(04-18-2017, 05:08 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: .......and he makes sure everyone knows how many dollars he donates via a website, of his own, that details to the last penny and to whom.  Who does that? Also, from what I've read, he wasn't doing much until he started facing backlash. I will give him props for actually donating.....but it reeks of a PR move. Oh well, any money to help the less fortunate is a good thing, regardless of the motive.

Narcissus?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-18-2017, 05:12 PM)BenZoo2 Wrote: Narcissus?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kinda feels that way, doesn't it?

(04-18-2017, 05:08 PM)Wyche Wrote: .......and he makes sure everyone knows how many dollars he donates via a website, of his own, that details to the last penny and to whom.  Who does that?  Also, from what I've read, he wasn't doing much until he started facing backlash.  I will give him props for actually donating.....but it reeks of a PR move.  Oh well, any money to help the less fortunate is a good thing, regardless of the motive.

Who cares if he publicizes it? He's helped his community plenty before that, but having some positive PR after receiving unnecessary backlash is the furthest thing from a problem. Fact is still people shouldn't even be worried about it still. He'll be a backup QB to a usually healthy QB. But if he does have to play he will provide the highest explosiveness factor to the offense which is needed to have a chance if you are forced to go to your backup QB

(04-18-2017, 02:21 PM)jj22 Wrote: Offseason programs have started. Trade in division is highly unlikely now. No way they give him updated playbook and offense 2017 plans just for him to take to Cleveland. Time to move on from McCarron trade folks. It's not happening.

Right, no player can be traded after playbooks are handed out.

Thatis why there are NEVER any draft day trades.

(04-19-2017, 09:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Right, no player can be traded after playbooks are handed out.

Thatis why there are NEVER any draft day trades.

I'm talking a qb within the division. What qb has? Why would they after he knows the 2017 season plans? So you really think they are just going to give him the new playbook, new calls, let him sit in classroom meetings, just to take the info to Cleveland? Even you know better than that Fred. If the trade was happening to Cleveland it would have happened by now. You don't give a qb to a division rival after putting them through offseason work and preparing them for the 2017 season.

Now name a qb traded within a division after the offseason program had begun......

(04-07-2017, 04:38 PM)Big Boss Wrote: The Browns wouldn't give up a first round pick (the Bengals' asking price) if they were only going to use McCarron as a stop-gag while they develop a rookie.  If they trade for McCarron, they're not drafting a QB early.

Conventional wisdom says you're right. But this is the Browns. They go through QB's like a Chipotle bathroom goes through toilet paper. 

(04-19-2017, 10:10 AM)Ravage Wrote: Conventional wisdom says you're right. But this is the Browns. They go through QB's like a Chipotle bathroom goes through toilet paper. 

Most teams do until they find a good one. Until then, finding a good one consumes your franchise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-18-2017, 05:17 PM)eoxyod Wrote: Who cares if he publicizes it? He's helped his community plenty before that, but having some positive PR after receiving unnecessary backlash is the furthest thing from a problem. Fact is still people shouldn't even be worried about it still. He'll be a backup QB to a usually healthy QB. But if he does have to play he will provide the highest explosiveness factor to the offense which is needed to have a chance if you are forced to go to your backup QB

Meh....it's kinda douchey in my opinion, but differing opinions make the world go round.  He's not very accurate these days, he got outplayed by Blaine Gabbert.  Pass.

(04-19-2017, 10:36 AM)Wyche Wrote: Meh....it's kinda douchey in my opinion, but differing opinions make the world go round.  He's not very accurate these days, he got outplayed by Blaine Gabbert.  Pass.

He never really was that accurate. He just has a big arm and can scramble.

(04-19-2017, 10:44 AM)ochocincos Wrote: He never really was that accurate. He just has a big arm and can scramble.

True that....as of late, it just seems he's exceptionally inaccurate.

(04-19-2017, 09:26 AM)jj22 Wrote: I'm talking a qb within the division. What qb has? Why would they after he knows the 2017 season plans? So you really think they are just going to give him the new playbook, new calls, let him sit in classroom meetings, just to take the info to Cleveland? Even you know better than that Fred. If the trade was happening to Cleveland it would have happened by now. You don't give a qb to a division rival after putting them through offseason work and preparing them for the 2017 season.

Now name a qb traded within a division after the offseason program had begun......

McNabb was traded to the Redskins on April 4th back in 2010. That's the closest example I can think of, but as far as draft day trades involving QBs, I'd say they're very rare. I've been saying all along that McCarron is likely staying a Bengal. I guess people won't believe it until it actually happens. People are just overrating his value. He's been available for almost 2 full offseasons, yet there hasn't even been a serious rumor involving him. 99% of the trade talk has been going on right here.

(04-19-2017, 09:26 AM)jj22 Wrote: I'm talking a qb within the division. What qb has? Why would they after he knows the 2017 season plans? So you really think they are just going to give him the new playbook, new calls, let him sit in classroom meetings, just to take the info to Cleveland? Even you know better than that Fred. If the trade was happening to Cleveland it would have happened by now. You don't give a qb to a division rival after putting them through offseason work and preparing them for the 2017 season.

Now name a qb traded within a division after the offseason program had begun......

It's not a deal breaker at all and I am pretty sure Hue Jackson already has a good understanding of our playbook and schemes.

(04-19-2017, 12:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: McNabb was traded to the Redskins on April 4th back in 2010. That's the closest example I can think of, but as far as draft day trades involving QBs, I'd say they're very rare. I've been saying all along that McCarron is likely staying a Bengal. I guess people won't believe it until it actually happens. People are just overrating his value. He's been available for almost 2 full offseasons, yet there hasn't even been a serious rumor involving him. 99% of the trade talk has been going on right here.

Lapham said the Bengals were offered a 2 and a 4 last offseason for Mcarron. I wouldn't be surprised if he would stay here but there probably is interest in him this offseason from other teams.

(04-19-2017, 12:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: McNabb was traded to the Redskins on April 4th back in 2010. That's the closest example I can think of, but as far as draft day trades involving QBs, I'd say they're very rare. I've been saying all along that McCarron is likely staying a Bengal. I guess people won't believe it until it actually happens. People are just overrating his value. He's been available for almost 2 full offseasons, yet there hasn't even been a serious rumor involving him. 99% of the trade talk has been going on right here.

Or the more likely scenario - 

The Bengals don't want to move him and are asking for more than the Vikes had to give up to get Bradford.

And would require even more if trading him to the Browns.

Let me know when you establish a link between the number of trade rumors surrounding a player and the actual number of trades that were offered.

The simple fact is - you don't have a clue what's been offered and rejected.

(04-19-2017, 12:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: McNabb was traded to the Redskins on April 4th back in 2010. That's the closest example I can think of, but as far as draft day trades involving QBs, I'd say they're very rare. I've been saying all along that McCarron is likely staying a Bengal. I guess people won't believe it until it actually happens. People are just overrating his value. He's been available for almost 2 full offseasons, yet there hasn't even been a serious rumor involving him. 99% of the trade talk has been going on right here.

You had me unti 99% comment AJM trade rumors have been on NFL sites everywhere and ESPN. I do agree it is hyped a lot more here, but those rumors/suggestions are out there.

(04-19-2017, 11:49 PM)J24 Wrote: Lapham said the Bengals were offered a 2 and a 4 last offseason for Mcarron. I wouldn't be surprised if he would stay here but there probably is interest in him this offseason from other teams.

Jim O has said this was false multiple times.

(04-20-2017, 03:24 AM)BigSeph Wrote: Or the more likely scenario - 

The Bengals don't want to move him and are asking for more than the Vikes had to give up to get Bradford.

And would require even more if trading him to the Browns.

Let me know when you establish a link between the number of trade rumors surrounding a player and the actual number of trades that were offered.

The simple fact is - you don't have a clue what's been offered and rejected.

You don't have a clue about anything either, but it sure doesn't stop you from serving up your opinion. I'm just giving mine right back. Sorry that annoys you.

Btw, obviously I disagree that it's "likely" that the Bengals are turning down offers that exceed the 1st and a 4th (that could become a 3rd or 2nd rounder) for Bradford.

(04-20-2017, 12:01 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You had me unti 99% comment AJM trade rumors have been on NFL sites everywhere and ESPN. I do agree it is hyped a lot more here, but those rumors/suggestions are out there.

They're more suggestions than actual rumors, and he's mostly mentioned behind options like Jay Cutler and Jimmy G. 

That's why I said 99%. I have seen him mentioned here and there, but the hype from the national media is minuscule compared to here.

(04-20-2017, 03:24 AM)BigSeph Wrote: Or the more likely scenario - 

The Bengals don't want to move him and are asking for more than the Vikes had to give up to get Bradford.

And would require even more if trading him to the Browns.

Let me know when you establish a link between the number of trade rumors surrounding a player and the actual number of trades that were offered.

The simple fact is - you don't have a clue what's been offered and rejected.

McCarron is going to be so good that I'm sure the NFL is making a secret deal to ensure he ends up on the Steelers so they don't miss any HOF QB play between Pig Ben and him.  Book it.

Well according to the Browns Organization the trade is unlikely.

(04-21-2017, 06:04 PM)Synric Wrote: Well according to the Browns Organization the trade is unlikely.

More than likely, what Marvin said was true. Nothing was ever really negotiated. I'm sure the asking price was too high, and the given price was too low. Only some people in our organization (and fan base) rate him that high. I don't think enough was shown to garner the picks so many were hoping for.

(04-23-2017, 01:50 AM)The Caped Crusader Wrote: More than likely, what Marvin said was true. Nothing was ever really negotiated. I'm sure the asking price was too high, and the given price was too low. Only some people in our organization (and fan base) rate him that high. I don't think enough was shown to garner the picks so many were hoping for.

I think when McCarron came in and didn't suck, it surprised us all...but some ran wayyy too far with that. He wasn't awesome. He was just "ok". 

For a backup, that's great. We should be happy to have him behind Dalton. For a 1st round pick or even a 2nd round pick though? With some team making him their "guy"? That's where people went too far with their excitement.