NFL '13 SEASON THREAD

[rams80]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

[rams80]

Well, thank you Browns for making me feel a little better about being a Bucs fan.

I wonder if there was some reason behind this trade we don't know about? I mean, I don't want to insinuate Richardson has a bad character or something it just seems so out of left field. Maybe he requested a trade to the FO?

He's had injury issues in both preseasons and for all the hype couldn't even crack 1000 yards last season.

[Cujo]

After 14 seasons of "meh", the Cleveland Browns finally possess a talent they can build the franchise around!

[DS729]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

You don't draft a once-in-a-generation running back when Colt McCoy is your quarterback. Okay, got it.

Well, thank you Browns for making me feel a little better about being a Bucs fan.

I wonder if there was some reason behind this trade we don't know about? I mean, I don't want to insinuate Richardson has a bad character or something it just seems so out of left field. Maybe he requested a trade to the FO?

He's had injury issues in both preseasons and for all the hype couldn't even crack 1000 yards last season.

Not everyone can crack 1,000 yards in their rookie year.

[rams80]

I don't know what they were thinking but frankly, the only RBs in the NFL that are untouchable are those that are on the Adrian Peterson tier of RBs. So, basically... Adrian Peterson. Perhaps the new Browns front office doesn't place such a high premium on RBs. The Colts aren't as good as their record indicated last year, so it may not be such a bad pick, but granted they will be better with Richardson.

I don't think it's a particularly good move, but I'm not going to be too quick to dismiss it as a terrible one.

Frankly, I think a good RB is a dime a dozen and given the choice between a guy like Richardson and a first round pick taking a different position, I wouldn't be against it. Granted, I'm not sure how likely it is that the Browns pick a good player with the pick anyways.

In other words, what you're saying is that it was a terrible decision to draft a running back with the third overall pick, which, in the end, still points to the Browns being a pretty terribly run organization.

It was, but the people responsible for that decision are gone.

[rams80]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

You don't draft a once-in-a-generation running back when Colt McCoy is your quarterback. Okay, got it.

Precisely. You fire the dumbarses who drafted McCoy and either get another QB or work on solidifying the lines for the QB you will get in the next draft. Look, riding "talented" RBs doesn't lead to victory anymore. For s sake that was the Rams M.O. for pretty much all of Steven Jackson's career (i.e. most of your life) and they haven't made the playoffs since his rookie season. It. Doesn't. Work.

Well, thank you Browns for making me feel a little better about being a Bucs fan.

I wonder if there was some reason behind this trade we don't know about? I mean, I don't want to insinuate Richardson has a bad character or something it just seems so out of left field. Maybe he requested a trade to the FO?

He's had injury issues in both preseasons and for all the hype couldn't even crack 1000 yards last season.

Not everyone can crack 1,000 yards in their rookie year.

"Once in a generation talents" should. Especially "When Colt McCoy is your quarterback."

[The_Admiral]

How is Trent Richardson a one-in-a-generation talent when Adrian Peterson is in his generation?

[NJTank]

You know what everyone is forgetting in this equation, the Colts now have two of the three top picks in the 2012 NFL Draft. A star QB and a star RB, they also got a potential great WR in the making with T.Y. Hilton all three will make everyone better and now the Colts have triplets and just need a few defensive pieces and by 2016 they could be the best team in the NFL for a few years. So this trade will look even dumber when the Colts go to the Super Bowl while the Browns break it down with a new staff again and again and again.

[crashcarson15]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

Ultimately though, the Browns were either going to get Bridgewater or Manziel (who I guess Lombardi's high on?) in this upcoming draft regardless of whether or not they dealt Richardson. Also, the FO's "not signing anyone over 27" motto and not going after any talent in the offseason cemented the idea that they were taking before the season even started.

But therefore, they're saying that a player at ~#20 will be a better complement to that quarterback the Browns were always going to get than Trent Richardson. Which I'm not at all buying.

[dfwabel]

You know what everyone is forgetting in this equation, the Colts now have two of the three top picks in the 2012 NFL Draft. A star QB and a star RB, they also got a potential great WR in the making with T.Y. Hilton all three will make everyone better and now the Colts have triplets and just need a few defensive pieces and by 2016 they could be the best team in the NFL for a few years. So this trade will look even dumber when the Colts go to the Super Bowl while the Browns break it down with a new staff again and again and again.

Luck and Richardson are "known", they both are far from "stars". Time will tell for both of them as well as TY.

Plus, there is no need for "triplets" in THIS NFL. Just ask Brady and Brees. It is not like Mark Ingram is tearing up the League.

The Colts also picked a player the Green Bay gave up on in LB Erik Walden and a player SF gave up on in Ricky Jean-Francois quickly in Free Agency. The former teams gave up on them for a reason, and the Colts happily signed both of them quickly.

Not good.

[See Red]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

Ultimately though, the Browns were either going to get Bridgewater or Manziel (who I guess Lombardi's high on?) in this upcoming draft regardless of whether or not they dealt Richardson. Also, the FO's "not signing anyone over 27" motto and not going after any talent in the offseason cemented the idea that they were taking before the season even started.

But therefore, they're saying that a player at ~#20 will be a better complement to that quarterback the Browns were always going to get than Trent Richardson. Which I'm not at all buying.

They're not saying that at all. They're saying that with that pick they can get a first round talent at a different position and they can replace the ~60 yards per game and 3.5 yards per carry that Richardson has given them so far in his career (hardly impressive) elsewhere. I'd rather have that first round pick and a guy like Deanthony Thomas or Lache Seastrunk in the second or so if they even wanted to go that high.

[dfwabel]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

Ultimately though, the Browns were either going to get Bridgewater or Manziel (who I guess Lombardi's high on?)

The 2014 Draft Class will have others as draft eligible:

CLEM-Taj Boyd (whom Chudzinski has seen a lot at Clemson when he worked for the Panthers)

UCLA- Brett Hundley (works in the Pistol and is 6'3")

ALA- AJ McCarron (still knows how to play and win under pressure)

ORE- Marcus Mariota (The Ducks are passing more this year)

MIA- Stephen Morris (big time arm)

H#ll, they could also use a lower pick on Washington's Keith Price as a future alternative.

It depends on what Chudzinski and Norv (if he last to year #2) want to put in place. What we do know is that RBs have a low shelf life and now less importance in the 2013 NFL.

[Kramerica Industries]

Yeah, the more I think about this myself, the more I don't think the trade is bad as much as it was the pick was bad (admittedly, the work of a prior regime). Just look at last year's draft class again. Trent Richardson went #3. Alfred Morris went, like, #199. Productive running backs can be byproduct's of offensive systems and lines as much as their own physical abilities. The need to take a running back so high simply doesn't exist anymore.

[dfwabel]

Lombardi wants draft picks to rebuild.

So far, they will have 2 in the 1st round, 1 in the 2nd, and 2 in the 3rd in 2014.

YOU DON'T TRADE YOUR 2012 #3 OVERALL PICK IN 2013 FOR A PICK IN THE 20S WHEN YOU'RE REBUILDING

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE IS HE GOING TO DO AT 25 THAT'S BETTER THAN TRENT RICHARDSON?

WE'VE BEEN REBUILDING FOR 10 GODDAMN YEARS NOW IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THE TEAM ACTUALLY :censored:ING TRY TO WIN EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE

Sunk. Costs. You also don't draft an RB #3 overall in today's NFL regardless of his pedigree and potential because they get hurt too easily. So the issue is more "Mike Holmgren is a dumbarse" than Lombardi.

You don't draft a once-in-a-generation running back when Colt McCoy is your quarterback. Okay, got it.

Well, thank you Browns for making me feel a little better about being a Bucs fan.

I wonder if there was some reason behind this trade we don't know about? I mean, I don't want to insinuate Richardson has a bad character or something it just seems so out of left field. Maybe he requested a trade to the FO?

He's had injury issues in both preseasons and for all the hype couldn't even crack 1000 yards last season.

Not everyone can crack 1,000 yards in their rookie year.

One should since it is only 62 yards/game.

EDIT: But since a pool of your former VT RBs cannot reach that mark (Williams, Evans, Imoh, Jones, Wilson...) I am not surprised you think it is so hard.

[Sport]

Yeah, the more I think about this myself, the more I don't think the trade is bad as much as it was the pick was bad (admittedly, the work of a prior regime). Just look at last year's draft class again. Trent Richardson went #3. Alfred Morris went, like, #199. Productive running backs can be byproduct's of offensive systems and lines as much as their own physical abilities. The need to take a running back so high simply doesn't exist anymore.

It makes some sense from a football perspective, but on the PR side of things this is a horrible move.

They're telling the fans that they're giving up on this season and they're only two games in so it feels rash. This tells the fans they're giving up on the rebuild they were already in which the fans were promised by the last regime would be the end of the losing. Giving up and starting over yet again means it'll be another 3 to 4 years until they're competitive again if everything goes right, and there's no reason for them to be optimistic that things go right. On top of that these people are in their 13th crappy season (out of 15) since the team came back so they're a little impatient.

I think the better course of action would be to save the fanbase some strain and further embarrassment and go about your rebuild in another manner.

BTW, the awkward commercial where the fantasy football guy sits on Richardson's shoulders is going to be a lot more awkward.

[See Red]

That's a good point, McCarthy. I like the move from a football standpoint but I wasn't really thinking about it from a PR standpoint. Given the outrage shown by Cleveland sports fans, they're clearly not happy with the move.

[Kramerica Industries]

Yeah, the more I think about this myself, the more I don't think the trade is bad as much as it was the pick was bad (admittedly, the work of a prior regime). Just look at last year's draft class again. Trent Richardson went #3. Alfred Morris went, like, #199. Productive running backs can be byproduct's of offensive systems and lines as much as their own physical abilities. The need to take a running back so high simply doesn't exist anymore.

It makes some sense from a football perspective, but on the PR side of things this is a horrible move.

They're telling the fans that they're giving up on this season and they're only two games in so it feels rash. This tells the fans they're giving up on the rebuild they were already in which the fans were promised by the last regime would be the end of the losing. Giving up and starting over yet again means it'll be another 3 to 4 years until they're competitive again if everything goes right, and there's no reason for them to be optimistic that things go right. On top of that these people are in their 13th crappy season (out of 15) since the team came back so they're a little impatient.

I think the better course of action would be to save the fanbase some strain and further embarrassment and go about your rebuild in another manner.

BTW, the awkward commercial where the fantasy football guy sits on Richardson's shoulders is going to be a lot more awkward.

Oh yes, no disagreement there. This feels like a minor-scale version of the Marlins firesale trade with Toronto last year; made plenty of sense in baseball terms, but made for a PR nightmare. Same thing here. Browns fans have every reason to be pissed.

[infrared41]

My issue with the Cleveland NFL franchise (hereafter referred to as the CNF) trading Richardson isn't the deal itself. I can see where this deal makes sense to people. What bothers me about it is the CNF waited until now to do it. They really screwed their fans with this deal. Clearly, the CNF front office had every intention of "blowing up" the team and starting from scratch - again. Suckering people into buying tickets, merchandise (the 33 jersey is the "marquee" CNF jersey this year) and then waiting until week three of the season to go into rebuilding mode just ain't right. Especially when it's become so obvious that blowing it up was their plan all along. It feels like the fans were deceived just a little bit.

While no one thought the CNF was a legitimate Super Bowl team, the consensus among the experts and prognosticators was that the CNF was going to be an improved team. Based on that, how many people dropped 100 bucks or more on #33 CNF jerseys this season? How many bought t-shirts, hats, etc? How many bought tickets to games? All because they were expecting to see the new and improved CNF? They were all duped. I can't blame CNF fans for being upset.

[dfwabel]

Yeah, the more I think about this myself, the more I don't think the trade is bad as much as it was the pick was bad (admittedly, the work of a prior regime). Just look at last year's draft class again. Trent Richardson went #3. Alfred Morris went, like, #199. Productive running backs can be byproduct's of offensive systems and lines as much as their own physical abilities. The need to take a running back so high simply doesn't exist anymore.

It makes some sense from a football perspective, but on the PR side of things this is a horrible move.

They're telling the fans that they're giving up on this season and they're only two games in so it feels rash. This tells the fans they're giving up on the rebuild they were already in which the fans were promised by the last regime would be the end of the losing. Giving up and starting over yet again means it'll be another 3 to 4 years until they're competitive again if everything goes right, and there's no reason for them to be optimistic that things go right. On top of that these people are in their 13th crappy season (out of 15) since the team came back so they're a little impatient.

And if they made no move, it would still be 3-4 years because they do not have a QB! That is why I like this trade. In life, you have to take risks.

This might also be more of a telling tale downward to prep programs within most of Ohio and Western PA in telling them that the days of Paul Brown/Vince Lombardi running the ball is over and preparing players for a passing era of football is what is now. Nebraska HS football was based on the Huskers were running for decades, then Callahan was hired and prep teams has to abandon the wish/flexbone and get into a passing era.

[infrared41]

This might also be more of a telling tale downward to prep programs within most of Ohio and Western PA in telling them that the days of Paul Brown/Vince Lombardi running the ball is over and preparing players for a passing era of football is what is now. Nebraska HS football was based on the Huskers were running for decades, then Callahan was hired and prep teams has to abandon the wish/flexbone and get into a passing era.

With all due respect, dfwabel, that you think the CNF is sending a message to Ohio HS football teams is about the stupidest thing I've read with regard to this trade - and trust me, that's really saying something.