By now.. Do the Giant call them and ask? If so would the Browns disclose it? What difference does it make if They make the 1st pick known? The Rams made it known they were taking Goff and Eagles were taking Wentz..
why would the Giants be interested in moving up one spot? Â
Why would the Browns let the Giants know who they are taking?
If the Browns have a close enough grade on Allen and Darnold but a much higher grade on Barkley than Chubb will they take Allen knowing that the Giants will take Darnold at 2 allowing Barkley to fall to them at 4. Or they could take Darnold 1st overall and risk the chance that the Giants will take Barkley at 2 leaving them with Chubb at 4. What it likely comes down to is would the Browns rather have Allen and Barkley or Darnold and Chubb?
If I’m the Browns, I trade for the Giants 2 and give them their 4th pick and a 2nd or 3rd. The Browns seem to have a boatload of good picks. Being able to get the QB of their choice(don’t need a trade for that) AND a Barkley or Chubb at 2 could be very enticing, imv.
Maybe they’ll get who they want at 4 if they stay pat, BUT to be assured that the Giants won’t take away their second most valued choice (Chubb or Barkley) could be an inducement. If they didn’t have a plethora of picks, I wouldn’t even broach this.
Not predicting this will or should happen, but if I’m the Browns, I’d do it.
If I’m the Browns, I trade for the Giants 2 and give them their 4th pick and a 2nd or 3rd. The Browns seem to have a boatload of good picks. Being able to get the QB of their choice(don’t need a trade for that) AND a Barkley or Chubb at 2 could be very enticing, imv.
Maybe they’ll get who they want at 4 if they stay pat, BUT to be assured that the Giants won’t take away their second most valued choice (Chubb or Barkley) could be an inducement. If they didn’t have a plethora of picks, I wouldn’t even broach this.
Not predicting this will or should happen, but if I’m the Browns, I’d do it.
Well we know the Browns are down to Allen and Darnold at 1. We know the Jets will take a QB at 3. That leaves the Giants as the only team that might take Barkley at Chubb at 2. Now if the Browns want Allen then they know there is a great chance that the Giants will take Darnold at 2 which would then leave both Barkley and Chubb for the Browns at 4. What it comes down to is do the Browns have a much higher grade on one of Barkley and Chubb?
That will certainly allow them to gain more information as they're sitting at #4. Action on the second pick is pretty much on hold until #1 is locked in. #2 is definitely impacting what #4 is planning to do. #3 is pretty firmed up and irrelevant.
If they can provoke a move on #2 by either the Giants or a trade, they could get a much clearer picture of what #4 is going to look like - which is equally as important.
And if they don't gain anything out of it, they haven't lost anything either. And they can always say go screw once the clock starts.
requires no strategy, they just pick the player they want most. But the only way they can guarantee who their next pick will be is by trading up to 2. Barkley, Chubb or Nelson would be the most probable choices. If all 3 are rated the same and all 3 are needed, they stay at 4. But if one of them is really, really important for them to get, they have to trade up or take their chances.
The Giants are on the clock, the Browns need to answer this question, "How bad do you want him?".
requires no strategy, they just pick the player they want most. But the only way they can guarantee who their next pick will be is by trading up to 2. Barkley, Chubb or Nelson would be the most probable choices. If all 3 are rated the same and all 3 are needed, they stay at 4. But if one of them is really, really important for them to get, they have to trade up or take their chances.
The Giants are on the clock, the Browns need to answer this question, "How bad do you want him?".
They want to move up.. It'll let them decide who they will take at 2.
What possible benefit could there be for the Browns in disclosing that info? I doubt the Giants would call and ask, but doubt even more that the Browns would offer the Giants the answer. How do they not know they Giants aren't in love with a different player and would possibly trade up to ensure getting him, why tell them they aren't drafting him?
I'm taking phone calls while I'm on the clock before I decide anything.
Why would the Browns trade out of the 1st pick? They are 1-31 the last 2 years. If they can get the right QB for your team with the first pick with 4 1st round QB's, this team is doomed.
A ton of high picks this year should finally make Cleveland relevant.
wait til they're on the clock to make a deal? Nothing is going to change between now and then. Maybe it would be in their interest to not announce it til the opening bell. It always annoys impatient me when the first team takes the entire time to make the pick. maybe a team will blink/cave at the last second, but realistically, all phone calls have been made before draft day arrives.
Should be in the final stage of picking there guy somewhere between the 20th to 24th the world will have an 85% percent idea who he is. That’s normally how it works everything else we are reading and hearing about is just BS to keep you interested. From all accounts it’s Darnold or Allen pretty sure the entire world knows that so now just comes the final decision.
And if they don't we are running up to the podium to take him.
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
Just don't let Rosen run to the podium. If he trips before he gets there and gets one more injury his career could be over within seconds of being picked.
Should be in the final stage of picking there guy somewhere between the 20th to 24th the world will have an 85% percent idea who he is. That’s normally how it works everything else we are reading and hearing about is just BS to keep you interested. From all accounts it’s Darnold or Allen pretty sure the entire world knows that so now just comes the final decision.
In 2006, Mario Williams signed a contract as the #1 overall pick before the draft started. Have the rules changed? If not, when can the Browns start talks?
You wouldn't want to sign the contract until the night before or morning of the draft, because something could happen do the guy, but IIRC the word was out in advance that the Texans were passing on Reggie Bush to draft Williams. (Most of the world thought they were nuts.)
RE: Aren't the Browns allowed to start talks with the player they want? Â
In 2006, Mario Williams signed a contract as the #1 overall pick before the draft started. Have the rules changed? If not, when can the Browns start talks?
You wouldn't want to sign the contract until the night before or morning of the draft, because something could happen do the guy, but IIRC the word was out in advance that the Texans were passing on Reggie Bush to draft Williams. (Most of the world thought they were nuts.)
I think you can still do that, but now with draftees being "slotted" (salary-wise) there's less of a reason to do so.
Back in the day a team with the first pick wanted to make sure that the player was sign-able and wouldn't hold out.
RE: The Browns wouldn't be wholly disserved by fixing the first pick Â
If the Browns have a close enough grade on Allen and Darnold but a much higher grade on Barkley than Chubb will they take Allen knowing that the Giants will take Darnold at 2 allowing Barkley to fall to them at 4. Or they could take Darnold 1st overall and risk the chance that the Giants will take Barkley at 2 leaving them with Chubb at 4. What it likely comes down to is would the Browns rather have Allen and Barkley or Darnold and Chubb?
Maybe they’ll get who they want at 4 if they stay pat, BUT to be assured that the Giants won’t take away their second most valued choice (Chubb or Barkley) could be an inducement. If they didn’t have a plethora of picks, I wouldn’t even broach this.
Not predicting this will or should happen, but if I’m the Browns, I’d do it.
Maybe they’ll get who they want at 4 if they stay pat, BUT to be assured that the Giants won’t take away their second most valued choice (Chubb or Barkley) could be an inducement. If they didn’t have a plethora of picks, I wouldn’t even broach this.
Not predicting this will or should happen, but if I’m the Browns, I’d do it.
Well we know the Browns are down to Allen and Darnold at 1. We know the Jets will take a QB at 3. That leaves the Giants as the only team that might take Barkley at Chubb at 2. Now if the Browns want Allen then they know there is a great chance that the Giants will take Darnold at 2 which would then leave both Barkley and Chubb for the Browns at 4. What it comes down to is do the Browns have a much higher grade on one of Barkley and Chubb?
Yup! Just like the Raiders passing on Rivers/Roethlisberger for the All Pro OL.
If they can provoke a move on #2 by either the Giants or a trade, they could get a much clearer picture of what #4 is going to look like - which is equally as important.
And if they don't gain anything out of it, they haven't lost anything either. And they can always say go screw once the clock starts.
Just a thought.
The Giants are on the clock, the Browns need to answer this question, "How bad do you want him?".
The Giants are on the clock, the Browns need to answer this question, "How bad do you want him?".
Yup, my major point
Quote:
Seriously, what would they gain from that?
what would they lose?
For 1 they provide an advantage to another team. Wouldn't you think it's an advantage if you know for sure who is available at 2?
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
Quote:
And if they don't we are running up to the podium to take him.
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
Why run?
What possible benefit could there be for the Browns in disclosing that info? I doubt the Giants would call and ask, but doubt even more that the Browns would offer the Giants the answer. How do they not know they Giants aren't in love with a different player and would possibly trade up to ensure getting him, why tell them they aren't drafting him?
Quote:
In comment 13913514 DavidinBMNY said:
Quote:
And if they don't we are running up to the podium to take him.
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
Why run?
Nothing wrong with getting some cardio in
Why would the Browns trade out of the 1st pick? They are 1-31 the last 2 years. If they can get the right QB for your team with the first pick with 4 1st round QB's, this team is doomed.
A ton of high picks this year should finally make Cleveland relevant.
Quote:
And if they don't we are running up to the podium to take him.
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
I agree.
Quote:
And if they don't we are running up to the podium to take him.
And if they do take him you should still run to the podium for Rosen.
Just don't let Rosen run to the podium. If he trips before he gets there and gets one more injury his career could be over within seconds of being picked.
This
Only if the Giants in good faith say what they would do at 2 would it make sense.
And what is the upside to telling them? So the Giants have more time to think about it? It's all downside and no upside for them, so no they wouldn't.
DG:"Well, that depends on who you are taking #1!"
John:"Well, that depends on who you are taking #2!"
DG:"Bye, John."
John:"Bye, Dave."
There's no reason for them to trade up to 2 or to tell any team who they're picking at 1.
You wouldn't want to sign the contract until the night before or morning of the draft, because something could happen do the guy, but IIRC the word was out in advance that the Texans were passing on Reggie Bush to draft Williams. (Most of the world thought they were nuts.)
You wouldn't want to sign the contract until the night before or morning of the draft, because something could happen do the guy, but IIRC the word was out in advance that the Texans were passing on Reggie Bush to draft Williams. (Most of the world thought they were nuts.)
I think you can still do that, but now with draftees being "slotted" (salary-wise) there's less of a reason to do so.
Back in the day a team with the first pick wanted to make sure that the player was sign-able and wouldn't hold out.
That is a good thought, but I'm not sure the Raiders are that smart.