Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Brady Quinn!

More seriously, Joe Thomas, Eric Steinbach, or Alex Mack?

Mack we may want but they're prob not in a rush to trade the youngest guys. They have a LB that's pretty solid, forget his name.

[The Goat]

I don't see trade w/ Cleveland making sense. They have very little to offer and Mike likes to draft talent so he's very unlikely to trade picks for players...especially our players.

[joethiesmanfan]

Extreme skins i dont go to
it's too commercial I like the real warpath.net.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

extreme skins i dont go to
it's too commercial i like the real warpath.net.

agree 110%

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

^^ here here^^

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

There was a 25page thread about this on ES today. its all they were talking about. TK eventually closed the thread because the guy who is "reporting" it has a history of pulling crap out of his butt and getting everyone on ES in a tissy. i guess the guys a total loser and gets his kicks from watching the other losers talk about his made-up crap all day long. TK evidently felt that there was absolutely nothing to this rumor. And in my mind, ES moderators are like petulent 4 year old children who have learned there is no santa clause. by adult standards, theyre ridiculous. but they are like gods to their peers.

Sounds like a lot of your post on here.

[SBXVII]

I was just wondering, what if the trade is not with the Browns. What if there is a trade in the works, word is leaked or slips out but we speculate it's the Browns and it's not. The front office can deny that a trade is in the works with the Browns but yet not be lying.

It's just a fabrication but what if we have a gentlemans agreement with the Rams for them to pick up Bradford and we pick up a player they would be interested in at our pick. We get stuck with the high cost of a #1 pick, trade Campbell to them for Bradford, and give them the pick they wanted at #4 at a lower cost? I know it sounds far fetched but the Rams have been looking into moving out of the pick, and it was rumored they were interested in Campbell. The only positive spot to get Bradford is at #1 otherwise we don't know what the teams prior to us or our trading team are going to want to do. Plus this gives the Rams two players or basically two picks for the #1 spot. They would get Campbell and whoever they wanted us to draft at #4.

It was also rumored that this might be their HC's last year. Supposedly their front office/ownership was not happy with how their season ended and rumor has it he has next year to turn it around. Why would the HC want to chance his job on a Rookie QB when he could get a proven commodity at a reasonable price in Campbell and a draft pick to fill another hole?

I'm not saying I agree with this or if the trade value is even comparable. I was just wondering if any of you other fans thought of this and or perhaps if those with the resources might want to explore this in regards to trade rumors. We would get the player Shanahan covets, the Rams get a decent QB and a player of another spot they need.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

dcsportsradio on twitter saying cleveland wants rogers, campbell, and cooley

interesting

but who is dcsportsradio?

marc jason (DCsportsradio) on Twitter

Adam Schefter of ESPN has a "tweet" saying that the Browns have now sent a 2011 "Undisclosed" draft pick to Seattle for Seneca Wallace.

Kinda makes sense since the new GM in town in Cleveland used to be Wallaces head coach in Seattle.

So they may not have that level of interest for Campbell any more.

Also the Browns have scheduled a visit with Ben Watson for Wednesday, so the level of interest for Cooley may have subsided as well.

Here's a thought......with Quinn, Anderson and Wallace now in Cleveland, I am williing to speculate that Derek Anderson will probably be released from the Browns.

Would there be any interest in DC for Derek Anderson?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

Adam Schefter of ESPN has a "tweet" saying that the Browns have now sent a 2011 "Undisclosed" draft pick to Seattle for Seneca Wallce.

Kinda makes sense since the new GM in town in Cleveland used to be Wallaces head coach in Seattle.

So they may not have that level of interest for Campbell any more.

Here's a thought......with Quinn, Anderson and Wallace now in Cleveland, I am williing to speculate that Derek Anderson will probably be released from the Browns.

Would there be any interest in DC for Derek Anderson?

I think he deserves a look and think as a back up to replace Collins as the number 2 I would feel better about than Rex Grossman. More competition to the roster....

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

Adam Schefter of ESPN has a "tweet" saying that the Browns have now sent a 2011 "Undisclosed" draft pick to Seattle for Seneca Wallce.

Kinda makes sense since the new GM in town in Cleveland used to be Wallaces head coach in Seattle.

So they may not have that level of interest for Campbell any more.

Also the Browns have scheduled a visit with Ben Watson for Wednesday, so the level of interest for Cooley may have subsided as well.

Here's a thought......with Quinn, Anderson and Wallace now in Cleveland, I am williing to speculate that Derek Anderson will probably be released from the Browns.

Would there be any interest in DC for Derek Anderson?

I'd venture to say if he can't crack the team with Quinn and Wallace there then why would we want him? Maybe Dallas should look into him.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think he deserves a look and think as a back up to replace Collins as the number 2 I would feel better about than Rex Grossman. More competition to the roster....

So with that in mind, sounds like you are thinking Okung gets drafted at the #4 spot next month?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

So with that in mind, sounds like you are thinking Okung gets drafted at the #4 spot next month?

I didn't read that in his statement. The team needs or wants to have a vet on board. I think JC fills that roll but others don't. They want draft picks for him. It doesn't matter if we picked him up or not it just means JC is more expendable cause we have another vet on the team. It could also mean we draft the QB at #4 and cut Colt. Who knows.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

So with that in mind, sounds like you are thinking Okung gets drafted at the #4 spot next month?

Personally I wouldnt mind Okung or Bradford. Both seem very worthy of a no. 4 pick. No, I dont think a signing of Anderson would indicate we wouldnt be drafting a QB at 4. We are in the market for a backup and give us a vet QB in case we recieve a good enough offer to move JC.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I didn't read that in his statement. The team needs or wants to have a vet on board. I think JC fills that roll but others don't. They want draft picks for him. It doesn't matter if we picked him up or not it just means JC is more expendable cause we have another vet on the team. It could also mean we draft the QB at #4 and cut Colt. Who knows.

I was just reading between the lines is all. With the tender on Campbell, it is very likely he will be in DC next season. And if the poster is suggesting Anderson as a backup, well that is a QB stable that is rather substantial when you add in Brennan as well. So drafting a QB at #4 just would not make any sense what so ever. So my next logical assesement is Okung. Unless by some miracle Suh drops, then that changes everything.

[MTK]

I would think it's safe to say if Okung is there at #4 he will be the pick. If Bradford and Okung are both there, it could be a toss up.