Why should the Browns accept this trade? We'd be lucky to get their 3rd. No way we get a first for him
Do to their poor history of drafting a QB.
Sam Bradford got a first. Cutler's contract is good till 2021. 5 years of average QB play ( Which the Browns haven't had for decades ) all at a pretty cheap price.
Why would the Browns want Cutler as their starting QB for the next 1-3 years? To get security?
Bradford got a late first, not the possible 1st Overall. Huge difference.
To get a stable franchise QB for the next 5 years.
Bradford also isn't better than Jay.
Seeing how that organization has drafted QBs with no luck would it be that bad if they gave away a first for a QB who has been better than their QBs the past decade?
Post by germansbombedph on Oct 10, 2016 3:17:24 GMT -6
Bradford was available and younger. The Vikes pick will be late in the 1st (20th or later)
You want that Pass Rusher badly... why shouldn't the Browns want him that bad? Why should they give him up for Cutler... you know, that's exactly what you want. Cutler for that pick. Why shouldn't they want it? We gont get a 1st for Cutler, not a Top5 pick for sure
Bradford was available and younger. The Vikes pick will be late in the 1st (20th or later)
You want that Pass Rusher badly... why shouldn't the Browns want him that bad? Why should they give him up for Cutler... you know, that's exactly what you want. Cutler for that pick. Why shouldn't they want it? We gont get a 1st for Cutler, not a Top5 pick for sure
Post by germansbombedph on Oct 10, 2016 3:27:33 GMT -6
their 2nd is the best we can dream for him. That'll be basically a late 1st. You can't compare it to the Vikes. They were desperate to Win. The Browns can tank after their start to the season.
their 2nd is the best we can dream for him. That'll be basically a late 1st. You can't compare it to the Vikes. They were desperate to Win. The Browns can tank after their start to the season.
Seeing that the Browns have 2 1st round picks and 2 2nd round picks would it truly hurt them?
Post by germansbombedph on Oct 10, 2016 3:53:21 GMT -6
It wouldn't, but then again why would they want Cutler if they can build a new Team with their staff that isn't there since forever? Imagine if the Browns have Cutler and we have Hoyer injured and Barkley and Fales but you add a 1st and 2nd to us.
Would you want us to add a Turnover and injury prone QB at the Age of 33 while we could just suck enough to get a 1st round Talent Pass Rusher and QB added with more help in the 2nd round? I wouldn't. If they want a QB for a 1st, they could ask Gase for Tannehill.
The only reason the Browns would want Cutler is b/c they have a bad front office. They just tried to get a vet starting QB to solve their issues, gave him a decent contract, now you're going to bring in another vet? I don't think they'll look to do it again, they can use their 2 firsts to get a qb and a pass rusher, and then use the next 2 picks in the 2nd to continue to build. And there ya have it, bob's your uncle; they've gotten better if they can hit in the draft and they didn't need to trade one away for a not a franchise qb.
This trade is only good for the Bears. I don't think you'd get a 2nd for Cutler.
