Trent Richardson to Colts

[Len B]

I do think the Browns got the best value possible for T-Rich; he's not as good as people seem to think.

That said, what does this say about a team that drafted him #3 overall and then Weeden in the same first round? Horrible, horrible moves by Cleveland. Goes to show you should never draft a RB in the first round of a draft.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I do think the Browns got the best value possible for T-Rich; he's not as good as people seem to think.

That said, what does this say about a team that drafted him #3 overall and then Weeden in the same first round? Horrible, horrible moves by Cleveland. Goes to show you should never draft a RB in the first round of a draft.

I think its kind of funny that it was Mike Lombardi after the draft that criticized Cleveland for taking Richardson-Weeden and suggested he'd rather take Tannehill-Doug Martin at Cleveland's respective spots. The trade of Richardson now is pretty telling in that regard.

[x0xHumblex0x]

T-Rich is good.........just not on the Browns. he doesnt fit their scheme.
Or
he could be really bad. we will find in a few weeks with the Colts

[SethMode]

T-Rich is good.........just not on the Browns. he doesnt fit their scheme.
Or
he could be really bad. we will find in a few weeks with the Colts

Man, with personnel analysis like that, someone needs to hire you.

"This guy might be good...unless he's bad."

[Villain]

Don't draft a RB in the first round.... Is this a popular opinion among NFL hipsters?

[dave]

I don't profess to be a Trent Richardson expert, but this guy had no chance of being a franchise player with that lineup. 2/5ths of an offensive line, a quarterback older than me and less efficient, absolutely no receivers.

Judging Richardson on his Browns' stint is simply unfair. Teams could line up 10 in the box and Weeden would miss those receivers. \\

But, again, I'm not Trent Richardson expert. It's up to him now. If he can't succeed with the Colts, the Browns were right to make this trade. If he turns into Emmit Smith (unlikely), the Browns look like morons.

And while I agree runningback is not as important in today's NFL as it used to be, a great run game does wonders for any quarterback (Russell Wilson?).

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Don't draft a RB in the first round.... Is this a popular opinion among NFL hipsters?

It is popular among people that know what's up. Winning franchises don't need to pick a runner in the first round. You can run down a list of winning teams and even if they did draft a RB in the first round, they weren't even starters when they won (see Indy drafting Joe Addai and starting undrafted Domonic Rhodes).

There is obviously value to good running backs, but when pressed to draft a running back or a lineman, quarterback, or secondary player...the question is..."why?"...

The Browns could have drafted a ton of good players ahead of Richardson @ #3 in last year's draft and also had a ton of good players @ #22...including a better than Richardson running back.

Taking one as high as #3 is crazy in today's NFL. Unnecessary. And Richardson was a sky high rated running back.

Hell, the Colts themselves got a pretty similar running back in regards to talent and skill set in Vick Ballard in the fifth round of the same draft.

[dave]

clearly nobody on VSN watches the Browns....understandable....but Trent Richardson sucks.

he dances around in the backfield looking for the hole and then gets swarmed. Luckily he has the power to get swarmed and still gain a few yards. He can run very well when there is a hole. But 9 our of 10 times he doesnt see the hole and jukes east and west. this isnt NCAA where you can expect 3 yard holes everytime. Or run E/W and think you will out run the defense for yards.

Holmgren was a cunt for drafting this guy in the first place. moving up to #3 to take a RB in todays NFL? talk about a moronic move. How he ever had a front office job is baffling. This current group is trying to salvage what they can for him.

Sure getting a 1st rounder before week 3 is going to hurt the team bigtime. But i think these guys are smart enough to know the browns are at best a 7-9 team. Why take the chance on another sub par season or worse, an injury and get no value for him. The days of building a team around the RB are dead. This is a passing league and i think the Browns did a great job getting great return on a bust of a pick.

sucks that the season is over already though...wtf though, its the norm around here

I agree with 90% of this post, but the Browns at best being a 7-9 team? Best case scenario for this team is maybe, just maybe, 4-12. No QB, now no HB, 2/5ths of an O-Line and no receivers ... and an ok defence while adjusting to an entirely new coaching staff. 7-9 in that scenario is almost like winning the Super Bowl.

If the Browns get Johnny Football out of all this mess, good for them. He has a better chance behind that O-Line than Trent Richardson ever did.

[Villain]

It is popular among people that know what's up. Winning franchises don't need to pick a runner in the first round. You can run down a list of winning teams and even if they did draft a RB in the first round, they weren't even starters when they won (see Indy drafting Joe Addai and starting undrafted Domonic Rhodes).

There is obviously value to good running backs, but when pressed to draft a running back or a lineman, quarterback, or secondary player...the question is..."why?"...

The Browns could have drafted a ton of good players ahead of Richardson @ #3 in last year's draft and also had a ton of good players @ #22...including a better than Richardson running back.

Taking one as high as #3 is crazy in today's NFL. Unnecessary. And Richardson was a sky high rated running back.

Hell, the Colts themselves got a pretty similar running back in regards to talent and skill set in Vick Ballard in the fifth round of the same draft.

Not ashamed to admit that I'm not "among people that know whats up." Thanks for a solid response.

[Aso]

Seems insane to me to say Richardson didn't fit Norv Turners offense. If he doesn't fit that offense he doesn't fit into any professional offense.

[Matt]

Seems insane to me to say Richardson didn't fit Norv Turners offense. If he doesn't fit that offense he doesn't fit into any professional offense.

Norv Turner runs a Vertical Offense. So yes, Richardson doesn't fit that offense.

[Aso]

Norv Turner runs a Vertical Offense. So yes, Richardson doesn't fit that offense.

Vertical for his receivers but how does that impact the RB's? He runs a power running offense that backs like Emmitt Smith, Stephen Davis, Ricky Williams, Lamont Jordan, Frank Gore have all thrived in. He fits that offense to a T.

[Houston]

[JimLeavy59]

[Warner2BruceTD]

Not sure why some of you are laughing at Cleveland, the Browns did great here to get a #1 for a RB who isn't anything special. I've been preaching for the last few years that RB's are largely "plug & play" these days, so grabbing a #1 for one is a smart move for a team that is DYING for a QB. Now, with two 1's, two 3's, and two 4's, this team has massive flexibility in the draft. They can trade up if they fall in love with a QB, trade down and stockpile even more, or just sit tight and grab seven useful players.

I can see why the Colts moved on this as well. It's not something I would have done, because like larry i'm not giving up a #1 for a RB unless it's a special player or dire situation, and this was neither.