario would be a big improvement, but what makes yours so much better than what the Browns chose to do?
They chose Richardson over Blackmon even though they had to cough up some draft picks that could have been used to accumulate more Marecic and Skrine and Hagg types. Lane said before the draft they had Blackmon rated about the same as Floyd and they weren't going to take Blackmon at #4 regardless of how it played out.
They could have stayed at 4 and tried to trade down with a team that wanted Kalil, but that would have taken them out of immediate impact player range, which they decided well before the draft not to do. So their only logical recourse was to move up for TR.
As for Weeden, if Lane is correct about the 2nd round grade then they did reach for him. Holmgren explained that sometimes you reach for a QB. It's the key position on the team and these guys simply cost more. Which is why the Redskins gave up three 1sts and a 2nd for RG3.
Holmgren pulled rank on Heckert on the McCoy pick two years ago. My guess is Heckert wanted to take a chance on Weeden being there at 37 or maybe move up just a bit but Holmgren overruled him out of fear somebody else might jump in first. I don't think it matters much. Maybe they could have gotten Reiff instead of Schwartz if they were willing to gamble, but Holmgren is sold on Weeden and wasn't willing to take that risk.
Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests