Babying 613 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I am not the opinion of tanking that is why I don't like the move. You build and Richardson was expected to be part of the build. Now you just start the rebuild. However I do believe the nfl draft is a huge part of the rebuild since guys drafted generally play right away Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The other thing is that their current GM and coach were not the ones that drafted Richardson so to say he was part of the plan to rebuild isn't entirely true. He was part of the rebuild from the previous management, but they have a different scheme this year and most of the time, new GM's and coaches like to revamp rosters. How competitive do you think the Browns would be this year even if they kept Richardson? 5 wins, 6 maybe? You certainly can't believe they had a shot at making the playoffs. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I am not the opinion of tanking that is why I don't like the move. You build and Richardson was expected to be part of the build. Now you just start the rebuild. However I do believe the nfl draft is a huge part of the rebuild since guys drafted generally play right away I'm not for intentionally losing games or anything like that, but if you can't possibly make the playoffs or win a championship with the current roster no matter what you do, then I think it's in everyone's best interests (team, players, fans) to do everything you can to set the team up for future success. You can't make one good pick per year and turn a horrible team into a contender, you have to paint with a wide brush in the beginning of a rebuild. I think this trade probably isn't the last deal they'll make this season, and with a solid 2014 draft there's no reason the Browns can't turn the corner and start getting respectable. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I'm not for intentionally losing games or anything like that, but if you can't possibly make the playoffs or win a championship with the current roster no matter what you do, then I think it's in everyone's best interests (team, players, fans) to do everything you can to set the team up for future success. You can't make one good pick per year and turn a horrible team into a contender, you have to paint with a wide brush in the beginning of a rebuild. I think this trade probably isn't the last deal they'll make this season, and with a solid 2014 draft there's no reason the Browns can't turn the corner and start getting respectable. I dont understand. Other then saying we dont like the guy, why is anyone arguing that the 3rd overall pick from last year is not a good tool to start a rebuild with. I'm all for tanking, but what are you tanking for, to get a top end player.....oh, like maybe draft 3rd overall? Its like saying Drouin should be traded if Tampa Bay thinks they should rebuild. I would trade everyone I had, and keep Richardson. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I am not the opinion of tanking that is why I don't like the move. You build and Richardson was expected to be part of the build. Now you just start the rebuild. However I do believe the nfl draft is a huge part of the rebuild since guys drafted generally play right away Given the disposable nature of RBs it's best to make him one of the last pieces you add. That being said... two wrongs (trading a RB too high / donking him off for a worse pick) dont' make a right. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 It's more like trading Victor Hedman than trading Drouin, if you want to draw a hockey parallel. High pick from a previous year who hasn't panned out quite like the team thought but still has value somewhere even if he doesn't fit with the current plan for going-forward. Also, just because he was picked #3 overall doesn't make him an automatic superstar...we're talking about a 3.5 yard per carry running back who has a career long of 32 yards...not exactly feature back numbers. I would argue much more strongly that the Browns made a mistake picking him in the first place than I would that trading him for absolute max value was an error in judgement. Mcgahee's career average is half a yard better than Richardson's and in a couple articles I read it was argued that the Colts would have been much better served just signing him themselves and keeping the 1st...that the trade was a panic move on their part. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 we're talking about a 3.5 yard per carry running back who has a career long of 32 yards...not exactly feature back numbers. . You mean the 18 games he has played over the course of about 1 year....who has an awful QB and terrible line? lol. I'll be curious to see how he looks in Indy, even though their line isnt that great either. Luck will help though. Ok, I guess we're going with they made a mistake taking him in the first place. Like I said, if you dont like him, ok, but man are you ever admitting a huge f up by trading him for such little return. I guess easier to do when its not your f up, but fans in Cleveland shouldnt care that it was the old GM, its the franchise as a whole that has to answer for such ridiculous actions. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Kind of hard to run for decent #s when the defence can stack box to counter on every play. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 You mean the 18 games he has played over the course of about 1 year....who has an awful QB and terrible line? lol. I'll be curious to see how he looks in Indy, even though their line isnt that great either. Luck will help though. Ok, I guess we're going with they made a mistake taking him in the first place. Like I said, if you dont like him, ok, but man are you ever admitting a huge f up by trading him for such little return. I guess easier to do when its not your f up, but fans in Cleveland shouldnt care that it was the old GM, its the franchise as a whole that has to answer for such ridiculous actions. FWIW (and I don't know much about football) but most of the articles I've read about this trade indicate that a mid to high 1st is a downright shocking return for a running back...pretty much any running back let alone one who hasn't done very much to date. You're right...taking handoffs from Luck will probably help and he might become a really good player in Indy. He almost certainly wasn't going to do that anytime soon in Cleveland, so it's good for him and it's good for the Browns that the deal happened, sets them both on a better path for success. Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Lets not forget about the signing bonus that the browns paid already. It is a sweet deal for the colts. Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Trading him to the Colts still saves the Browns about 6.6 million. And a first round pick > Richardson in terms of rebuilding. I don't see why you guys still aren't understanding how this makes sense for the Browns. You keep arguing that Richardson should be part of the rebuild, but the problem isn't at RB. It is at QB and receiver. In order to correct those problems they need to acquire future assets (draft picks, salary, etc). The only real valuable asset they had was Richardson, but keeping him wasn't going to speed up the rebuild. Acquiring more picks and saving money is going to. In order to be successful in the NFL, you absolutely have to have a franchise quarterback. Look at the successful teams. Brady, Big Ben, Peyton, Rodgers, heck even Flacco. You can't win championships with guys like Weeden and Hoyer. That has to be addressed immediately so it makes sense to let him go. Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I understand you can't win with weeden or hoyer. I don't like the trade because the accountant in me comes out. Trading a 3rd pick overall for a lower pick later plus paying all the upfront signing bonus does not make sense to me Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted September 20, 2013 Author Share Posted September 20, 2013 I'm on KC. Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 I'm on KC. Oh no. I am on Philly and Chip Kelly. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted September 20, 2013 Author Share Posted September 20, 2013 Oh no. I am on Philly and Chip Kelly. I have a good start. Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 I hate Vick and chip kelly Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Should have just bet the under. I figured KC offense would struggle to score, and I was right, just didn't count on all of the turnovers. Philly moved the ball really well on the ground, but Vick was wildly innaccurate with his throws. Without checking, I don't think Philly got a single first down when they started a new set of downs with a throw instead of a rush. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted September 20, 2013 Author Share Posted September 20, 2013 Just want to give a plug to my good friend Brian. He runs the website sportswagers.ca I have known Brian for close to 20 years and he is part of the AHL. It might be the only website out there that gives you real free picks with write ups. His record is all out there for anyone to see. He has had a great year in Baseball up 82 units already. Already up 5.34 units in NFL and 6 units in College Football. he was all over KC last night Overall he is a huge winner. You will make money if you follow him . I AM NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE SITE..He is just a good friend. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 I'm going to post my football picks here if anyone is interested. Started the season with a $100 football betting bankroll. I did this last year as well. Was up about $350 at the end of the regular season. bet $100 on SF to win the superbowl at 7-1, then put the rest of my winnings on SF at escalating lines on the superbowl game itself. Ended up losing them all. It was fun, and always made football more entertaining, so I'm doing it again. I like to bet parlays, which is high variance, but it's just for fun, so who cares? I usually make $20 bets, but since I am playing with house money, I'm being more aggressive this week. Current bankroll: $470 Bets for week 3: $70 - Philadelphia -3.5 Under 51 - Pays $190 $35 - TB +7 Dallas -4 NYG (Pick) - Pays $215 $35 - Seattle -19 Denver -15 SF -10 Pays $175 $30 - GB -3 Buffalo +3 Chicago -3 Pays $189 I'm adding a $50 bet on Miami -3 (+120) pays $60. (taking the advice of the sportwagers site that Serge posted) The line is the worst around, but the money must be heavy on Atlanta because the miami side pays way more. balance after these 4 bets: $250 Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 I will concur with serge that Brian is a great guy. Some picks may not come in but he does research the heck out of it Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 This seems like a good explanation for why the trade was made. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/trent-richardson-trade-is-not-what-it-seems-browns-fans-092013 If this is true about his "attitude", then I get it. Things like that have a way of also affecting his value as trade bait too, so maybe thats why they couldnt do better. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Man, I wanted to speculate so hard about attitude issues but I stopped myself more than once because that's all it would have been and I know that's irresponsible. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Man, I wanted to speculate so hard about attitude issues but I stopped myself more than once because that's all it would have been and I know that's irresponsible. RACIST! I just hope the article is actually based on some facts, and not just Cleveland managements ways of spinning the story. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 If you were doomed to play for a crap team like the Browns you'd have a bad attitude as well 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I'm adding a $50 bet on Miami -3 (+120) pays $60. (taking the advice of the sportwagers site that Serge posted) The line is the worst around, but the money must be heavy on Atlanta because the miami side pays way more. balance after these 4 bets: $250 crappy results all around. Miami bet saved the weekend a bit. Current bankroll: $470 Bets for week 3: $70 - Philadelphia -3.5 Under 51 - Pays $190 $35 - TB +7 Dallas -4 NYG (Pick) - Pays $215 $35 - Seattle -19 Denver -15 SF -10 Pays $175 $30 - GB -3 Buffalo +3 Chicago -3 Pays Miami -3 (+105) Result: win $52.50 unfortunatly odds worsened from +120 to +105 before I got the bet in on Miami. net result for weekend: -117.50 current bankroll: $352.50 adding Denver -15.5 for $52.50 for the monday nighter. Pays $47.75 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now