Skip to content

Mike Holmgren: Browns had to trade up for Trent Richardson

Trent Richardson AP

The Cleveland Browns gave up three picks to move up one spot in the NFL draft and select Alabama running back Trent Richardson, a trade that has some analysts questioning the Browns’ decision because the Vikings (who already have running back Adrian Peterson) wouldn’t have drafted Richardson anyway. But Browns President Mike Holmgren said that if he hadn’t pulled the trigger on moving up to get Richardson, someone else would have leapfrogged the Browns and taken the player they wanted most.

Although the Browns obviously would prefer not to be in a position where they had a Top 5 pick and desperately needed an offensive playmaker, Holmgren said that once they were in that position, they had to do whatever it took to get the playmaker they wanted.

“You don’t want to be up there, really,” Holmgren said. “But we were up there so it was very, very important who we chose there. That’s why we targeted Trent. We didn’t want to lose him.”

It’s entirely possible that the Vikings were bluffing when they convinced the Browns to trade up, and that if the Browns hadn’t agreed to the trade the Vikings would have stayed at No. 3 and drafted Matt Kalil, whom they ended up drafting at No. 4 after the trade. So maybe the Browns wasted the fourth, fifth and seventh-round picks they gave the Vikings to move up one spot.

But Holmgren — who felt burned when he was out-maneuvered by the Redskins in his effort to trade up for Robert Griffin III — says he told General Manager Tom Heckert and coach Pat Shurmur that Richardson was too good to miss out on, and they needed to do whatever it took to get the pick to take him.

“My conversations with Pat and Tom were, ‘If you even think somebody is going to jump us, then what are we going to do to prevent that from happening?’ We had that conversation many, many times – how far were we willing to go to do this? Tom did a masterful job of setting that thing up,” Holmgren said. “I thought it was an excellent trade because we got the player who, Lord willing, stay healthy and all those things, is going to be a really fine player for us for a long time.”

Ultimately, whether this trade was the right move or not will depend on whether the Browns are right about how good Richardson is. If Richardson is an All-Pro running back, then it was worth the price to eliminate any doubt that they’d get him. If Richardson turns out to be no better a player than the next few guys off the board (Kalil, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne), then the Browns were foolish to trade up for him.

In other words, we really don’t know yet. But Holmgren is glad he didn’t take any chances.

Permalink 95 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Cleveland Browns, Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
95 Responses to “Mike Holmgren: Browns had to trade up for Trent Richardson”
  1. kathyisintheroom says: Apr 29, 2012 12:23 PM

    Say hello to another mediocre season fans.

  2. 7thlombardiontheway says: Apr 29, 2012 12:27 PM

    6 rings > you. Think about it for a while.

  3. skoobyfl says: Apr 29, 2012 12:27 PM

    Fish.

  4. 6ringofsteel says: Apr 29, 2012 12:29 PM

    Harrison needed fresh meat, now hes got it.

  5. Gordon says: Apr 29, 2012 12:31 PM

    Dumb move

  6. gking11 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:32 PM

    C’mon man, why does everyone think that the Vikings snookered the Browns? Did everybody forget that the Bucs AND the Rams were (presumably)interested in Richardson? Also, let’s not forget that one of those three picks traded away was originally the Falcons’ pick that was given to the Browns for last year’s mega-trade. So, in reality, the Browns only gave up two of their own lower round picks (one of which was recouped anyway in the Denver trade). At the end of the day? Just one lower round pick given up to nab Richardson. I’d say that’s a job nicely done by the Browns FO.

    Look, I’m an unapologetic Browns fan, and I’m glad we didn’t take any chances to get Richardson. You all know (and endlessly mock) how bad our offense has been. Don’t you think maybe, just maybe, the Browns did something right for once?

  7. kathyisintheroom says: Apr 29, 2012 12:33 PM

    Holmgren is worse than his predecessor.

    Some organizations are just destined to fail, over and over.
    2 of the most ridiculous moves seen in awhile was moving up 1 spot for Richardson then taking Weedon in the first round.

    The Falcons fleeced them, now they fleece themselves.

  8. heyguru1969 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:34 PM

    Congratulations to the Minnesota Vikings who made Holmgren BELIEVE he needed to give three picks to move up 1 spot. Criss Angel would be proud of such an illusion.

  9. stairwayto7 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:35 PM

    Typical Browns move! Enjoy 4-6 win season for the next 5 years plus!

  10. pdxpanther says: Apr 29, 2012 12:35 PM

    “a trade that has some analysts questioning the Browns’ decision because the Vikings (who already have running back Adrian Peterson) wouldn’t have drafted Richardson anyway.”

    Who are these analysts, because it was pretty well known among all analysts I watched/read that Tampa Bay was one team that was aggressively looking to leapfrog Cleveland.

  11. glowingstone says: Apr 29, 2012 12:36 PM

    IMO, the problem with Mike Holmgren is that he is better on the sidelines than he is in the front office. I really don’t believe Mike Holmgren is good at the personnel thing. I like the Browns and hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see the team making much headway with Holmgren as President.

  12. trinityeagle says: Apr 29, 2012 12:37 PM

    7thlombardiontheway says:
    Apr 29, 2012 12:27 PM
    6 rings > you. Think about it for a while.

    6 rings and a rapist as a quarterback.
    See I can post irrelevant things too.

  13. len462 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:38 PM

    7thlombardiontheway says: Apr 29, 2012 12:27 PM

    6 rings > you. Think about it for a while.

    ———————————————

    don’t forget that your qb is also the active nfl leader in sexual assaults…

    stay classy Pittsburg!

  14. galatians62 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:39 PM

    I thought the Skins overpaid for RGIII, just like the Raiders overpaid for Carson Palmer, but I get it. This is a QB league. Running backs don’t change the fortunes of a franchise. To make things worse, they drafted a QB who will be 29 in October – smh. I hope this works out for the Browns, but I don’t think it will.

  15. slowclyde86 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:39 PM

    Tampa clearly wanted trich. Once he was gone they traded back. What’s more, they traded up to get a Rb later on. If Cleveland wanted him, they needed to trade. Can you imagine if the browns lost out again? Good move on their part.

    That being said, if weeden can play the draft is a home run. If not, the franchise is set far, far back, once again. It’s all about weeden at this point.

  16. pjgrannan says: Apr 29, 2012 12:40 PM

    If the Redskins are universally praised for paying way more to move up for RG III then the Browns should at least be given the benefit of waiting to decide for moving up for Richardson. If RGIII is a star then the Redskins trade was worth it. Same with Richardson for the Browns.

    Besides – once you get past the concept of it being three picks they were not high picks (and Cleveland was loaded with picks this year). Using the old draft charts it was actually a bargain and under theoretical “value” Minn should be criticized. That would not be fair because they obviously got their man and picked up extra picks for their trouble.

    Tampa’s actions trading out of five immediately after the Browns traded up and then trading back in to round 1 for Doug Martin pretty clearly indicate the Browns were not the only suitors for Richardson.

  17. johnnyjagfan says: Apr 29, 2012 12:40 PM

    Great RB. Give him the rock. He’s the man.

  18. 805_9er says: Apr 29, 2012 12:40 PM

    I can’t fault them on this trade. If Richardson is the player they want then go get him.

    It’s all the other things they do like the McCoy stuff that makes Cleveland so “Special”…

  19. kathyisintheroom says: Apr 29, 2012 12:42 PM

    Meant VIKINGS fleeced them,

  20. gbiscottagecheesefatties says: Apr 29, 2012 12:42 PM

    as a Vikings fan I am very happy this trade happened, it guaranteed us a free pass to move up in the first round to get our safety (which every team in the league knew we NEEDED to get)….. I think the Brown were pretty smart tho to make sure they got their guy. If Tampa was seriously interested in moving into the #3 spot, the Browns made the right move and honestly didn’t give up THAT much to do so.

    The Browns wanted RGIII or Richardson, at least they got one of them…. this would have been a FAILED draft if they let Tampa leapfrog them.

    Vikings get an A+ from that trade…

    Browns get a B. They got their guy and gave up 4/5/7. they still had a few comp picks to draft with in those rounds anyhow.

  21. wludford says: Apr 29, 2012 12:43 PM

    I think there was a good chance the Bucs would’ve moved up to get Richardson, who was their top choice. After the Browns traded up, the Bucs, knowing they lost T Rich, moved down. The only one who knows the real answer to that question is the Bucs GM. I don’t think the Rams were going to move up, and I’m pretty sure the Vikings didn’t want to move down past #5.

  22. ampats says: Apr 29, 2012 12:45 PM

    As a fan of an AFCE team, I say good move by Holmgren to ensure the Browns get Richardson who no matter what Jim Brown thinks is one of the more special RB’s to come out in the draft.

    I feel bad for McCoy because the Browns did not give him a chance with any weapons.

  23. joecoz17 says: Apr 29, 2012 12:46 PM

    Not a Browns fan, but from the outside looking in Holmgren is looking like a failure.

    Cut your losses now browns.

  24. NoobTubeTV says: Apr 29, 2012 12:46 PM

    Dammit! No one gives a flying PUCK about T-Rich… it was a good pick!…

    Weeden and John Hughes are what people are flipping cars about. Try and explain those decisions!

  25. tiproast says: Apr 29, 2012 12:48 PM

    I’m not a Browns fan, but I think they did the right thing here.

    They entered the draft with 13 picks. Let’s say they keep them all, and hit on every one of them. All those new guys make it through camp and are on the opening day roster.

    How well with a team that 25% rookies do in this league? Has the youngest team in the league ever won a Super Bowl?

    Sure, there are guys drafted in later rounds that are good values, but most of the really good players in the league are drafted in the first two rounds.

  26. dbtime says: Apr 29, 2012 12:52 PM

    Steeler fans need to go away.

  27. ratbastardshanahandjob says: Apr 29, 2012 12:53 PM

    What did anyone think the horizontally challenged Pinocchio Holmgren would say??

    I feel sorry for Browns fans. As a long suffering Raider fan. We know 1st hand what happens when someone Clueless is calling all the shots. At least Holngren can be fired and he’s not the co DC…….

  28. citizenstrange says: Apr 29, 2012 12:53 PM

    I say it was a good move, especially if Richardson was THE ONE they wanted and did not want whoever was left to them after he was picked.

    Sometimes you have to be aggressive and really nail down the pick/player you want.

    IMO — It would have been a bad move if they gave up a second or third, but to give up a fourth and then two picks (5th and 7th) who probably wouldn’t make the team anyway is OK.

  29. djigel says: Apr 29, 2012 12:56 PM

    “6 rings > you. Think about it for a while.”

    ——————————————————-
    A few comments:

    1) Didn’t really have to think about it for a while… it is a pretty simple equation to comprehend.

    2) I have one ring. My wedding ring. 6 is still greater than 1, but I am fine with that.

    3) A more appropriate equation would be:
    “Pittsburgh Steelers’ 6 rings > the Browns 0 Rings… that is true.

    4) You are not or have not been a part of the Steelers organization, therefore, you also have 0 Rings.

    5) Ergo: You = Browns.

    Fair enough?

  30. kathyisintheroom says: Apr 29, 2012 12:56 PM

    It’s bad enough that the Redskins outsmart you to get RGIII. But then you get snookered by Rick Speilman too?
    How many more examples do you need to be convinced that the Walrus is not going to put a championship team together?

    Wake up Browns fans, you have been dreaming for decades and are STILL “waiting til next year”

    The most pathetic and inept team in the league

  31. pmars64 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:02 PM

    @ 6ringofsteel
    C’mon, man, everybody knows Harrison is getting long in the tooth. Nobody is afraid of him anymore. And Richardson is low enough to the ground that it’s more likely that he will launch head-first into Harrison instead of the other way around.

    As a Browns fan, my complaint about the draft is that they still lack overall team speed. The U WR in the 4th round does not impress at 170 lbs. I like several picks, but the lack of speed – after 3 Heckert drafts – is obvious. With Weeden’s growing pains and still several holes on the team, it does look like another 10+ loss season, although I do think they’ll be more competitive.

  32. nikkodawg says: Apr 29, 2012 1:03 PM

    Too bad Jerry Angelo isn’t the Browns GM. He would have agreed to terms of the trade and then forget to call it in. (See Bears Ravens non trade last year) Then the clock runs out on the Vikes and Browns draft Trent before Vikes even realized what happened.

  33. samoanjungle says: Apr 29, 2012 1:03 PM

    Easy fix for that that Holmgren should have thought of:
    If the Vikes say they are trading just tell them you have an offer to trade your spot to someone to someone who wants Khalil.
    Kinda stupid to give up 3 picks on a possible bluff when Blackmon and Claiborne would have been available if someone took Richardson.

  34. KIR says: Apr 29, 2012 1:05 PM

    History says that 4 years from now over half of the 1st. round picks will be out of the league or considered bust and history says that other than 2004 only 1 or NONE of the quarterbacks will be a franchise QB. Fact

  35. billsfan1 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:06 PM

    idk… didnt they have 13 picks anyways? even if richardson ends up sucking, i dont think this is a big deal. its not like trading all your pics for Ricky Williams or anything. They still had 10 picks…

  36. gator2006 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:08 PM

    This draft just shows that tanking is a way to rip the bandaid off quickly. Lose an extra game, garner 4 more draft picks. Crazy. Tanking is not just for the first overall pick anymore.

  37. jrmehle says: Apr 29, 2012 1:09 PM

    At this point, it appears Spielman pulled a fast one over on Holmgren. Of course with any draft day decision, you never know until years later. It’s also worthy to note how much more the #2 pick brought to the Rams (3 1sts, 2nd).

  38. stiffarm37 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:10 PM

    It was a good trade. Richardson is the guy they wanted, and they gave up a 4, 5, and a 7 to ensure they got him. A 4, 5, and 7 is nothing for 100% certainty you’re going to get the guy you want in the top 5.

    Evaluating the trade years down the road is garbage. It’s a good trade. Whether or not the player lives up to expectations is a separate issue.

  39. bigdawgy54 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:14 PM

    PDXPANTHER….You said it very well. I agree!
    I now live in the Tampa Bay area. And I know there was a “LOT” of talk about the Buccaneers doing what they have to do to trade up for Trent Richardson.
    That doesn’t mean that they would have but, it justifies Holmgren’s need to mandate the trade to insure they got Richardson.
    Also, I think the Weeden acquisition is genius. This guy has all the tools and a cannon arm. And, throws the football extremely accurate. Has top shelf leadership skills in the huddle and locker room. Remember, Kurt Warner, for one, never started until he was 28. I have to applaud H & H for taking both Richardson and Weeden in the first round.
    GO BROWNS!!!

  40. thcnote says: Apr 29, 2012 1:17 PM

    trinityeagle says:
    Apr 29, 2012 12:37 PM
    7thlombardiontheway says:
    Apr 29, 2012 12:27 PM
    6 rings > you. Think about it for a while.

    6 rings and a rapist as a quarterback.
    See I can post irrelevant things too.
    ——
    I like it.lets keep a count since the only thing dumb Steelers fans can ever say is 6 rings. 6 rings for the Steelers and 2 rapes for Ben. Wonder which one will get to 7 first. My money is on Ben.

  41. jackblackshairyback says: Apr 29, 2012 1:20 PM

    If you really think Heckert(not Holmgren) made a bad move here, but the Redskins made a good move by trading 31sts and a 2nd for agriffin, you’re either a hypocrite or an idiot. Three late round picks, that were extra to begin with, was a small price to pay. We all knew Tampa wanted him and Minnesota wanted to trade down. The big fear was that Minnesota would want the #22 pick. They didnt.

    As far as the comparison with the Raiders trading for Palmer, there is none. Even after giving up those 3 picks, the Browns still had twice as many picks as the Raiders did.

  42. thcnote says: Apr 29, 2012 1:21 PM

    The Browns should have just done what the Rams did and stayed put to get their guy. It worked out so well for the Rams. If they stayed put and missed on Trent everybody would have said that that was a mistake. Can’t win either way. Good move Browns.

  43. KIR says: Apr 29, 2012 1:21 PM

    All of these draftniks and so called draft experts are grading this years draft. lol Lets look at their draft grades for teams 4 or 5 years ago. So that we can truly evaluate the best GM’s and the best TV and print draft analyst.

  44. seanx40 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:23 PM

    Holmgren should be fired for that first round. Cosmic levels of stupidity. Matt Millen levels of stupidity.

  45. th56 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:23 PM

    All the lower round pcks in the draft won’t add up to one great player.
    You have a shot at the player you want, you do what it takes to get him. I can just imagine all the whining from the fans If they let someone jump ahead of them.

  46. gb4mn0 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:23 PM

    Who cares? The vikequeefs blow!

  47. 72goober11 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:24 PM

    Glad all the attention is on Richardson and not the wasted 22nd pick on the 29yr old QB….whew…

  48. dscol715 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:24 PM

    And this is why the seahawks were terrible for years until they kicked Holmgren out of the front office and went to the super bowl afterwards. Great coach, terrible GM. Everyone on the planet knew the Vikings were drafting Khalil and would only trade down if they knew they could still get him. The Vikings preyed on Big Mike’s desperation and squeezed some extra picks out of him. Well done.

  49. ken0west says: Apr 29, 2012 1:26 PM

    I dont get the picked and especially the trade. If you polled NFL GMS on Barron vs Richardson I think Barron would be the favorite.

  50. rcali says: Apr 29, 2012 1:30 PM

    Holmgren, learning on the job. Browns are scared of their own shadows these days. Losing Trent would have meant that they just got another guy at another position of need. They had plenty of positions of need.

  51. themackstrong says: Apr 29, 2012 1:31 PM

    Mike Holmgren is a football legend as a coach. He is everything you could ask for and all the players & fans love him. As a front office/ GM status he was always a step behind in Seattle. We missed on a bunch of first round picks that he lost those rights and was only coaching in his last bit of time in Seattle. Last year I believe he pushed for McCoy and this year the Vikings GM did everything in their power to make it appear they were trading out gave them the upper hand.

  52. theytukrjobs says: Apr 29, 2012 1:34 PM

    I’m a Vikings fan and obviously for them to get the guy they were going to take anyways, plus some picks, it was a good move.

    But I also reject the notion that the Browns were snookered. According to most trade value charts out there, which NFL teams loosely follow, the Browns actually came ahead. It should have “cost” them 400 points to move up a spot and instead it “cost” them less than 200 points.

    The reason the Vikings gave them a discount is because trading to the Browns, and only the Browns, ensured nobody could slip in and take Kalil. If they traded with the Bucs it is conceivable that another team would have traded up with the Browns.

    If the Vikes had traded to the Bucs they would have been getting a 2nd rounder most likely as part of the deal. People have to keep in mind that a 4th, 5th, and 7th round pick is not that high of a price.

  53. therealjr says: Apr 29, 2012 1:37 PM

    Bad idea, should have taken the best available at pick 4 or even traded down.

    Elite RB are key to winning in NFL since when now?

  54. bstras2809 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:38 PM

    The TRich deal shouldn’t even be talked about. EVERY NFL team would give up 3 meaning picks (out of 13!) to get their homerun guy. How come the Browns are getting crap for FINALLY doing what the fans wanted and what is RIGHT on the football side of the house? The trades in this year’s draft proved the Skins gave up the world for RG3 and everyone’s talking about this?? Crazy.

    Now, Weeden with #22?? I like the guy but come on.

  55. denverdave3 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:38 PM

    Once upon a time the Browns and Broncos (my team) were the class of the AFC, but now they are both perennial bottom dwellers. I see them both going 5-11 or so this year.

    The Broncs blew it when they hired a snot-nosed kid to be their coach and probably won’t recover for a few more years. Meanwhile the Brownies don’t do much of anything correctly.

  56. digitaldonnie says: Apr 29, 2012 1:39 PM

    At least the Browns have a RB. How about Pittsburgh? Medenhall? Ha. Looks like the aging stiller will be at the bottom of the AFC North this year. I can’t wait for Richardson to run straight thru Harrison.

  57. grandpoopah says: Apr 29, 2012 1:39 PM

    The best case comparison for Richardson is Steven Jackson. A good player who posts respectable numbers on a crap team against constant 8 man fronts and never wins more than 7 or 8 games a year. In Cleveland’s defense, they probably would have blown this three picks on practice squad fodder anyway. I would be surprised if the Browns finish any better than last in their division even once in the next 4 years.

  58. gooboy6 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:40 PM

    When you really think about it , Vikes probably were the ones that left draft capital on the table on this deal…

  59. digitaldonnie says: Apr 29, 2012 1:42 PM

    Oh and the chances that the player MINN took with those pocks will make the team??? 1% at best

  60. jaylord40 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:46 PM

    I haven’t heard an analyst say where Weeden would have been drafted if he were 21 or 22 years old. Would he be a top ten choice? Was there anything other than his age which was a negative? If it’s only his age and the Browns think he can play now, then i say go for it. If he does it for 5-6 years, oh well ! Then we look for another QB.
    If not, then the pick was a total waste, as i’m sure about 50% of the choices will be anyway.

  61. drunkenagitator says: Apr 29, 2012 1:50 PM

    He’s not really that good.

  62. jaylord40 says: Apr 29, 2012 1:50 PM

    Hmmmm! Tampa selected RB in the 1st round. Maybe they did want to trade up for Richardson. I can only imagine what would be said in blogs if the Browns had stayed put and lost Richardson.

  63. thejuddstir says: Apr 29, 2012 1:56 PM

    Not a Browns fan but they absolutely did the right thing. They would’ve looked very foolish had the Bucs or Rams leapfrogged them and drafted Richardson. At this stage, any player drafted has an element of risk but after losing out on RG3, the Browns had to make sure they got they top offensive player on the board. I think the Browns actually had a very good all around draft as did the Giants, Vikings , Pats and Bengals.

  64. rwmilli says: Apr 29, 2012 1:56 PM

    No worrys browns fans, I don’t even like them, but any TRUE football fan can piece together that the bucs wanted to make the move for him. And anyone who thinks running backs can’t change a franchise, watch some football please :) there are numerous great backs in this league that still CARRY the ball and make plays to give their teams a win….if anything taking Richardson will help weeden succeed because you know have a back who can relieve some of the pressure that mans going to face

  65. dawglb says: Apr 29, 2012 1:58 PM

    It was a necessary move. They ultimately got who they wanted. I’m not real concerned about losing a 4th, 5th and 7th round pick, in a year that they had many extra picks. The 7th round pick is irrelevant . Browns HAVE to make moves like that to get their fan base excited. Suppose they lost RGIII, and TRI? Holmgren would have gotten blasted….

  66. realitycheck21 says: Apr 29, 2012 2:01 PM

    The Browns braintrust is anything but. What else is Holmgren going to say? Richardson wasn’t THE player they wanted. RG III was. They took Trent to keep TB from getting him all BS aside. Holmgren lost whatever touch he may have had years ago. The team has multiple needs, requiring multiple picks in order to address those needs. Simple math. Giving away the farm to meet one need is not only ridiculous, it’s completely irresponsible. Shades of Ditka-Williams circle jerk from years past. This move much like the other, is going to haunt Cleveland. The ghosts at Franklin Castle will be heading over to Holmgren’s house now.

  67. jesse1834 says: Apr 29, 2012 2:02 PM

    Big deal so the Vikings got a Wal-mart greeter, bell hop and a grocery bagger and the Browns got the player they wanted.

  68. dawsonleery says: Apr 29, 2012 2:07 PM

    It was all in their head. No way Vikings were gonna move out of the #3 spot and pass on a franchise LT.

  69. jluns275 says: Apr 29, 2012 2:11 PM

    After Luck & RGIII, Wheeden was obviously the best QB remaining. The question of his age is rather simply answered with another question:
    Just how long would you expect he would play if he was 22?
    Remember, he hasn’t been playing football 6 more years than everyone else, he was playing baseball-largely non-contact.
    Wheeden has already done the whole rookie thing, is married, owns a home, & can realistically appreciate a 1st round NFL salary after have ridden buses around the countryside to & from minor league baseball games.
    If I were an NFL GM, I would gladly give up 6 years in age to gain 6 years of maturity & a little wisdom from my QB. Virtually all young QB’s end up holding a clipboard for at least a year or two anyway before being deemed ready for the big time. Colt McCoy would surely have benefitted from that (along with a few decent offensive weapons to distribute the ball to). What use would the player’s youth of 22 be if he were too immature or ‘green’ to immediately start, devolop &/or win the starting job?

  70. mediasloppy says: Apr 29, 2012 2:11 PM

    Typical naysayers. If the Bucks traded up we would be reading about how much it would of cost them to do it.

    Then we would be reading. How could Holmgren lose the player they wanted most in the draft, when all they had to do was give up a few later round picks for him…

    Hindsight…

  71. ameagle98 says: Apr 29, 2012 2:15 PM

    @7thlombardiontheway – Really? Gotta beat Tebow first! D’oh!

  72. bartpkelly says: Apr 29, 2012 2:33 PM

    IF someone leaped over them to get Richardson they would have been left with
    1) an OT in Kalil that they don’t need an dyou don’t draft a franchise LT to play RT
    2) A WR which is the best this year but isn’t better than Jones or Green was last year so they would have drafted him way too high
    3) a CB which was a great player but not a need as they have a top 10 defensive secondary

    So you are looking at them losing out on a great player they need and hoping and praying that someone will trade with them, but that just means moving down and getting players that aren’t game changers.

    They needed to do it.

  73. leatherface2012 says: Apr 29, 2012 2:41 PM

    does any of this matter, since aaron rodgers will lead the pack to 14-2 season (with refs help) and win the superbowl again? oh wait the giants blew them out nevermind

  74. rocketdogsports says: Apr 29, 2012 2:43 PM

    Browns move up to get the guy they want. OK, good move.

    After that, the decisions to take a QB of any age and a DT before taking the WR they desperatly had to have can only be described as moronic. Then, the Browns don’t take any more WRs, WTF?

    September will be very interesting as Holmgren, Heckert and Shurmer are all in on this draft. Hopefully, they are rgiht. But I, and a lot of other Browns fans are skeptical.

    We shall see.

  75. fdugrad says: Apr 29, 2012 3:02 PM

    Holmgren, Seattle GM: Koren Robinson and Jeremy Stevens….Good luck Cleveland!!

  76. briang123 says: Apr 29, 2012 3:04 PM

    I know exactly what the Browns should have done and if they should have drafted Richardson. I will tell you a about it as soon as I see how everything shakes out. Signed, typical EPSN and NFL Network talking head.

  77. tncm333 says: Apr 29, 2012 3:26 PM

    They gave up 100 points in draft stock to cover a 400 point difference between 3/4. If anything they got a cheap deal.

    Too bad Tampa wasn’t so cheap. Couldn’t cough up anything more than 100 points to get a player they coveted.

  78. couldntthinkofaname says: Apr 29, 2012 3:38 PM

    The Browns should have just done what the Rams did and stayed put to get their guy. It worked out so well for the Rams. If they stayed put and missed on Trent everybody would have said that that was a mistake. Can’t win either way. Good move Browns.

    ____________________________

    I’m sorry the Rams didn’t give you the second overall pick, Cleveland loser. Last I saw, Brockers was a pretty good player. Didn’t really hurt them. They didn’t give up a bunch of picks to take a running back who’ll spend the next several years getting stuffed at the line because you have no QB or WRs.

    But go ahead and rip other teams. It’s what makes SuckTown what it is. I’ll enjoy watching Balt. and Pitt knock your little Tim Couch, Jr.’s teeth down his throat four times this year.

    Hey, great third round pick, too. LOL Typical Browns draft.

  79. rickytheblackhawk says: Apr 29, 2012 3:55 PM

    Great trade VIKES!!!

  80. tluke25 says: Apr 29, 2012 4:15 PM

    Um, no the didn’t have to trade up for Trent Richardson. The worst pick of the draft. The 3rd pick is worth atleast 2 first rounders and they picked a guy who will only be good for 4-5 seasons tops and by season 5 or 6 he will be playing for a different team and only carrying the ball 7 times a game.

    Once again, the Browns just don’t get it. It’s a shame because it just makes the AFC Central boring, because its always the Steelers/Ravens show. This team needs to learn how to be smart and understand how to approach the draft. The front office in Cleveland is just terrible.

  81. ballboy48 says: Apr 29, 2012 4:35 PM

    I think it’s funny how Steelers fans talk junk, but fail to realize their team was terrible from 1933-1971! What’s that 38 years? I love how they want to talk about their six championships, blah, blah, blah…If you want to talk about history, look at Cleveland’s eight! Nuff said! Go back to you cabins in W. Va, trolls!

  82. themage78 says: Apr 29, 2012 4:44 PM

    How many analysts would still lambaste the Browns if they didn’t trade up and someone like Tampa Bay (who traded back into the 1st round for a RB) leapfrogged them and took Richardson?
    The Browns had a glut of picks, and they made sure they got the Home run guy instead of getting one pretty good guy and 3 more meh players. Tell me, how many 4th, 5th and 7th rounders become elite players? not many.

  83. waltdawg says: Apr 29, 2012 4:49 PM

    Sure you did Mike…Sure you did

  84. rolli1967 says: Apr 29, 2012 5:04 PM

    hey couldntthinkofaname becauseIhaveno brain: find it HILAREOUS for a Rams fan to be talking smack about being a loser. Rams=LOSERS year after year since Kurt Warner left town. Feel sorry for Bradford that he ended up in such a sorry organization, well at least he’s laughing all the way to the bank. Rams owner should sell the team and new owner move it back to L.A where the the once proud organization belongs.

  85. ballboy48 says: Apr 29, 2012 5:05 PM

    If these 4, 5, and 7 round picks turn out to be elite, then I guess it was a bad deal! Until that happens, I’m glad T. Rich is a Cleveland Brown!

  86. stew48 says: Apr 29, 2012 5:08 PM

    Judging from the expert comments here, it is clear you do not understand how to build a team. Aside from QB, a dummie like Paul Brown started with a center. Remember? There is no explanation offered here that justifies Richardson other that the Browns wanted to make a big PR statement. And, I mean, none. I think only one person noted the lifttime of a RB vs OL, DL, LB, CB, Safety, etc. And, if a lot of you spent your effort thinking about football and not maligning another person, at least you would benefit.

  87. sezzu says: Apr 29, 2012 5:32 PM

    Everyone bitchin about Weeden’s age. Roger Staubuck didn’t start his pro career until he was 27..How’d that work out??

  88. realskipbayless says: Apr 29, 2012 5:33 PM

    Richardson and Weeden were good picks. Give them a couple years to build around them and the browns will be solid.

  89. realskipbayless says: Apr 29, 2012 5:42 PM

    tluke25 says: Apr 29, 2012 4:15 PM

    Once again, the Browns just don’t get it. It’s a shame because it just makes the AFC Central boring, because its always the Steelers/Ravens show. This team needs to learn how to be smart and understand how to approach the draft. The front office in Cleveland is just terrible.

    AFC central? Have u not watched football in like 10 years. It’s the afc north and u say its the ravens/Steelers show not really the bengals made playoffs last year also. It’s one of the best divisions in the league.

  90. criticaldsj says: Apr 29, 2012 6:01 PM

    Holmgren pops up again, trying clumsily to justify a move after the fact. He’s pretty bad at this.

    Still, in this instance, I think he did the right thing. He moved up one spot to ensure that Tampa (a team that traded back into round one to take a running back in case you missed it) did not leap frog them to get Richardson, a guy who is going to have to be the centerpiece of their offense this season, regardless of which bad QB starts under center.

    They had 13 picks. All 13 of those picks were not going to make the roster, so spending a few to make sure they got Richardson wasn’t a terrible decision. Now, did they over pay to ensure they got Richardson? That’s arguable, and on that I lean toward yes. But was making the decision to trade up to ensure they got their guy as insurance a bad call? Not really.

  91. backindasaddle says: Apr 29, 2012 6:02 PM

    Classic case of somebody out-smarting themselves. Dumb Dumb Dumb. Just stay put and pick him if he falls to you. If not you pick the next guy on your board. The best guys managing the draft understand that as a rule you can not and do not fall in love with a specific player. Holmgren has been around a long time and he should know better. I also question the wisdom of drafting a running back so high to begin with.

  92. brownsfan5505 says: Apr 29, 2012 7:01 PM

    Great picks they get a beast in trich to play in the afc north which is the big boy division and you need a tough rb and then got a top 10 qb if he isnt 28 guy is very accurate n very strong arm. I like mccy bc hes a good kid but good kids dont win games good qbs do and weeden has the arm strenth and accuracy to play n the cleveland weather. Im excited to see how we look this yr. i think heckert is a smart gm

  93. pacodawg says: Apr 29, 2012 7:27 PM

    Stephen hill in the second why? Caught 29 passes his senior year and is fast, big deal. My neighbors kid is faster than hill and caught more balls as a junior in high school. H and h know more than u I am sure of that

  94. 7to10for6allday says: Apr 29, 2012 8:17 PM

    @7thlombardiontheway

    You’re a retard!

  95. brownsbacker44 says: Apr 30, 2012 1:49 AM

    Fact is The Browns had a good draft and a lot of us are happy with round one. They can’t fix everything at once. If we win even 2 more games this year it’s progress.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!