Browns sign RG3

[RamBall]

The only thing I can think this changes is the willingness for the Browns to trade out of their pick. Dont think its a big change but enough that the right offer could do it, especially if they like a QB expected to go lower

Hopefully Hue Jackson likes atleast 1 of the guys he has enough to be willing to give up the #2 pick for a 2 or 3 picks in return. The Rams have the picks to make a trade that would still benefit both teams as long as the browns dont want a rediculous return like the Rams got from washington.

 

[Ram Man]

But we're talking about a class valedictorian with a 4.0 gpa who not only has run a pro-style offense, but has also been responsible for OL line calls when he changes plays. No other QB I've ever heard of has done that. That's crazy!

While I might stipulate that he isn't a sure thing, I can't put him in the same pile as JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf and Rick Mirer... C'mon. We're talking apples and carburetors here.

Lottery tickets!

 

[Faceplant]

But I do have another question, how many of those QBs you used as evidence were actually drafted after a team traded up to take them. Just a hint but I'm pretty sure the answer is zero.

That is because he neglected to name the QB in the OP. RGIII. Boom.

 

[OldSchool]

Right. As long as you accept that you have as good a chance at ending up with a bust like Jake Locker as you do of ending up with a home run like Alex Smith.

Every pick in every round at every position carries that risk!

 

[OldSchool]

That is because he neglected to name the QB in the OP. RGIII. Boom.

So because one pick that a team traded up for means no team should trade up again? To quote you BOOM.

 

[Faceplant]

I have a question. Where were all the Wentz supporters during the NCAA season????? I NEVER heard that kids name mentioned before the annual "NFL seasons over, lets go draft a franchise QB" talk started. Every year I see another group of QBs propped up as the next greatest thing. It is like clock work. Not saying Wentz won't be a good QB. Frankly, NONE of us knows that. Just saying there are some on here threatening to renounce their fandom if the Rams don't go get one of these "next greatest things". Silliness....

 

[Faceplant]

So because one pick that a team traded up for means no team should trade up again? To quote you BOOM.

Cool. So you think the QBs in this draft are better prospects than RGIII was coming out? I find that hard to believe, but whatever. Sounds like you would risk giving up as much or more than the Redskins did just to find out. Cool.

 

[Mackeyser]

Well, Wentz was in the radar. I dunno how much he was being talked about because he had mid-season injury and came back to lead his team to a National Championship. That injury may have muted early interest, but once he proved he was back to form, interest peaked.

He's been talked about since December at least, I think.

 

[OldSchool]

Cool. So you think the QBs in this draft are better prospects than RGIII was coming out? I find that hard to believe, but whatever. Sounds like you would risk giving up as much or more than the Redskins did just to find out. Cool.

Not sure what you're reading but I never said that, never implied or hinted at that. My comment centered around one foolish statement. That being we shouldn't trade up for a QB because other QBs that were traded up for busted. That is an asinine assertion, you don't rule out a trade because Washington did and it didn't work. You trust your scouts and if you think a QB is worth it you make the trade.

 

[LesBaker]

Where is the post @Ramsey did on this. Someone dig that shit up and we can all rad it again.

It was good work!!!

 

[Ram Man]

So because one pick that a team traded up for means no team should trade up again? To quote you BOOM.

This being a Rams forum I thought mentioning RGIII was unnecessary. Historically trading up to draft a QB in the 1st Round hasn't worked out.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/bears-should-know-that-trading-up-for-qbs-rarely-works/

It is bad when the picks you gave up to move up turn into good players on other teams.

 

[dieterbrock]

Kaepernicks deal I thought was easier and cheaper to get out of than what they just signed RG3 for.

Well they would have had to trade for him, so that's part of it. Not sure how its easier to get out of as he pretty much gets his $$ as long as he's on active roster. So yeah, he's apparently cuttable, but what's the point in trading for a guy you would cut to save money?

 

[OldSchool]

This being a Rams forum I thought mentioning RGIII was unnecessary. Historically trading up to draft a QB in the 1st Round hasn't worked out.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/bears-should-know-that-trading-up-for-qbs-rarely-works/

It is bad when the picks you gave up to move up turn into good players on other teams.

So there's a QB in the draft that your scouting department says can be a good NFL QB and you're not going to upgrade the most important position in the game because some other team might get good players from the picks used to move up? Guess what your team just spent three more years without a good QB and had a losing record. Your owner know that you refused to trade up for the QB who one of your rivals picked and is in the playoffs. You and the rest of the front office/coaching staff were just fired have a nice day.

Yes there are risks trading up, guess what there are as many risks standing pat and not getting your team a QB. But to not make a trade because other trades have failed wow there aren't many words to describe that "thinking" that won't get me in trouble.

 

[Faceplant]

Not sure what you're reading but I never said that, never implied or hinted at that. My comment centered around one foolish statement. That being we shouldn't trade up for a QB because other QBs that were traded up for busted. That is an asinine assertion, you don't rule out a trade because Washington did and it didn't work. You trust your scouts and if you think a QB is worth it you make the trade.

EDIT: I assume you were accusing someone else of that assertion.

If the scouts are convinced Wentz or Goff are worth the risk, I hope they pull the trigger.

 

[OldSchool]

Well they would have had to trade for him, so that's part of it. Not sure how its easier to get out of as he pretty much gets his $$ as long as he's on active roster. So yeah, he's apparently cuttable, but what's the point in trading for a guy you would cut to save money?

What's the point in signing a guy just to cut him? It comes down to two things with me on the draft picks.

One they just spent money on a QB they think is capable of coming in and leading their team. He's still young and while not really high priced they still spent valuable cap money on him.

Two your roster is so void of talent yet your going to spend the #2 pick on another QB. That was the first time rg3 fumbles or throws an int you have fans yelling to let the rookie play.

The Browns just invested in a QB but don't have much at all to support him. Go out with your excellent draft capital and build a team around him. If after the two years is up and he isn't the answer you move on from him. This avoids the who should start circus and let's you bring in help for your team. And now in two years if you need a QB you have more talent on the roster and your team is in a better spot to support a rookie QB. Whereas if you take Wentz this year and rh3 is the real deal you just wasted a #2 overall pick on a backup and you missed a chance to add a player to your roster to help.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Right. As long as you accept that you have as good a chance at ending up with a bust like Jake Locker as you do of ending up with a home run like Alex Smith.

Absolutely.
I get ya with A. Smith. The fact is, that we could still be much more competitive with him. Not that he's to be confused for a HOF candidate. But he is solid.

 

[OldSchool]

Before accusing me of making "asinine assertions", you might want to find an example of one that I made. Show me where I ever said anything even REMOTELY close to the assertion you accused me of above. You asked, so I gave an example of a trade up that did not work out. Simple as that.

Everything else, I agree with. If the scouts are conviced Wentz or Goff are worth the risk, I hope they pull the trigger.

You jumped into a reply I made to somebody else who was arguing exactly that and were defending his stance. The comment he made was to not trade up because other trade up attempts failed. You aligned yourself with that comment by defending it.

 

[Ram Man]

Yes there are risks trading up, guess what there are as many risks standing pat and not getting your team a QB. But to not make a trade because other trades have failed wow there aren't many words to describe that "thinking" that won't get me in trouble.

Trading up to draft a QB in the 1st round is not a new concept. You can look back at the success rates for those who have tried it in the past. Past results say that the odds of achieving a successful outcome if you try it are worse than if you do not.

The Rams should draft a QB with the 15th pick if there is value there. They should then use their other picks to improve their team.

 

[kurtfaulk]

What's the point in signing a guy just to cut him? It comes down to two things with me on the draft picks.

One they just spent money on a QB they think is capable of coming in and leading their team. He's still young and while not really high priced they still spent valuable cap money on him.

Two your roster is so void of talent yet your going to spend the #2 pick on another QB. That was the first time rg3 fumbles or throws an int you have fans yelling to let the rookie play.

The Browns just invested in a QB but don't have much at all to support him. Go out with your excellent draft capital and build a team around him. If after the two years is up and he isn't the answer you move on from him. This avoids the who should start circus and let's you bring in help for your team. And now in two years if you need a QB you have more talent on the roster and your team is in a better spot to support a rookie QB. Whereas if you take Wentz this year and rh3 is the real deal you just wasted a #2 overall pick on a backup and you missed a chance to add a player to your roster to help.

so the browns shouldn't draft their qb of the future because they just signed a qb to almost back up money? c'mon man, listen to yourself.

.

 

[Mojo Ram]

You know what they say about playing the lottery. Ya can't WIN if you don't play!
The Rams won't solve the QB problem in this draft picking at or below #15.