So What Happens To Other Teams If Al Davis Drafts Calvin Johnson?

[Cugel]

What happens to the top 10 if Al Davis manages to pull off a trade of Randy Moss for Packers QB Aaron Rodgers? Obviousy, then Davis takes Calvin Johnson #1 overall. But, what does that do to the rest of the teams (including the Broncos if they managed to trade up to #6?)

First of all of course, that means

1. Oakland -- WR Calvin Johnson.

2. Detroit. Now Detroit is on the clock. They have been fielding offers for this pick already, but it's unlikely they will be able to find anyone to trade with them, because everybody knows they will take OT Joe Thomas. They don't need JaMarcus Russell either because they have Jon Kitna, but NO OL to block for him!

3. Cleveland -- Here's where it gets interesting. Cleveland would be the logical choice to trade down if someone wanted Russell. They could trade the pick, take Russell or draft RB Adrian Peterson. Remember that the Browns QB is Charlie Frye. Despite what Charlie Brown thinks they NEED a decent QB. They will never go anywhere until they get one. Having your pick of the two top QBs in the entire draft when you have Charlie Frye should be a no-brainer.

If they liked both Quinn and Russell, they could afford to drop back a few places and still be guaranteed of getting whoever was left.

4. Bucs. Jon Gruden is now gnashing his teeth and dreaming of spiking Al Davis's transfusion with stricnine. He doesn't need a QB and Johnson and Joe Thomas are off the board. If Adrian Peterson is still there he could get a lot for this pick. If not, you're looking at a trade for a team that wants to ensure getting a QB or taking a DL.

5. Cardinals. The only difference here is that JaMarcus Russell is possibly still here and maybe one of the DEs Gaines Adams or Jamaal Anderson is not. So, do they trade their pick or take a DE? A team that wanted Quinn would be a logical trade here. But, that depends in part on whether Cleveland has traded down.

6. Redskins want a DL if they keep this pick. But, what do they do if both Adams and Anderson are gone (i.e. Bucs and Cardinals take them)? If the Broncos landed here they could have traded up to get a top DL only to see the top prospects already off the board! That would NOT be good. Do they then take S LaRon Landry? Or try and trade back down?

This pick is looking more iffy now and less of a value unless you want Brady Quinn and he's still there at #6. But, what would the Broncos get from a team that wanted him when they might very well be able to trade with the Vikings at #7.

I'd say that unless you KNOW that a top DE is going to be available at #6 then Shanahan shouldn't make the trade to get up this high. I don't see taking Okoye #6 either, when he could be had at #8-10.

So, unless the Broncos were targeting Carriker, I don't see Shanahan making this trade.

#7 Vikings. -- WR or DE if they stay here. But, they might not have very good value at either position. WR Ted Ginn? Gaines Adams or Anderson would be good value here, but both should be gone. Carriker would be a good choice too, if they stay. But, the Vikings are more likely to trade down if they can. This might be a logical place for Brady Quinn to fall to if the rumors that the Texans are interested in him are true. A team that wanted Quinn would then have to trade up and get him here.

Or, Vikings could take Quinn themselves (although they took QB Tarvaris Jackson with their 2nd round pick last year, so that's less likely).

#8. Texans. If the Browns DO take Adrian Peterson then Quinn might fall this far. If not the Texans might have to trade up a bit to get him. Whether they really want him is another matter. Supposedly they are letting David Carr have yet another bash at it. What comes of that I don't know.

#9. Dolphins. S LaRon Landry? DT Okoye? Either or both would be value here. The Dolphins might trade down too. OT Levi Brown is another value pick in this spot for a team that wants a potential franchise LT.

#10. Falcons. S LaRon Landry would instantly upgrade their secondary which could use it. DT's a need so Okoye would make sense. They lost Kerney, so DE would be nice, Carriker could be the fit there. Or OT Levi Brown to give them a bigger OL. OL might be the biggest need since the Falcons have lost the services of their former Broncos OL coach and now will probably move away from the zone-blocking scheme he instituted towards a more traditional rushing attack. That means bigger man-blocking OTs and Guards.

Can you think of some more impacts?

[pipes]

What happens to the top 10 if Al Davis manages to pull off a trade of Randy Moss for Packers QB Aaron Rodgers? Obviousy, then Davis takes Calvin Johnson #1 overall. But, what does that do to the rest of the teams (including the Broncos if they managed to trade up to #6?)

First of all of course, that means

1. Oakland -- WR Calvin Johnson.

2. Detroit. Now Detroit is on the clock. They have been fielding offers for this pick already, but it's unlikely they will be able to find anyone to trade with them, because everybody knows they will take OT Joe Thomas. They don't need JaMarcus Russell either because they have Jon Kitna, but NO OL to block for him!

3. Cleveland -- Here's where it gets interesting. Cleveland would be the logical choice to trade down if someone wanted Russell. They could trade the pick, take Russell or draft RB Adrian Peterson. Remember that the Browns QB is Charlie Frye. Despite what Charlie Brown thinks they NEED a decent QB. They will never go anywhere until they get one. Having your pick of the two top QBs in the entire draft when you have Charlie Frye should be a no-brainer.

If they liked both Quinn and Russell, they could afford to drop back a few places and still be guaranteed of getting whoever was left.

4. Bucs. Jon Gruden is now gnashing his teeth and dreaming of spiking Al Davis's transfusion with stricnine. He doesn't need a QB and Johnson and Joe Thomas are off the board. If Adrian Peterson is still there he could get a lot for this pick. If not, you're looking at a trade for a team that wants to ensure getting a QB or taking a DL.

5. Cardinals. The only difference here is that JaMarcus Russell is possibly still here and maybe one of the DEs Gaines Adams or Jamaal Anderson is not. So, do they trade their pick or take a DE? A team that wanted Quinn would be a logical trade here. But, that depends in part on whether Cleveland has traded down.

6. Redskins want a DL if they keep this pick. But, what do they do if both Adams and Anderson are gone (i.e. Bucs and Cardinals take them)? If the Broncos landed here they could have traded up to get a top DL only to see the top prospects already off the board! That would NOT be good. Do they then take S LaRon Landry? Or try and trade back down?

This pick is looking more iffy now and less of a value unless you want Brady Quinn and he's still there at #6. But, what would the Broncos get from a team that wanted him when they might very well be able to trade with the Vikings at #7.

I'd say that unless you KNOW that a top DE is going to be available at #6 then Shanahan shouldn't make the trade to get up this high. I don't see taking Okoye #6 either, when he could be had at #8-10.

So, unless the Broncos were targeting Carriker, I don't see Shanahan making this trade.

#7 Vikings. -- WR or DE if they stay here. But, they might not have very good value at either position. WR Ted Ginn? Gaines Adams or Anderson would be good value here, but both should be gone. Carriker would be a good choice too, if they stay. But, the Vikings are more likely to trade down if they can. This might be a logical place for Brady Quinn to fall to if the rumors that the Texans are interested in him are true. A team that wanted Quinn would then have to trade up and get him here.

Or, Vikings could take Quinn themselves (although they took QB Tarvaris Jackson with their 2nd round pick last year, so that's less likely).

#8. Texans. If the Browns DO take Adrian Peterson then Quinn might fall this far. If not the Texans might have to trade up a bit to get him. Whether they really want him is another matter. Supposedly they are letting David Carr have yet another bash at it. What comes of that I don't know.

#9. Dolphins. S LaRon Landry? DT Okoye? Either or both would be value here. The Dolphins might trade down too. OT Levi Brown is another value pick in this spot for a team that wants a potential franchise LT.

#10. Falcons. S LaRon Landry would instantly upgrade their secondary which could use it. DT's a need so Okoye would make sense. They lost Kerney, so DE would be nice, Carriker could be the fit there. Or OT Levi Brown to give them a bigger OL. OL might be the biggest need since the Falcons have lost the services of their former Broncos OL coach and now will probably move away from the zone-blocking scheme he instituted towards a more traditional rushing attack. That means bigger man-blocking OTs and Guards.

Can you think of some more impacts?

I heard on KFAN (Minnesota Sports channel) that Brad Childress told both Tavaris Jackson and Brooks Bollinger that there is a strong possibility that the Vikings are going to select a QB....first round or not, I do not know, but Brady Quinn wouldn't surprise me very much.

IF Denver does get the sixth pick and drafts Landry, it would certainly be "sexy" with his talent, but everybody and their brother's girlfriend's sister knows that Denver needs to address the DL early and often.

-And yeah Jon Gruden would be pretty pi$$ed at Al if he does draft CJ....and so would I, for different reasons of course.

[Charlie Brown]

3. Cleveland -- Here's where it gets interesting. Cleveland would be the logical choice to trade down if someone wanted Russell. They could trade the pick, take Russell or draft RB Adrian Peterson. Remember that the Browns QB is Charlie Frye. Despite what Charlie Brown thinks they NEED a decent QB. They will never go anywhere until they get one. Having your pick of the two top QBs in the entire draft when you have Charlie Frye should be a no-brainer.

If they liked both Quinn and Russell, they could afford to drop back a few places and still be guaranteed of getting whoever was left.

No they do not.

The Browns offensive line has been extremely ragtag sicne the team returned. Every single QB has looked bad behind the line. Tim Couch looked very bad behind that line. Kelly Holcomb looked bad behind that line. Jeff Garcia looked bad behind that line. Trent Dilfer looked bad behind that line and now Charlie Frye is looking bad behind that line. Drafting a QB is a very stupid idea when the common denominator has been the line. Everything else has been changed. But the line's horrid play has continued over the years. The line is the problem and with Steinbach being signed it at least helps the line a little bit. But he should by no means be the only person signed to the line. The line needs a complete overhaul with all the weak links going.

[gyldenlove]

I have a different take on things.

1. If the Rodgers deal goes through or the Raiders deal for Carr or another QB with starting potential they will take CJ. He is the best player in the draft and a playmaking talent you can build your team on.

2. Detroit may field a few offers because Russell suddenly is in play, but ultimately I think they will stay pat, take Joe Thomas and pick up Drew Stanton in the 2nd round.

3. Cleveland is in a connundrum, they have a young QB, no line to block for him and they signed a RB in the offseason. So AP looks out of the question, the problem is that there is no OT in the draft other than Thomas who has value here, so Cleveland will go with AP, just like the Saints last year, when you get a talent like that thrown in your lap you have to take it, regardless of who you have.

4. Tampa Bay already have a slew of QB, they need a DE to groom for a year under Simeon Rice, Gaines Adams is perfect and he will be off the board here, quickly too.

5. Cardinals have no need for a QB, they do need DL people and fast, it will come down to Anderson or Branch, seeing as how they have Berry and Okeafor on the ends but are weak in the middle, I think Branch will be the pick.

6. With both QB on the board and the skins going with Campbell, this is a sure fire trade. Houston could be in the picture very much here, as could Miami. I think the skins will drop to 8 or 9 and pick up a 3rd rounder, and they may try to drop even futher from there to get a 2nd rounder. I think this is where Russell is picked by a team to be named later.

7. The vikings are clapping their hands that Anderson is still available and snap him up.

8. Houston could very well be out of those spot to take Russell, or they could stay, let Miami or another team trade up and pick up Brady. If Houston is out of this spot, then the reskins are going down more and Carolina is the probably candidate, but in that case the choice is still Brady.

9. Miami could stand pat here, but would then end up without any of the 2 QB on the board, Landry is good value here and Miami could do with a S, Okoye is also an option as Miami is very old at DT.

10. Atlanta has so many needs it is not even funny, realisticly this pick could be Ginn, Leon Hall, Carriker or whoever Miami didn't pick. This will be a good yardstick of Okoye, if he is available here and his own college coach passes on him he might not be as good as he is made out to be, on the other hand is his coach takes him here he might be better than people think.

[SM19]

Here's the thing: If this scenario plays out and we're stuck at 6 with Adams and Anderson off the board, do we really ignore our need and take Landry instead of Okoye just because we think Okoye could be had two to four picks later? That's hard for me to imagine, because it means we don't address our biggest need and, because of the trade up, we've now got fewer picks to try to address it later. If taking Okoye at 6 is a reach, it's not a very big one, and I have to think we'd do it.

[BigBroncLove]

No they do not.

The Browns offensive line has been extremely ragtag sicne the team returned. Every single QB has looked bad behind the line. Tim Couch looked very bad behind that line. Kelly Holcomb looked bad behind that line. Jeff Garcia looked bad behind that line. Trent Dilfer looked bad behind that line and now Charlie Frye is looking bad behind that line. Drafting a QB is a very stupid idea when the common denominator has been the line. Everything else has been changed. But the line's horrid play has continued over the years. The line is the problem and with Steinbach being signed it at least helps the line a little bit. But he should by no means be the only person signed to the line. The line needs a complete overhaul with all the weak links going.

Here's something to consider....

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+Way+We+Hear+It/default.htm

In the minds of many evaluators, including PFW resident draft analyst Nolan Nawrocki, there is a considerable gap between QBs JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn.

The way we hear it, it is Quinn, not Russell, who Nawrocki and a growing contingent of teams think will be the better pro. And perhaps to the surprise of many draft fans, more of the teams we consulted had finished their pre-Combine draft meetings thinking Quinn would be the better pro.

Multiple teams that have begun digging into Russell's background have been turned off by his lazy work habits and immaturity. When he took off his shirt at the Combine weigh-ins and exposed a very soft, fleshy body filled with baby fat, the concerns immediately heightened for one top-10 team that PFW spoke with, revealing what some consider to be the tip of the iceberg.

Much like Vince Young a year ago, whose poor Wonderlic test result was leaked and wound up setting in motion a lot of questions about how far he would fall, the significance of Russell's unshapely physique may be way overblown.

Our sources say Oakland’s Al Davis, who holds the top pick, is still chafed he decided not to take Matt Leinart a year ago and is dead-set on finding a signalcaller of the future to replace the recently released Aaron Brooks, whose option was not exercised after one year with the team.

Davis is widely assumed to favor the more strong-armed Russell, who better fits the vertical offense the Raiders have long run. However, had Davis made the call a year ago, our sources say he would have selected the more cerebral, NFL-ready Leinart, not the more strong-armed Jay Cutler, whom the Broncos traded up to select one pick later.

Said one astute, high-ranking evaluator, whose team has no need for a quarterback, of the draft's top two quarterbacks: “Physically, arm-strength-wise, there is no question who has the advantage. But if you want to talk about mental aptitude, ability to escape pressure and make good decisions, it's not even close. There is a big ‘miss’ factor on Russell. He had a lot of up-and-down games, and he makes a lot of bad decisions. He's sitting in the middle of the second round right now on our board. He'll never make it that far, but that’s where his value is. After Quinn, I would be sweating if I needed a quarterback from the rest of this crop.”

If Davis fails to land a veteran passer such as Houston’s David Carr, who has been thrown on the trading block after his struggles last year, or Byron Leftwich, who may be dealt despite Jack Del Rio’s statement that he is the Jaguars’ starter for 2007, don't be surprised if Quinn, not Russell, winds up becoming the first overall pick. Davis could be among those who are scared off by the red flags surrounding Russell and thus opt for Quinn. That could leave Russell, despite the concerns, falling only, like Young, to the No. 3 spot, where fellow Mobile, Ala., native and Browns GM Phil Savage would be waiting with open arms, the way we hear it.

Sources close to the Browns have even speculated that Savage, who helped advise Russell on his decision to enter the draft, has already informed Russell that he would not fall any further than the spot where the Browns were picking, and that he would be a lock top-four pick.

Now that Russell showed up to his pro day 12 pounds lighter I don't know if he will slip because of his physical condition, but now it becomes less of an issue for teams. However if somehow he does slip, for whatever reason, it sounds as if the Browns are a place he could land, even though it sounds to be only speculation right now....

[MHS]

6. Redskins want a DL if they keep this pick. But, what do they do if both Adams and Anderson are gone (i.e. Bucs and Cardinals take them)? If the Broncos landed here they could have traded up to get a top DL only to see the top prospects already off the board! That would NOT be good. Do they then take S LaRon Landry? Or try and trade back down?

This pick is looking more iffy now and less of a value unless you want Brady Quinn and he's still there at #6. But, what would the Broncos get from a team that wanted him when they might very well be able to trade with the Vikings at #7.

I'd say that unless you KNOW that a top DE is going to be available at #6 then Shanahan shouldn't make the trade to get up this high. I don't see taking Okoye #6 either, when he could be had at #8-10.

So, unless the Broncos were targeting Carriker, I don't see Shanahan making this trade.


Can you think of some more impacts?

thats why the broncos wont trade until draft day ...then they can see how ythe draft pans out ... it would be stupid to trade now since they dont know how the draft is gonna go. By waiting till the draft they have a better idea of how the draft is gong to go once teams start making picks. Look last year..shanny didnt trade for javon last year for one reason i believe...to keep teams thinking the broncos were giong to get chad jackson..by doing this no team that wanted cutler felt the need to trade ahead the broncos.

[Cugel]

Here's something to consider....

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+Way+We+Hear+It/default.htm



Now that Russell showed up to his pro day 12 pounds lighter I don't know if he will slip because of his physical condition, but now it becomes less of an issue for teams. However if somehow he does slip, for whatever reason, it sounds as if the Browns are a place he could land, even though it sounds to be only speculation right now....
Last year the same kind of stories surrounded Vince Young and we all know what he did for the Titans, as a rookie no less. Maybe Russell is not as good as Young, but teams have to take a deep breath and stop hyperventilating over every perceived flaw at this point of the draft. You've watched the video tape of Russell throwing precision 50 yard TDs last year. It's fairly clear what you're getting. Just take the plunge.

And despite what Charlie Brown says, there's NO WAY the Browns will take an OL unless they trade back and grab Levi Brown, because Joe Thomas looks to be off the board at #3 and Brown at #3 would be a horrible reach. As for AP, he'd be horrible behind the Browns line.

Charlie Frye doesn't look bad because the Browns OL is horrible. He looks bad because he sucks. Period. If the Browns want to wallow for another 5 years trying one useless QB after another that's fine with me! :wave: But this quote from the PFT:

Sources close to the Browns have even speculated that Savage, who helped advise Russell on his decision to enter the draft, has already informed Russell that he would not fall any further than the spot where the Browns were picking, and that he would be a lock top-four pick."

probably means that they are thinking of taking a QB. You can always get an OL in the 2nd or 3rd round or even both! Now that they have picked up Steinbach they at least have an immediate upgrade on their line. A 2nd round pick for an OL after taking Russell or Quinn would be entirely reasonable for the Browns.

Alternatively if they really ARE dumb enough to think that Frye is the answer then they could try and trade back to #8 or #9 and take OT Levi Brown, while picking up a 2nd round pick to use on another need (and they have LOTS of other needs). However, if Charlie Frye is the answer I hate to think what the question is! :laugh:

As for the Broncos, I have to think you're right about not trading back until draft day. Only if Quinn or Russell (or better yet both) were off the board by #6 would the Broncos (if they had that pick) be able to get their choice of DL.

If it goes:

1. Russell
2. Joe Thomas
3. AP
4. Calvin Johson
5. Gaines Adams

which is currently the conventional wisdom, then Denver would be able to take Jamaal Anderson, which would be great (or Carriker if Shanahan thought him the better prospect).

MUG insists that Moss will be gone to the Steelers at #15 and probably will be off the board anyway by #21, which leaves DE Charles Johson or a S, maybe Nelson.

I don't think the Broncos need a safety if they keep Dre Bly because they are planning on converting Foxworth to cover safety to get him on the field more (as they did at the end of last year) and they already have Ferguson and Brandon coming back. Neither is ideal, but Ferguson had 6 Ints in 2005 and doesn't suck, despite the criticisms on this board.

I was impressed with his play in 2005 and the team really missed him after he went down with injury this past year. Brandon is going to be 29 this year, so he's still relatively young. He's really more of a career backup and special teams player though, so at some point safety is a need, but not necessarily this year (at least not FS).

Lynch's replacement would be a need, but you don't have to take a run-support safety with the first pick. Nelson might be a decent pickup to groom for Lynch's retirement if the Broncos wanted to go that direction.

But, they really don't need to do it this year.

[BigBroncLove]

Last year the same kind of stories surrounded Vince Young and we all know what he did for the Titans, as a rookie no less. Maybe Russell is not as good as Young, but teams have to take a deep breath and stop hyperventilating over every perceived flaw at this point of the draft. You've watched the video tape of Russell throwing precision 50 yard TDs last year. It's fairly clear what you're getting. Just take the plunge.

I agree for the most part, and as the story sugegsts, these rumors are probably being over played. However what applies to last year will not always be applicable in the next as we are talking about different playersi nVince Young and Russell, who do not mirror each other in the least. Secondly, this is Al Davis, who has been known to make decisions based not on what experts or scouts tell him, but his gut feeling, which has been less and less reliable as time has pushed forward. I could certienly see Davis deciding to go with Quinn over Russell, though I have to say I think Russell is obviously the top candidate now that it seems the Raiders will nto find any type of possible replacement for the QB through FA (Aaron Rodgers won't be the answer there IMO, and I doubt the Packers think their "future" QB behind Farve is worth inheriting Moss's fat contract.)

Charlie Frye doesn't look bad because the Browns OL is horrible. He looks bad because he sucks. Period. If the Browns want to wallow for another 5 years trying one useless QB after another that's fine with me! But this quote from the PFT:

probably means that they are thinking of taking a QB. You can always get an OL in the 2nd or 3rd round or even both! Now that they have picked up Steinbach they at least have an immediate upgrade on their line. A 2nd round pick for an OL after taking Russell or Quinn would be entirely reasonable for the Browns.

I don't think that Quote eludes to the Browns targeting a QB at all. What I think it tells us is that Savage likes Russell, he was the one who urged him to enter the draft this year. So while Savage may be very happy with taking Russell as a QB, I don't think that love affair includes Quinn. So while I think Russell would certienly be likely to land in Cleveland, I don't think that applies to Quinn, who I imagine Savage is not high on. After all, this is a very shallow draft for QB's, and I imagine one reason you don't hear "new QB, new QB" in Cleveland more often, is not because the Browns FO is so enamored with Frye, but instead they are simply biding their time until they can draft a franchise QB. After all you don't boost the confidence of your current QB by saying, "we want to draft a better QB then who we have, but there is no talent out there that we want. So we wil lstick with Frye until we can find a real replacement."

I don't think the Broncos need a safety if they keep Dre Bly because they are planning on converting Foxworth to cover safety to get him on the field more (as they did at the end of last year) and they already have Ferguson and Brandon coming back. Neither is ideal, but Ferguson had 6 Ints in 2005 and doesn't suck, despite the criticisms on this board.

I was impressed with his play in 2005 and the team really missed him after he went down with injury this past year. Brandon is going to be 29 this year, so he's still relatively young. He's really more of a career backup and special teams player though, so at some point safety is a need, but not necessarily this year (at least not FS).

I think it is to early to understand completely what is happening in the secondary right now. If Bly stays, or we trade for a CB with Bly, then perhaps you will Foxy in one of the Safety slots during sure fire pass downs, but I think once Furgeson comes back this year, the Broncos will be more apt to go back to business as usual with Lynch in the free slot, and Furgeson in the strong slot. The Broncos haven't seemed, at least publicly, to be displeased with Lynch's level of play, and Ferguson is a better SS then Foxy will be for a while IMO (not the greatest SS in the league, but a solid jack of all trades SS). I would rather see Foxy in as a nickle CB then as a cover safety on passing downs (even though I don't like how Lynch has been beat at times deep, but there are other factors I think contributed to that, which would be a long and off topic explanation). Obviously if Bly doesn't stick around and no starter worthy CB is acquired, we all know where Foxy will be.

[Cugel]

I agree for the most part, and as the story sugegsts, these rumors are probably being over played. However what applies to last year will not always be applicable in the next as we are talking about different playersi nVince Young and Russell, who do not mirror each other in the least. Secondly, this is Al Davis, who has been known to make decisions based not on what experts or scouts tell him, but his gut feeling, which has been less and less reliable as time has pushed forward. I could certienly see Davis deciding to go with Quinn over Russell, though I have to say I think Russell is obviously the top candidate now that it seems the Raiders will nto find any type of possible replacement for the QB through FA (Aaron Rodgers won't be the answer there IMO, and I doubt the Packers think their "future" QB behind Farve is worth inheriting Moss's fat contract.)

What you and I might think (stay away from Moss) doesn't seem to be what Lord Farve thinks. According to PFT, he's pushing this trade. And we all know, what Lord Farve wants he generally gets (at least if the Pack want him back for another season).

I don't think that Quote eludes to the Browns targeting a QB at all. What I think it tells us is that Savage likes Russell, he was the one who urged him to enter the draft this year. So while Savage may be very happy with taking Russell as a QB, I don't think that love affair includes Quinn. So while I think Russell would certienly be likely to land in Cleveland, I don't think that applies to Quinn, who I imagine Savage is not high on. After all, this is a very shallow draft for QB's, and I imagine one reason you don't hear "new QB, new QB" in Cleveland more often, is not because the Browns FO is so enamored with Frye, but instead they are simply biding their time until they can draft a franchise QB. After all you don't boost the confidence of your current QB by saying, "we want to draft a better QB then who we have, but there is no talent out there that we want. So we wil lstick with Frye until we can find a real replacement."

Slight problem with that theory. For the Browns to draft a franchise QB, they pretty much need a top 10 pick. Occasionally (Ben Roethlisberger) you can get a franchise QB at #12 or #14, but that's really rare and only happened in 2003 because Eli Manning AND Phillip Rivers were also available. Normally, Roethlisberger is a top 10 pick, and like Aaron Rodgers might well have been a top overall pick in another year.

So, unless the Browns are planning on sucking at least as bad this year as last they need to get their franchise QB NOW or commit to Charlie Frye for the foreseeable future.

I wouldn't do that, but then I'm not paid for running the Browns franchise into the ground, so what do I know? :confused:

A lot smarter move if they don't want Quinn and Russell isn't available would be to forget about Peterson, trade back and take OT Levi Brown around #8 or so. Charlie Brown IS right that they need OL (among many other things), it's just that #3 is a bad place to draft one this year and they don't desparately need a RB -- no matter how good he is.

I think it is to early to understand completely what is happening in the secondary right now. If Bly stays, or we trade for a CB with Bly, then perhaps you will Foxy in one of the Safety slots during sure fire pass downs, but I think once Furgeson comes back this year, the Broncos will be more apt to go back to business as usual with Lynch in the free slot, and Furgeson in the strong slot. The Broncos haven't seemed, at least publicly, to be displeased with Lynch's level of play, and Ferguson is a better SS then Foxy will be for a while IMO (not the greatest SS in the league, but a solid jack of all trades SS). I would rather see Foxy in as a nickle CB then as a cover safety on passing downs (even though I don't like how Lynch has been beat at times deep, but there are other factors I think contributed to that, which would be a long and off topic explanation). Obviously if Bly doesn't stick around and no starter worthy CB is acquired, we all know where Foxy will be.

I'm not the one saying publicly that they are trying out Foxworth at cover safety this year. That was in the Post. It makes sense to get your best athletes on the field as much as possible and Foxworth is one of the 3 best DBs if Bly stays (which the Broncos are now saying he will at least for this season). That would leave Paymah as the nickel back, which would get some use out of him. Hopefully he will be ready for this increased role by his 3rd season. We'll know soon enough whether he was a wasted pick or whether he'll pan out to be a decent backup CB.

I don't see why he can't be. He has the physical tools and it's not like they're asking him to be the #1 or even #2 CB. Surely with all the coaching he's had he can manage to cover some #3 WRs. :coffee:

[BigBroncLove]

What you and I might think (stay away from Moss) doesn't seem to be what Lord Farve thinks. According to PFT, he's pushing this trade. And we all know, what Lord Farve wants he generally gets (at least if the Pack want him back for another season).

Farve is coming back for another season, and while talks continue between the two teams, I doubt you will see it come to fruition unless Moss does finally decide to allow the Raiders to restructure his contract for the trad.e Right now I give it a 35% chacne of actually happening. Just my opinion.... after all the trade talks initially broke down because of Moss's contract, and unless that changes, I don't see the Packers changing their position much despite Farve's desire to play with Moss.

Slight problem with that theory. For the Browns to draft a franchise QB, they pretty much need a top 10 pick. Occasionally (Ben Roethlisberger) you can get a franchise QB at #12 or #14, but that's really rare and only happened in 2003 because Eli Manning AND Phillip Rivers were also available. Normally, Roethlisberger is a top 10 pick, and like Aaron Rodgers might well have been a top overall pick in another year.

So, unless the Browns are planning on sucking at least as bad this year as last they need to get their franchise QB NOW or commit to Charlie Frye for the foreseeable future.

I wouldn't do that, but then I'm not paid for running the Browns franchise into the ground, so what do I know? :confused:

A lot smarter move if they don't want Quinn would be to trade back and take Levi Brown around #8 or so.

So the Broncos trading up to #10, or the talk of finding their way to #6 this year is an impossibility for the Browns down the road. I am sorry, but there is nothing wrong with that theory. I take the article for what it's worth, and it tells me Savage likes Russell, and it has been the only article I have read since mid January that even suggests the Browns still targeting a QB since Savage, at the combine, was quoted as saying the Browns were happy to stick with Frye (to which he caught some heat from the FO for goign public with it and I am sure more then a few Browns fans for not wanting a QB). If the Browns don't see Quinn as a real potential franchise QB, to which I am assuming (yep, I wil ltake that liberty here :P ), then why would they waste their #3 pick on a guy they don't think will the fill the hole they are picking for. At the #3 overall, there is no reason for the Browns to be looking to set down a smoke screen. They have the entire board at their fingertips....



I'm not the one saying publicly that they are trying out Foxworth at cover safety this year. That was in the Post. It makes sense to get your best athletes on the field as much as possible and Foxworth is one of the 3 best DBs if Bly stays (which the Broncos are now saying he will at least for this season). That would leave Paymah as the nickel back, which would get some use out of him. Hopefully he will be ready for this increased role by his 3rd season. We'll know soon enough whether he was a wasted pick or whether he'll pan out to be a decent backup CB.

I don't see why he can't be. He has the physical tools and it's not like they're asking him to be the #1 or even #2 CB. Surely with all the coaching he's had he can manage to cover some #3 WRs. :coffee:

I agree, I would like to see Foxy out there mroe often also, I really like his level of play and I think it can only help. I am in agreement, I would like to see it. I just have the feeling that Lynch wouldn't be sidelined for Foxworth, and unless they slid Lynch to SS (which I would love to see) I don't feel Foxy makes a good replacement for Furgeson who is reliable enough in coverage and is the better tackler of the two IMO. I know I think he could be a more reliable cover safety, but I have not heard anything that makes me think the Broncos were displeased with Lynch or Ferguson throughout the year to make me think they will actually make the move of Foxworth to safety. If your in a coverage situation anyhow, I think Foxy should be i nthe nickle CB slot anyways, and a better move to get the best personel on the field is to slot in Brandon in rather then put Paymah in, even though I liked Paymah's play this last year. Hwoever I would trust BRandon out there more then Paymah, and I don't feel Lynch would be yanked out for Foxworth, or Furgeson..... just my :2cents:

Here's hoping I am wrong though :beer:

[Cugel]

Farve is coming back for another season, and while talks continue between the two teams, I doubt you will see it come to fruition unless Moss does finally decide to allow the Raiders to restructure his contract for the trad.e Right now I give it a 35% chacne of actually happening. Just my opinion.... after all the trade talks initially broke down because of Moss's contract, and unless that changes, I don't see the Packers changing their position much despite Farve's desire to play with Moss.

Obviously Moss would have to re-do his contract, but I don't know why he would object to that. Normally the team just converts much of the salary into a signing bonus spread out over the length of the contract, say 4 or 5 years. That gives the player more up front money, and lowers the cap hit. I don't know why that can't be done in this case unless the Packers were trying to get Moss to take a pay-cut. If that's the case of course there's ZERO chance he would agree to that and they would know that up front. So, I would imagine they are just having some negotiating problems, which is routine with a contract of this size. The latest news is that they are close to working it out, and PFT says "We still believe based on everything we've heard that it's a matter of when, not if. Quarterback Brett Favre has been pushing for this deal, and likely will continue to do so until it's done.

There's nothing inherently that difficult about getting that deal done, so I would expect it to happen.

So the Broncos trading up to #10, or the talk of finding their way to #6 this year is an impossibility for the Browns down the road. I am sorry, but there is nothing wrong with that theory. I take the article for what it's worth, and it tells me Savage likes Russell, and it has been the only article I have read since mid January that even suggests the Browns still targeting a QB since Savage, at the combine, was quoted as saying the Browns were happy to stick with Frye (to which he caught some heat from the FO for goign public with it and I am sure more then a few Browns fans for not wanting a QB). If the Browns don't see Quinn as a real potential franchise QB, to which I am assuming (yep, I wil ltake that liberty here ), then why would they waste their #3 pick on a guy they don't think will the fill the hole they are picking for. At the #3 overall, there is no reason for the Browns to be looking to set down a smoke screen. They have the entire board at their fingertips....

The Broncos were incredibly lucky to be able to land Cutler at all. :coffee:

In a normal year that would never have happened, but there were 3 franchise QBs available in 2006. Even so, it still took the utter stupidity of Al Davis (which he is now said to regret) that caused him to pass on Leinart, for the Broncos to be able to snag Cutler at #11. If Davis hadn't had a comlete brain-fart that caused him to take LB Michael Huff at #7 then he would have grabbed Leinart, in which case the Cardinals would have taken Cutler off the board at #10, leaving Shanahan to twist slowly in the wind. He would end up having wasted all that ammo to move up -- only to wind up with RB Lawrence Mulroney -- Shanahan's stated backup pick -- whom he could have gotten at #15 anyway (he went to the Pats at #21).

The Broncos tried every team to swing a trade to move up into the top 10 because Shanahan anticipated that he'd have to be somewhere ahead of the Cardinals to be sure of getting Cutler or Leinart, but he completely failed. Not one team in the top 10 was willing to trade their pick (to anyone)!

And normally there AREN'T 3 franchise QBs in any draft class. What if 2008 is like 2005 and there's only ONE guy like Alex Smith was that year? Not another QB was taken in either the 1st or 2nd round. The next QB was Charlie Frye taken by Cleveland in the 3rd round. Charlie Frye never was and never will be a franchise QB. He's going to be a career backup and it sounds to me like the Browns already know it. Most Browns fans are already facing the music that they need a better QB than Frye.

So, it's not such a given that you can just trade up anytime you want and grab a franchise QB. Some years (like 2005) it's completely impossible. Some years (like 2006) you have to be incredibly lucky and be in the right place at the right time -- and then Al Davis has to have another stroke and do something stupid -- for it to work out.

Otherwise you need to have a top 10 pick and you can't count on that, unless your team is the Browns, I suppose, in which case you will probably have another top 10 pick next year and the year after. But, that's not saying that GM Phil Savage and Romeo Crennel will be around for very long if they keep doing that every year! :laugh:

That said, if the Browns want to give Frye another year they could trade back, pick up a second round pick and take OT Levi Brown around #8 or so. I wouldn't want to mortage my job future to having Charlie Frye turn into a franchise QB though. :coffee:

I agree, I would like to see Foxy out there mroe often also, I really like his level of play and I think it can only help. I am in agreement, I would like to see it. I just have the feeling that Lynch wouldn't be sidelined for Foxworth, and unless they slid Lynch to SS (which I would love to see) I don't feel Foxy makes a good replacement for Furgeson who is reliable enough in coverage and is the better tackler of the two IMO. I know I think he could be a more reliable cover safety, but I have not heard anything that makes me think the Broncos were displeased with Lynch or Ferguson throughout the year to make me think they will actually make the move of Foxworth to safety. If your in a coverage situation anyhow, I think Foxy should be i nthe nickle CB slot anyways, and a better move to get the best personel on the field is to slot in Brandon in rather then put Paymah in, even though I liked Paymah's play this last year. Hwoever I would trust BRandon out there more then Paymah, and I don't feel Lynch would be yanked out for Foxworth, or Furgeson..... just my :2cents:

Here's hoping I am wrong though :beer:

The title "SS" or "FS" doesn't mean anything. Lynch is used like a LB close to the line in run support most of the time while Ferguson is back in coverage. It all depends on the scheme. People see the depth chart with Lynch listed at "FS" and think the Broncos would rather have him covering WRs down the field than Brandon or Ferguson. That isn't the case.

[BigBroncLove]

Obviously Moss would have to re-do his contract, but I don't know why he would object to that. Normally the team just converts much of the salary into a signing bonus spread out over the length of the contract, say 4 or 5 years. That gives the player more up front money, and lowers the cap hit. I don't know why that can't be done in this case unless the Packers were trying to get Moss to take a pay-cut. If that's the case of course there's ZERO chance he would agree to that and they would know that up front. So, I would imagine they are just having some negotiating problems, which is routine with a contract of this size. The latest news is that they are close to working it out, and PFT says

There's nothing inherently that difficult about getting that deal done, so I would expect it to happen.

I still don't think Moss will take the pay cut. I'm sorry, but he has had no problem being a thornin the Raiders side just to stay in the game and make money. While I must say your post makes me think it is a higher possibility, I do not think it will be such as ure fire shot as this PFT quote is making it out to be. Also, link to the PFT quote please....



The Broncos were incredibly lucky to be able to land Cutler at all. :coffee:

In a normal year that would never have happened, but there were 3 franchise QBs available in 2006. Even so, it still took the utter stupidity of Al Davis (which he is now said to regret) that caused him to pass on Leinart, for the Broncos to be able to snag Cutler at #11. If Davis hadn't had a comlete brain-fart that caused him to take LB Michael Huff at #7 then he would have grabbed Leinart, in which case the Cardinals would have taken Cutler off the board at #10, leaving Shanahan to twist slowly in the wind. He would end up having wasted all that ammo to move up -- only to wind up with RB Lawrence Mulroney -- Shanahan's stated backup pick -- whom he could have gotten at #15 anyway (he went to the Pats at #21).

The Broncos tried every team to swing a trade to move up into the top 10 because Shanahan anticipated that he'd have to be somewhere ahead of the Cardinals to be sure of getting Cutler or Leinart, but he completely failed. Not one team in the top 10 was willing to trade their pick (to anyone)!

And normally there AREN'T 3 franchise QBs in any draft class. What if 2008 is like 2005 and there's only ONE guy like Alex Smith was that year? Not another QB was taken in either the 1st or 2nd round. The next QB was Charlie Frye taken by Cleveland in the 3rd round. Charlie Frye never was and never will be a franchise QB. He's going to be a career backup and it sounds to me like the Browns already know it. Most Browns fans are already facing the music that they need a better QB than Frye.

So, it's not such a given that you can just trade up anytime you want and grab a franchise QB. Some years (like 2005) it's completely impossible. Some years (like 2006) you have to be incredibly lucky and be in the right place at the right time -- and then Al Davis has to have another stroke and do something stupid -- for it to work out.

Otherwise you need to have a top 10 pick and you can't count on that, unless your team is the Browns, I suppose, in which case you will probably have another top 10 pick next year and the year after. But, that's not saying that GM Phil Savage and Romeo Crennel will be around for very long if they keep doing that every year! :laugh:

That said, if the Browns want to give Frye another year they could trade back, pick up a second round pick and take OT Levi Brown around #8 or so. I wouldn't want to mortage my job future to having Charlie Frye turn into a franchise QB though. :coffee:

Yes, but just because you need a deep draft to find a franchise QB at #10 doesn't mean it isn't possible, which makes me theory realistic IMO, which you said was the main problem with it. Also, re-read my post. Nowhere did I say it was a given, or easy to trade into the early rounds. Hwoever you made it out to be a near impossibility, which is proven wrong IMO by looking back at only the Broncos last two drafts (let alone the entire league), so that assumption can;t hold any water in my personal opinion. It is possible to trade up to grab yopurself a top notch QB. Is it likely to happen every year? no, but do teams do it? yes. Beyond all this, I will agree, I doubt the Browns are basing thier picks this year on what they intend to draft next year. However the main part of that last post wasn;t wether the Browns could find a franchise QB later, but that if a team doesn't think a player will live up to their precieved potential (Which is possible with Quinn and the Browns) then they will pass on them, no matter their need at the position. Just because the Broncos have a huge need at DT, that does not mean they will use the #21 draft pick for a DT where there is little value (unless a big name drops to them, which I think unlikely). It's about value, and if the Browns don't see that value in Quinn, then not much anyone can say or do about it. Just because you are in the top 10 and need a QB, doesn't mean you must draft a QB.

Besides this whole discussion was based off of you taking the PFW (pro football weekly) article and saying the Browns must be after a QB if they like Russell, to which I do not agree. All this talk about finding QB's like the Broncos did in 2005 is taking my words out of context. I never said that another draft wa likely to have the same depth at QB that the 2006 draft class did. I was using that as an example of a team trading up and finding that franchise QB, which can happen. I was not eluding or suggesting anywhere in that comment that other draft classes will be similar....

[BigBroncLove]

The title "SS" or "FS" doesn't mean anything. Lynch is used like a LB close to the line in run support most of the time while Ferguson is back in coverage. It all depends on the scheme. People see the depth chart with Lynch listed at "FS" and think the Broncos would rather have him covering WRs down the field than Brandon or Ferguson. That isn't the case.

This was added after the fact so let me respond in kind. There is a difference between a Strong Safety and Free Safety. They have different repsonsibilities, and how a SS attacks a play will be different then how a FS attacks a play. Firstly the FS main repsonsibility is as a cover man. The FS will play a role in run defense, as all safties resonsibilities in this role has been increasing the past few years. The Strong Safety main role is helping keep the TE in check, while watching coverage and the SS will take a mroe active role in run defense then the FS usually. But don't take my word for it.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_back

The free safety (FS) is responsible for reading the offensive plays and covering deep passes. Depending on the defensive call, the safety may also provide run support.

The strong safety (SS) is usually larger than the free safety, and is positioned relatively closer to the line of scrimmage. While strong safeties play a pivotal role in halting the offense's running game, they are also responsible for keeping various receivers, especially tight ends, in check.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060927222627AAbO3AS

Usually the strong safety plays on the strong side (i.e., the side where the TE lines up) and plays closer to the line of scrimmage to support the run defense -- he is almost like another LB on the field. The SS also typically has responsibility for covering the TE (depending upon the type of coverage). The free safety usually plays the deep zone and is less active in run defense. The FS will insure that no receivers get past him -- he is the last line of defense and will usually assist CBs to cover on deep routes. Some teams also like to throw a wrinkle into their defense by using the FS to blitz the opposing QB

Also, the SS and FS duties changes from team to team. The eagles for example use their SS much more like a FS. The Broncos obviously use both safeties in run support more often then other teams. It dependso nthe team and how they utilize them, but there is a difference, and the SS specifically has different duties since he will often be the man to make sure the TE doesn;t get unbuttoned and find his way throug ha soft zone or beat his man on the deep route. The FS for his part has a wider range of coverage responsibilities, and generally is not applied ot run support as often as the SS.

[TXBRONC]

The Broncos were incredibly lucky to be able to land Cutler at all. :coffee:

In a normal year that would never have happened, but there were 3 franchise QBs available in 2006. Even so, it still took the utter stupidity of Al Davis (which he is now said to regret) that caused him to pass on Leinart, for the Broncos to be able to snag Cutler at #11. If Davis hadn't had a comlete brain-fart that caused him to take LB Michael Huff at #7 then he would have grabbed Leinart, in which case the Cardinals would have taken Cutler off the board at #10, leaving Shanahan to twist slowly in the wind. He would end up having wasted all that ammo to move up -- only to wind up with RB Lawrence Mulroney -- Shanahan's stated backup pick -- whom he could have gotten at #15 anyway (he went to the Pats at #21).

The Broncos tried every team to swing a trade to move up into the top 10 because Shanahan anticipated that he'd have to be somewhere ahead of the Cardinals to be sure of getting Cutler or Leinart, but he completely failed. Not one team in the top 10 was willing to trade their pick (to anyone)!

Maybe Shanahan was lucky. At the same time maybe if Leinart is off the board with Oakland's pick then maybe the Cardinals go a different direction rather than taking Cutler anyway. It really depends on how Greene had them ranked on his draft board.

The other thing I don't totally unpleasureable "twisting in wind" if we had gotten Maroney at 15. Thankfully things worked out the way they did.

[Dream]

If we would have missed out on Cutler, I would have been fine with Maroney at #15. Franchise quarterbacks are very hard to come by, but there are some options that the Broncos could have looked at this year though too, like Drew Stanton. However, I'm really glad the Broncos got Jay.

[TXBRONC]

If we would have missed out on Cutler, I would have been fine with Maroney at #15. Franchise quarterbacks are very hard to come by, but there are some options that the Broncos could have looked at this year though too, like Drew Stanton. However, I'm really glad the Broncos got Jay.

I have read and heard some good things about Stanton but I'm with I'm glad the Broncos were able to draft Jay.

[Dream]

I have read and heard some good things about Stanton but I'm with I'm glad the Broncos were able to draft Jay.

Stanton is pretty much a Jake Plummer type player. Gunslinger, good mobility and a good leader. (Regardless of what people thought of Jake, he was a team leader and I'd say a good one.) A lot of similarities and it is possible that Denver could have got a kid like him this year, but hey - we have Cutler and Travis Henry now, I'd probably take that over Maroney and ________.

[Cugel]

If we would have missed out on Cutler, I would have been fine with Maroney at #15. Franchise quarterbacks are very hard to come by, but there are some options that the Broncos could have looked at this year though too, like Drew Stanton. However, I'm really glad the Broncos got Jay.
Getting Mulroney at #15 wouldn't have been awful at all. Getting him at #11 with Haloti Ngata still on the board would have been a major reach.

Of course, Shanahan only pulled the trigger on the trade when Cutler was available, but obviously he had previously talked to the Rams about it before he took that step and laid out the boundaries of the trade.

I doubt that all happened in the fifteen minutes they were on the clock. It's all pre-arranged.

But, my point is franchise QBs are like the "Big Planet Theory" -- only more so. If you are in a position to draft a franchise QB and you don't have one you have to take it and not pass like Al Davis did. Because the next year you might not be able to do it. (Of course the Raiders are in that position every year, so I guess it doesn't matter much! But that's entirely due to Al Davis being a moron and handling the GM duties himself and alienating his elite coach in Jon Gruden).

Some years, like 2005 you're flat out of luck. Every team in the NFL that wanted a franchise QB and wasn't the S.F. 49ers with the #1 pick of the draft was totally S.O.L. because there was Alex Smith and after him, NOTHING WHATSOEVER. So, if you needed that guy you didn't get him!

Of course the Browns might not like Brady Quinn. A lot of scouts are now saying that he's the best QB in the draft because he's more consistent than Russell. Who knows how they rate these things.

AS for the Cardinals, they needed a QB and if Leinart wasn't available they would very probably have taken Cutler. Nothing like that would be certain of course, but it's very likely. After all, Cutler was rated nearly as highly as Leinart and many think he'll be better since he had to overcome his horrible teammates, while Leinart had a roster of all-stars at USC. I think both will excell, but which is better is very much an open question.

Let's put it this way. If Cutler were available at #10 and the Cardinals passed on him they would be rightly criticized as very stupid indeed.

[pipes]

Getting Mulroney at #15 wouldn't have been awful at all. Getting him at #11 with Haloti Ngata still on the board would have been a major reach.

Of course, Shanahan only pulled the trigger on the trade when Cutler was available, but obviously he had previously talked to the Rams about it before he took that step and laid out the boundaries of the trade.

I doubt that all happened in the fifteen minutes they were on the clock. It's all pre-arranged.

But, my point is franchise QBs are like the "Big Planet Theory" -- only more so. If you are in a position to draft a franchise QB and you don't have one you have to take it and not pass like Al Davis did. Because the next year you might not be able to do it. (Of course the Raiders are in that position every year, so I guess it doesn't matter much! But that's entirely due to Al Davis being a moron and handling the GM duties himself and alienating his elite coach in Jon Gruden).

Some years, like 2005 you're flat out of luck. Every team in the NFL that wanted a franchise QB and wasn't the S.F. 49ers with the #1 pick of the draft was totally S.O.L. because there was Alex Smith and after him, NOTHING WHATSOEVER. So, if you needed that guy you didn't get him!

Of course the Browns might not like Brady Quinn. A lot of scouts are now saying that he's the best QB in the draft because he's more consistent than Russell. Who knows how they rate these things.

AS for the Cardinals, they needed a QB and if Leinart wasn't available they would very probably have taken Cutler. Nothing like that would be certain of course, but it's very likely. After all, Cutler was rated nearly as highly as Leinart and many think he'll be better since he had to overcome his horrible teammates, while Leinart had a roster of all-stars at USC. I think both will excell, but which is better is very much an open question.

Let's put it this way. If Cutler were available at #10 and the Cardinals passed on him they would be rightly criticized as very stupid indeed.

I see what you're sayin'......btw I think that if Alex Smith had come out in last year's class, he would've been the 4th QB taken. Just my opinion.

[DenBronx]

i dont know whats gonna happen to the other teams but i can tell you whats gonna happen to cj. he plays behind a sorry line, an off and on running back, a whollllle lot to learn qb, no tight ends, crappy coaches, an owner that looks like that beast from the lord of the rings and some very very very un-motivated recievers. this in its self can cancer a rookie and throw his learning/developmental process by a few years. by then people will consider him a bust ala mike williams.

[Lorcust]

Getting Mulroney at #15 wouldn't have been awful at all. Getting him at #11 with Haloti Ngata still on the board would have been a major reach.

Of course, Shanahan only pulled the trigger on the trade when Cutler was available, but obviously he had previously talked to the Rams about it before he took that step and laid out the boundaries of the trade.

I doubt that all happened in the fifteen minutes they were on the clock. It's all pre-arranged.

But, my point is franchise QBs are like the "Big Planet Theory" -- only more so. If you are in a position to draft a franchise QB and you don't have one you have to take it and not pass like Al Davis did. Because the next year you might not be able to do it. (Of course the Raiders are in that position every year, so I guess it doesn't matter much! But that's entirely due to Al Davis being a moron and handling the GM duties himself and alienating his elite coach in Jon Gruden).

Some years, like 2005 you're flat out of luck. Every team in the NFL that wanted a franchise QB and wasn't the S.F. 49ers with the #1 pick of the draft was totally S.O.L. because there was Alex Smith and after him, NOTHING WHATSOEVER. So, if you needed that guy you didn't get him!

Of course the Browns might not like Brady Quinn. A lot of scouts are now saying that he's the best QB in the draft because he's more consistent than Russell. Who knows how they rate these things.

AS for the Cardinals, they needed a QB and if Leinart wasn't available they would very probably have taken Cutler. Nothing like that would be certain of course, but it's very likely. After all, Cutler was rated nearly as highly as Leinart and many think he'll be better since he had to overcome his horrible teammates, while Leinart had a roster of all-stars at USC. I think both will excell, but which is better is very much an open question.

Let's put it this way. If Cutler were available at #10 and the Cardinals passed on him they would be rightly criticized as very stupid indeed.

Aaron Rodgers.... Jason Cambell...?

[Cugel]

i dont know whats gonna happen to the other teams but i can tell you whats gonna happen to cj. he plays behind a sorry line, an off and on running back, a whollllle lot to learn qb, no tight ends, crappy coaches, an owner that looks like that beast from the lord of the rings and some very very very un-motivated recievers. this in its self can cancer a rookie and throw his learning/developmental process by a few years. by then people will consider him a bust ala mike williams.
:laugh: "The beast from Lord of the Rings"! That cracked me up! I was thinking he looks more like the crypt keeper:

http://www.poe-news.com/imgs/story/45473-crypt_keeper.jpg