Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bleacher report are getting content from Crackheads!


WOW!!
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2956204-browns-realistic-trade-packages-for-baker-mayfield

If this idiot thinks the browns are getting a 2nd round pick from anybody for Mayfield he is clueless..

I wish I could trash him in the comments..

Pretty sure that's one of @Basbear's top sources 🤣...

Edited by SizzleBuzz
  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some team will end up with either a pre-season injury or a poor performance from a bubble QB and make the trade for Mayfield. They'll probably be more competitive after doing so. 

And there's always the outlier that after this week's investigative interviews by the NFL that Watson might end up in a suspension situation. Cleveland then could end up having to make amends with Baker quickly. Of course, the NFL investigation could be just as flimsy as it's expected to be and nothing comes of it.

Still, off of the list they gave in the article, Houston would be the most likely landing spot. If Cleveland just up and releases him, expect him to be there before the ink is dry on the pink slip.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

We just need a vet backup like Foles. Our goal at the QB position should be to get Corral up to speed and see if he has what it takes before the next draft. Someone like Foles could start the first few games until Corral is ready. 

 

22 minutes ago, YourLastThought said:

Call me unexcited and a stick in the mud but I just don't have any enthusiasm for Mayfield. Hell I would rather just grab a vet like Cam or Fitzpatrick and let one of them start out and mentor and see if they can work Corral into some games and see how he grows.

I think before doing this they might want to see A bit more of Corral. If they see the body of work and deem it worth getting a non Sam QB then maybe they pull the trigger on a competent mentor.  Otherwise just ride it out with Sam. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I was watching a YouTube and it was said that scout and GM insider types were saying the NIL had killed rounds 4-7. I don’t know that I buy it, seems like it might for a year or maybe two but then those guys have to move on.  NCAA is apparently about to give 5 years of eligibility. It is gonna skew those entrants older maybe.   
    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...