In response to danemcmenamin's comment:
In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:
In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:
In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:
I am not making a bet on what ifs. All I am saying is how much it would make sense and how much Lombardi liked Mallett, now the GM in Cleveland.
There are too many people here who let the media dictate their opinions. RG3 for example is not worth more than Ryan Mallett. The media made it seem like that because of poorly run teams desperate last year after reaching for who came after Luck, that the QBs taken after Luck were as good of an investment. Nope. They weren't.
Yes, Lombardi trading back to #29 when the #5 is the same as #25 would end Lombadi's reign in Cleveland. lol. How does that make sense? This would be the IDEAL time to trade back with the depth of this draft.
I know Mt Hurl has a penchant for only understading cupcakes, but Wheatfarmer is making this uncomfortable.
It's Lombardi's job to not be a moron and to read markets. Pretending Weeden, a guy you don't like, wasting a year pretending you do, is why Cleveland has sucked for 20 years.
Hey Man, I don't disagree that Mallett would be a huge upgrade for Cleveland over Weeden. He would. My whole point is that it would be a very bold move for Lombardi to pull the trigger on such a big move to acquire Mallett, and I'm betting that he won't have the balls to do it. Hope this post didn't make you too "uncomfortable." :)
Why is it bold? I am just asking you to lay out a case that makes it bold.
If pick 5-25 is the same talent in Rd 1, that's per Mike Mayock ("This is NOT the year to have a 1st rd pick", and Todd McShay just said this morning that neither Barkley and Smith are 1st rd talents, wouldn't that mean that Mallett has MORE value in this market if Cleveland is picking 6th?
Yes, it would, because Mallett was mid 1st rd projected in 2011's draft. Throw in the idea that Lombardi has a direct B-Line relationship with BB and knows all he wants about Mallett's progression in NE, why are you so convinced of the scenario being so impossible?
So, Cleveland, would save MONEY, TWICE. Once, by getting their QB (factually, Lombardi loved Mallett in 2011), possibly then dealing Weeden to a team for a 3rd rder, for example, and not losing their own 1st rd pick.
Again, you seem to be not realizing that if Cleveland is looking to save cash, trade back in a draft you want to trade back in, and still not lose a 1st rd pick while getting a QB their GM really likes, it's a win/win for them.
The top 10 pick in this year's draft does not have the value it usually has.
Yeah Rusty you know the facts that the general people's of Cleveland may not know and that makes all the difference. If your new GM goes and trades away a top 10 pick for a QB who's barely seen an NFL field it's a bold move, when you know the facts it seems like a much better move than claming either of those first round QBs this year. If Lombardi goes through with it though and Mallett doesn't work out people will be crying that they didn't take one of the draftees from the top 10 that will inevitably be playing well. The way I see it is that getting Mallett is their best bet at worst they're back in the top 10 next year (where they permenantly reside) I just don't see the public seeing it that way
Ahhhhhh......I hate to tell you this but it ain't no guarantee that the 6th overall pick is a lock to work out either. Man drafting would be a walk in the park if all your picks worked out.
Here's another tidbit, every single QB in this years Draft is a risk, a big risk....
Yeah man that's about the only truth in the Draft that you really have almost no idea what you're getting. Absolutely agree, however with the no.6 pick Cleveland have a shot at anyone in the top 20 therefore should they take Mallett and he doesn't work out then it'll have looked like a very bad job by Lombardi because although the draft is unpredictable there will be great players in that top 20. Imagine it'll be one of those things you hear about on down the line " remember when lombardi traded for that bust Mallett when he could have had (insert name here)" I don't see the back lash being as bad in drafting a draft bust at least that way you have a few years before that can be said one way or another