Well, that certainly makes sense. Don’t know if Gronkowski can stay healthy, but that’s a dangerous team if all holds up

So, let me get this straight, Bill Bellichick has just traded a retired player for a 4th round pick?

responding to vers from the last thread



Per the Jimmy Johnson trade value chart
#41 = 490 points
#66 = 260 points

The difference is essentially equivalent to #72 (230 points). I'd rather just give them #74 (220 points) if this were the case and keep our 2nd rounder.

Knowing his cap number this last year of his contract, his age, and guessing he wants a big number in a long term deal - I'm not sure I'd want to give up #74. Tough question.

Thanks for the information.

I asked because there is still legs to the rumor that the Browns are interested in him and I have been a bit underwhelmed of the top OTs in the draft. I heard they were so good, but when I started doing my research, they all have some nagging question marks. Not sure they are worth the tenth pick in the draft when better players should be available.

Thanks again. I appreciate it.

Pick swaps normally favor the teams acquiring the player.

Interesting. I was thinking that TB actually got the better end of that deal. I like the different thought process. Not sure I agree, but it's interesting.

They need to trade us OJ.

Oh and cfrs, I am not talking about OJ Simpson...

I thought I heard a rumor about TB trading OJ before this trade went down. Not certain about that, though.

What do you think of my trade idea? You have way more knowledge about that type of thing than I do. Is it fair for both teams?

They traded the rights to TB which NE still retained from his retirement...

I’d do it but only give we were giving up our third and getting back their fourth.

The tweet says he has already had a physical for TB. How can that happen? No other team is able to give players physicals.

He got his physical before the trade even went through.

You are right. Tampa Bay is trying to trade him.

Thanks. What about from their end? I'm thinking about this being a fair deal for both teams. What do you think they would accept. Both of scenarios?

I saw in the locked thread that Malik Hooker might be available. The guy has some of the best FS skills I have ever seen. And I mean....ever.

Problem is that he's been hurt a lot.

I wonder what they would want in return. If he stays healthy, he could solve our issue at FS for a long, long time.

I understand the nuts and bolts. Doesn't it sound more ironic the way I said it though?

Not to be a bummer but... If we get him he’ll likely have until 2021 to heal up....

It sounds hilarious the way you put it

It's more likely the games are played without fans than the season getting cancelled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjwofYhUJEM

For reference, that equates to the equivalent of pick #90. Sounds about fair to me because I was thinking our #97. I wonder if Washington would even consider this, based on the rumor was they were looking for a 1+ IIRC.

It would not be fair for Washington at all. The team that receives the player in the type of pick swap you are proposing almost always get the better end of the deal.

Sounds like Tampa could use Hunt...

Let's make a deal.

I'm cool with it.

Here's a (really) wild one for you: Browns trade #10 to NE for OG Joe Thuney and a late rounder. Use our 2nd for Ashtyn Davis, FS, our first 3rd rounder for Logan Wilson, ILB, use our second 3rd for OT Terrance Steele, and finally sign Jason Peters. Everything fixed...

Please God no.

.... . (Never say...never).

Imagine giving up the tenth overall pick for a guard on a one year contract.

I would assume the proposed trade would include a signed 4 year contract.

I still wouldn't make that trade. I would consider it if the draft compensation was NE's pick #23 in the 1st round. The presumption is that Tua fall to #10 and NE wants to trade up for him.

Wow, come on people, even Joe Thomas has said that Trent Williams is the best LT in football. Even if he regresses just a little he would be better than any rookie for the next 2-3 years and OMG - would please get off the Peters (I don't want to spend anything) 38-year old way past his prime LT. That's just foolish and would be no better than putting in one of the rookies that have never played LT.

Trent Williams is going to cost some money but the offense is built to win now (on paper). The team does not have the luxury of waiting 1-2 years for a rookie LT to get up to speed if he ever does. With Williams, you have a plug and play player that has been a Pro Bowl selection 7 of the last 8 years (only missing last year because he sat out last year).

If you're going after Williams, I think you need to add a player to lessen the draft blow. Getting Williams for next years 2nd round pick and Njoku can probably get it done. Trading Njoku makes sense since it looks very unlikely that the Browns will exercise the 5th year option on him making him a free agent at the end of the season. So one way or another, it doesn't look like the Browns will hold on to Njoku. Washington needs a TE so it benefits them this year and they might pass on the draft pick until next year.

In comparison, going after a Clowney who wants 20-million per year after turning down 18.5 from the Seahawks when we have Vernon (though I'm not a fan and would welcome the Browns dumping him and his 17-million for this year) seems a little foolish considering we have nothing for LT as it is right now. Paying a 7-time Pro Bowler 17-18 million seems a much smarter investment considering his history of performance which you can say about Clowney or even the injury factor.

Finally about OJ - he's in the same boat as we have with Njoku. Howard was selected 19th and Njoku 29th. Both players must have their 5th year options exercised by May 3rd. IMHO, Njoku hasn't earned that 5th year option with a hefty pay day considering what he's done with the Browns. I think the signing of Austin Hooper. Likewise though, Howard is in the exact same situation and if the Browns trade for him they either exercise the 5th year option or they get him for 1-year before he becomes a free agent. The question you have to ask is has Howard's performance warranted the 5th year option? My guess would be he hasn't of they wouldn't be putting him out there as trade bait. Just my opinion but trading one under performer for another seems a little silly.

Joe Thomas also said Johnny Manziel was a great QB..... you shouldn't listen to Joe Thomas' player evaluations.

Did he say that pre or post draft ? It's been noted that Joe is overly enthusiastic about members of the Browns team. I don't know that extends to anyone and everybody 'just because' ... and his breakdown on the draft OT's this year was critical and balanced in nature imo

Trent Williams for #97 overall and I am happy.

Would this mean we go BPA, trade down? Which top tackle could make the transition to RG?

Really, you want to take a jab at Thomas because he voiced his opinion on Williams, a 7-time Pro Bowler, by comparing it to his thought of Johnny M's future stated as a team mate? What did you expect him to say, "Our QB sucks"? That's the same Joe Thomas that people on this board say would be the perfect mentor to teach a young rookie how to play LT but according to you his evaluation of players suck.

I'll take Thomas'opinion on Williams because he's actually lived the position and knows what it takes to be successful. That said, the best in the game right now at LT is Williams as Thomas said. It would be a huge positive move if the Browns can get him via trade.

I would hope the plan is BPA. Even if we do not get a LT before then, I would hope the plan is BPA.

Yes, I'll take a jab at that 10-time pro bowler for his comments that 7-time pro bowler for the 19th time. Three times I'll say that the 10-time pro bowler is like Chucky talking about QB's, be it n-time Pro Bowl QB's and 0-time Pro Bowl QB's. And that is Pro bowl with both capitalized letters and non-capitalized.

I don't know how much you're going to get in kick backs from Trent for your advertising, but your marketing of him - and consistent use of "7-time pro bowler" is tiring, repetitive, and frankly, kinda dumb. You *think* you're adding to the argument and validity of what you're saying, but you're not. You're just a broken record re-hashing that you can count (or read) how many pro Bowls a guy that didn't play last year has been voted to.

Just because some of us are cautious about going after a guy who not only didn't play last year, but has missed more games than he has played in the last three years, and are not willing to give up anything the Redskins wish for to get him doesn't make us wrong. In fact, it makes us right. You, on the other hand, have continuously gone out of your way to construct paper arguments as to why giving up tons of cash & capital somehow makes sense for a player that IS a risk. In fact, his agent has battled the fact that he is an Age Risk, a Character Risk, and a Health Risk. Despite everything, he is indeed all of those.

Now, as I've said, I am not averse to getting Trent, but absolutely NOT at the expense of large draft capital AND gigantic contract extension. In that event, we are far better off in the long run - and we ARE building a team for the long run and NOT the 'right now' - to spend a large draft pick on a rookie and have that player on a rookie deal for the next several years and then pay out the big contract 4 years down the road.

You are most certainly correct. I do see a scenario where Trent would be of more value to us if the LT/LT's we actually have targeted at #10 aren't there at our pick.

Picking a LT later in the draft, even in round 2, certainly cut down on the odds of him being a starter at the position in year one. It also cuts down on him actually ever developing as a starting LT in the NFL.

The thing is, both sides know this. And I doubt we will be the only team that comes out of round 1 who still has a question mark at the LT position. So we may not be the only suitor in line for his services.

Still, with all that said, I think what one's definition of "large draft capital" is a subjective term that has some fluctuation from person to person.

To me if we come out of the tenth pick without a LT, I would feel the situation dictates that to us, in that circumstance, Trent would be worth a third round pick. Hopefully the latter of the two, but considering we would be going into the 2020 season without an immediate answer to the position, I wouldn't consider that too high.

O.J. HOWARD
TE, TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS

CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora reports that there's a "distinct possibility" O.J. Howard still lands in New England.

That scenario is still "very much alive" according to La Canfora after the Patriots dealt veteran Rob Gronkowski to the Bucs for a fourth-round selection. The Tampa Bay Times' Rick Stroud also suggests any trade inquiries surrounding the 25-year-old would have to start with a second-round pick — an asset New England currently lacks — in return. We still lean towards Howard moving to Washington in a blockbuster for LT Trent Williams. San Francisco could also be involved as a last-minute suitor.

RELATED: Tom Brady, New England Patriots
SOURCE: Jason La Canfora on Twitter
Apr 22, 2020, 10:16 AM ET

Williams to Tampa makes some sense .. Tampa could trade Howard and a 3rd round pick for Williams ... that frees them up to draft a good defender in the 1st

Really?? 12 Tackles Picked in the 2nd Rd. or lower became NFL HOF Recipients I wonder how many others became quality NFL Tackles?

2nd Round HOF Tackles

1956 Forrest Gregg T Green Bay Packers
1971 Dan Dierdorf T St. Louis Cardinals

3rd Round HOF Tackles

1938 Frank "Bruiser" Kinard T Brooklyn Dodgers
1951 Mike McCormack T New York Yanks
1953 Bob St. Clair T San Francisco 49ers
1968 Art Shell T Oakland Raiders
1976 Jackie Slater T Los Angeles Rams

7th Round HOF Tackles

1967 Rayfield Wright T Dallas Cowboys

21st Round HOF Tackles

1958 John Madden T Philadelphia Eagles

27th Round HOF Tackles

1953 Roosevelt Brown T New York Giants

Special Selection to HOF

1950 Lou Creekmur T Detroit Lions (Selected by the Lions in the second round of a special draft in 1950. Originally drafted in 1948 by the Philadelphia Eagles in 26th round - 243rd overall - and the AAFC's Los Angeles Dons in 28th round - 197th overall. He opted to complete his college eligibility.

FA HOF Tackles

1946 Lou Groza T-K Cleveland Browns (AAFC)

Is there anyone from this century?

So a total of 12 in 64 years and none in the era of faster edge rushers. Nothing since Jackie Slater in 1976.

You do realize that it's been 44 years since 1976, right?

Quite reminding me


I view any OT taken after pick 20 to be basically a red shirt rookie. They won't start unless they either surprise the snot out of everybody, or there just isn't anyone else to do the job because of injury or poor planning.

If we get an OT that we feel needs a season of seasoning, then we will almost certainly bring in another OT. I don't think we'd trade for an OT - any OT - if we draft one that we think will be ready in a year. I think we'd more be looking at someone on a one year deal.

Man... I can't wait for tomorrow to be over, lol

Pastor the game has changed in the last 50 years.

I look forward to getting the draft behind us as well. So 1976 presses a button does it? Maybe this will help. I have a daughter who was born in 1978.

I have twin grandchildren who are 21. Did that help?

I guess I just see this LT class a little differently than most. I do understand the potential some of these guys have. But we all know how much this team has drafted boasting about the potential of a player we never see reached. Now let us just suppose that four or five LT prospects are drafted before we draft one.

The gamble would then be that the fifth or sixth LT picked in this draft would be able to refine his skills to become at least a mid level NFL starting LT. Something about the sound of that doesn't give me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

I certainly get the allure of bringing in Williams. I'm just skeptical because of how the stars will have to align in order for him to suit up as a Brown.

Getting a deal done with the 'skins won't be easy all by itself. They've been weird with the Williams situation from 'go'.

Getting a deal done with Williams won't be easy by itself. He has had some injuries leading up to the growth situation, and he's been out of football for a year. Based on his alleged contract demands, it sounds like he doesn't accept that his recent history is pushing down his value.

Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet
·
39m
Sources: The #Dolphins have called the teams in front of them for a possible trade up from No. 5 and are gauging the price to come up to No. 3 to potentially take an offensive tackle. We could see a run on tackles in the Top 10 like never before.

If they do that i wonder if they go get Cam or maybe Winston ... either that or there fine with Fitz or maybe they saw sumptin in Rosen ...

Either that or the sources are the lions and there trying to up the price for someone seriously looking to get there ...

If the report is correct, it seems they feel one LT prospect is head and shoulders above the rest and not the "insert name here" most have been advocating for a top 10 pick. I mean no sense paying a bunch to move up from number five if you think three or four LT draft picks are that closely lumped together in value.

And they must know NYG likes this prospect

That's total smoke. They are gauging the price to move up to 3 because they want a QB. But they also don't want to spook San Diego into trading the farm and paying the price that they themselves aren't willing to pay to move up to #2.

I was telling a friend a few weeks ago that a trade to #3 almost seems inevitable. The Lions will want either Okudah or Simmons, and both will likely be there at 5 or 6. The Chargers and Fins need a QB, so they'll likely have a bidding war to get to #3 and get their preferred guy. I doubt the Skins trade down, as Young is the best player in the draft and won't be available at 5 or 6, so it would probably take a significant haul for them to move.

I agree ... what I don't understand is how Herbert is being touted as being taken ahead of Tua. I know Tua got hurt but he's twice the QB that Herbert will ever be in my opinion. Herbert reminds me of a less athletic Josh Allen - his measurables are great but his accuracy is a question and forecasting that improving in the NFL seems a huge stretch.

Where are you seeing that? Most of what I read has Tua being well ahead of Herbert. Unless it's mock drafter trying to be edgy for web-clicks, or the Chargers and Fins trying to talk up the other guy so either the other team gets baited into taking him, or the fanbase doesn't jump off a building when they get the consolation prize ...

Here are some who had some success at Offensive Tackle Drafted in the 2nd Rd. or later for the last 30 Years

2018 3rd Rd. Orlando Brown T Baltimore Ravens
2017 4th Rd. Julie'n Davenport T Houston Texans
2016 2nd Rd. Jason Spriggs T Green Bay Packers
2016 5th Rd. Halapoulivaati Vaitai T Philadelphia Eagles
2015 2nd Rd. Rob Havenstein T St. Louis Rams
2015 3rd Rd. Chaz Green T Dallas Cowboys
2014 2nd Rd. Cyrus Kouandjio T Buffalo Bills
2014 2nd Rd. Jack Mewhort T Indianapolis Colts
2014 7th Rd. Seantrel Henderson T Buffalo Bills
2013 4th Rd. David Bakhtiari T Green Bay Packers
2012 2nd Rd. Mitchell Schwartz T Cleveland Browns
2012 2nd Rd. Kelechi Osemele T Baltimore Ravens
2012 4th Rd. Bobby Massie T Arizona Cardinals
2011 2nd Rd. Marcus Gilbert T Pittsburgh Steelers
2009 2nd Rd. Max Unger T Seattle Seahawks
2009 2nd Rd. Phil Loadholt T Minnesota Vikings
2009 4th Rd. T.J. Lang T Green Bay Packers
2008 7th Rd. Geoff Schwartz T Carolina Panthers
2008 7th Rd. Kirk Barton T Chicago Bears
2007 3rd Rd. Marshal Yanda T Baltimore Ravens
2006 2nd Rd. Winston Justice T Philadelphia Eagles
2006 2nd Rd. Andrew Whitworth T Cincinnati Bengals
2006 3rd Rd. Eric Winston T Houston Texans
2006 4th Rd. Willie Colon T Pittsburgh Steelers
2005 2nd Rd. Michael Roos T Tennessee Titans
2004 3rd Rd. Max Starks T Pittsburgh Steelers
2004 4th Rd. Nat Dorsey T Minnesota Vikings
2004 7th Rd. Shane Olivea T San Diego Chargers
2003 2nd Rd. Jonathan Stinchcomb T New Orleans Saints
2001 2nd Rd. Matt Light T New England Patriots
2000 2nd Rd. Chad Clifton T Green Bay Packers
1999 2nd Rd. Jon Jansen T Washington Redskins
1999 4th Rd. Jay Humphrey T Minnesota Vikings
1998 3rd Rd. Robert Hicks T Buffalo Bills
1998 4th Rd. Jason Fabini T New York Jets
1998 5th Rd. Oliver Ross T Dallas Cowboys
1998 6th Rd. Matt Birk T Minnesota Vikings
1997 2nd Rd. Jerry Wunsch T Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1997 2nd Rd. Adam Meadows T Indianapolis Colts
1996 3rd Rd. Roman Oben T New York Giants
1996 4th Rd. Jon Runyan T Houston Oilers
1995 2nd Rd. Zach Wiegert T St. Louis Rams
1995 2nd Rd. Barrett Brooks T Philadelphia Eagles
1994 2nd Rd. Tre' Johnson T Washington Redskins
1994 2nd Rd. Larry Allen T Dallas Cowboys
1994 3rd Rd. George Hegamin T Dallas Cowboys
1993 2nd Rd. Todd Rucci T New England Patriots
1993 4th Rd. Ron Stone T Dallas Cowboys
1993 5th Rd. Everett Lindsay T Minnesota Vikings
1992 3rd Rd. Siupeli Malamala T New York Jets
1991 2nd Rd. Joe Valerio T Kansas City Chiefs
1991 3rd Rd. Erik Williams T Dallas Cowboys
1991 3rd Rd. Kevin Donnalley T Houston Oilers
1991 5th Rd. Harry Boatswain T San Francisco 49ers
1990 3rd Rd. Glenn Parker T Buffalo Bills
1990 6th Rd. Frank Pollack T San Francisco 49ers
1990 7th Rd. Joe Staysniak T San Diego Chargers
1990 11th Rd. Justin Strzelczyk T Pittsburgh Steelers

Yes it has just Check out the tackles drafted in the last 30 years in the 2nd Rd. or later in the post above ...

You really stretched that "some success" thing didn't you?

BTW- How many of those guys played RT and not LT?

Ive seen it a few times, Dane Brugler he's also showing it on his final mock draft and he is very credible.

Most of them started for a few years and it just said tackle ...

I guess one would have to decide if using a late first round or early second round pick on a tackle "who can start for a few years" as a wise investment of draft capital or not.

Then on top of that, not knowing if they'll ever be able to play LT which is what we need. That's of course if they will even be able to play the OT position at all.

Let me add Cody Risien was drafted in the 7th Rd. in 1979

So then that eliminates all the Tackles except Andrew Thomas and if he is gone that means trade down or BPA, because he the only true LT in the draft ??

Two pretty Good Cleveland Browns LT's Doug Dieken Drated 6th Rd. 1971 Paul Farren Drafted 12th Rd. 1983 and Dieken came out of Illinois as a TE

To me it pretty mch boils down to two of them. But that's just my opinion.

Wills was projected to move to LT before the combine. So I can see him as a distinct possibility along with Thomas. But in regards to Wirfs and Becton I don't see it at #10. But I'm just a fan.

j/c

Two words...Josh Jones...possibly even at #10. JMG

I have heard that Wills could play LT but the rumor mills says the Browns may like Josh Jones best of all, so maybe thats why all of the trade down talk?

I started talking about liking Jones about a week ago, I have not heard anything about the Browns liking him ...where is that rumor coming from?

Anything is possible at this point. But I would find drafting him at #10 quite unlikely. I guess the bottom line to me is the idea of five or six LT's that are at least mid level starters in the NFL for the long haul is pretty unlikely. Who will be the winners and losers after all the picks are made is left to be seen.

Mary Kay picked it up from your post last week ... now its come full circle ... *L* ...

JC

I’m far from a talent evaluator, especially on the OL ... but this draft has been touted as the one with good OT prospects.

Good news for us ... it’s a big area of concern and it’s a make or break year for Baker. So, get the best LT possible

Wow, the intrigue is killin' me!

I understand the talk of drafting an LT, but is there news that the team is not planning on Jack Conklin at LT?

j/c:

I don't think that there is anything in writing saying that we're not playing him at LT, but you can pretty much write it in concrete on your own, I'd think.

Not if we are reaching to get him, screw that. There are 22 starting positions on the field. You can eliminate say 10 because the positions aren't as important and you simply have no need. I mean we aren't giving up on Baker at this point, so we aren't drafting a QB in round 1.

If 2-3 tackles are selected by our selection, that tells me at least some teams feel we will be selecting the 3rd or 4th best LT in the draft..I don't want that. Stick to the board. No way our board has 4 LT's in the top 10 players. No way.

Trade back at that point and get one of the next wave if you insist on drafting for need.

We can still sign free agents for need. That is what you do. FA is all about needs. You aren't signing guys simply because they are the best available. You sign them because you need them.

If you are drafting for needs in the first 3 rounds, you are a loser. I can possible see targeting a position in the 2nd round, or your 2nd pick of the draft. QB is the only outlier here. If you need a QB, you probably do have to reach at some point.

After that, BPA until maybe the 6th round if you need some sort of kicker, snapper, or returner. Then, ok, burn a pick for the need.

If you are drafting for need in the top 10 of the draft, you are short sighted and you are done.

j/c:

This thread got crazy. Lou Groza? LOL

Anyway, I have a question from one of Diam's posts:





A last-minute suitor for whom? OJ Howard or Trent Williams?

Howard I would assume. They have Joe Staley.

Yeah, and they also have Kittle.

Both options don't seem all that legit. But, who knows...

I think teams are looking to go with two tight ends a lot more next year. I think the 49ers were, lightly, in on Hooper.

I don't really believe SF is a player for OJ Howard, but obviously, I could be wrong. I think the report is not very accurate.

I admire the thought process you guys have on here. Some nice and some not so nice - LOL.

Today is the day that the Browns have to make their moves. A trade back is highly likely that will most likely be combined with a trade of some sort in my opinion. There's multiple items the Browns need to address that clearly will determine how they draft. It would seem to be extremely risky to think the Browns would be going into this draft with the idea that afterwards they would address positions, contracts and personal with FA's. It's common knowledge that it does happen but I don't think you go into a draft thinking that afterwards you'll address those items.

Items on the table:
1. LT - biggest need and at this point a make or break item for the front office. Is the 4th, 5th or even lower OT selected at #10 or lower getting the BPA? After spending multi millions of dollars to improve your offense for 2020 and still having the #3 valued position on the team still open warrant taking the perceived 4th or 5th option at the position or worse yet drafting with the idea of addressing it after the draft? I don't believe the FO can or will take that risk. This is a high risk game of chicken that the Browns will fell the effect of for years if they are wrong.

2. Njoku - the Browns have to exercise the 5th option by May 3rd. The Browns went out and signed Hooper. That certainly doesn't make it look like the Browns are expecting to open up the wallet on the 5th year or a future long term contract. Does it make sense for the Browns to keep Njoku at this point knowing he will be a FA next year. He's not in the future plans so expect him to be moved soon.

3. Vernon - in his final year with a 17-million price with bonuses this year but no dead money. He hasn't lived up to expectations and highly unlikely to take a team discount to stay and not in the Browns best interest moving forward. Do the Browns come out of the draft not addressing Vernon or the position or are they gambling they will get Clowney afterwards. This is another high risk game of chicken that the Browns could lose big time on.

4. Trent Williams - Browns want a discount but other suitors may drive up the price. The question remains: Untested rookie, older vet in Peters or others, effect on the offense if the FO is wrong in their decision. Missing at LT will cripple the team - the FO can't swing and miss here.

5. Clowney, Ngakoue, or Griffin - high dollar decision. Do the Browns invest here and leave LT open to questions. Is this the draft position the Browns are focused on? Where's the higher risk and the best value? DE will be addressed - where's it stand in the pecking order?

6 LB and Safety - can the Browns survive with what they have? Are late round picks the answer or after draft lower level FA moves? Positions of high concern but where do they fit in the entire plan? Can the Browns address the above and these areas too? Trading back will help a lot but does that make the above a higher need?

Today will answer a lot of those questions.

I am guessing Howard. The article seems to be about TB trading Howard.

TRENT WILLIAMS
T, WASHINGTON REDSKINS

ESPN's Josina Anderson reports "everything is still open at this point" between the Browns and Redskins LT Trent Williams.

Meanwhile, Mike Florio reports there is "zero truth" to the Eagles' interest in Williams. Clearly the Browns are the No. 1 team in the market for the Redskins' long-time stud tackle. It remains to be seen if anything gets done before the draft. Left tackle remains the most-glaring hole on the Browns offense, as they're quietly fairly loaded elsewhere. With better protection Baker Mayfield should have a solid chance to bounce back in year three.

SOURCE: Josina Anderson on Twitter
Apr 23, 2020, 8:39 AM ET

Diam: We need a few more seats on the boat as it's draft day and we have a catch to haul on board for the trip to the Isle...

Last year, I didn't think we should trade for Williams because I thought the cost would be too high. I am assuming that the cost has gone down and thus, I am warming up to the trade.

I think all of the LTs in the draft have question marks. I am not saying they won't be good. I'm just saying it's hard to tell who will perform well and who won't. Williams is a proven player. His refusal to play w/Washington concerns me. So does his possible contract demands. I would not doubt that the two are related. That's scary.

However, I would be in favor of trading our 2nd rounder for Williams and a 3rd or maybe a 4th. Something like that. I think that trade would favor us, but Washington is probably running out of options. I don't know that for a fact and that is why I said "probably." Btw...........all of this is my opinion and don't want to be called out for posting BS by 888.

jc...

I have not been following the Trent Williams trade subject so I have a few questions...

...What would the Browns have to give up in draft picks to make the trade happen?

...It will be the Browns who have to negotiate a contract with Williams? How much will that cost the Browns?

Just looking for general info to get an idea of the cost and if it makes any sense...Thanks, mac

Would it not be a 'sign-and-trade' deal? Perhaps why this seems to be taking so long...

Sign and trade would be the safest way for the Browns..I believe that would be a deal breaker for the Browns.

Williams is under contract for the 2020 season, but after that without a sign and trade deal already worked out, I wouldn't make that trade.

If the picks we have to give up are small enough that we wouldn't care if he was a one year rental, we'd likely just trade for him as-is and work out a new contract later.

If we have to give up significant draft capital, then there is no way the deal happens without a new deal in place that the trade is contingent upon.

What that threshold is would be anyone's guess, but I'd draw the line at a 4th. 4th or lower... be happy to view it a one year rental. Anything more than that and we'd need a new deal to keep him for a few years.


Either way, I still think the only way we trade for him is if we end up with Simmons and don't have a future LT candidate by the end of Round 2. I *hate* making generalizations in the vein of "this FO doesn't like ...", BUT - this FO doesn't like bringing in guys over the age of 30. Be it free agents or in trade. I think we may have brought in a couple already this offseason, but they are bit role players, not major cogs. The thing is, if we want a veteran LT, there aren't any other options, and the only remaining variable for a veteran LT is whether we are looking at someone to hold the spot for 3-4 years or if we are looking for a one year rental.

If we come away from the Draft with even a Round 2 LT, I could see us not pursuing a veteran LT at all, at least not until we see him - whomever it ends up being - in a practice. Like, as soon as we can do 1-on-1's, have him go against Myles and Vernon for a couple of hours and get a feel for whether or not we think he might be able to hold his own before we look at bringing in a veteran because frankly, time is on our side. The guys that are out there, nobody else is talking to. We're the only player in the ring for Trent... there's no hurry. Actually, the longer we wait, the more likely they are to just release him and the additional $12 million cap hit he will be to them.

JC

Offer a 3rd for Williams
Draft Simmons or Brown at 10 .. or trade down if they aren’t there

I wouldn’t give up more than a 3rd

Trade a 3rd for Trent Williams to fix the OLine. Then offer all of our remaining picks and next years 1st and 3rd to Washington and get Chase Young DE. Far and away the best player in this years draft. With him and Garrett coming off the edges. Look out.

Now I know this will not happen. But, That would be my dream draft day trade scenario today.

I struggle to figure out what the passage of time has done to William's cost of acquisition (in terms of compensation to the 'skins). They could just be doing their Redskins thing and have decided to be stubborn. I dunno. Such a crazy situation.

I think I saw a poll on Twitter asking if you would trade OBJ and #10 to the Redskins for #2. I said yes. Thoughts?

Why?

Washington wants a lot, the Browns aren't willing to meet that price or this would be done by now. 97 feels right at his age and salary expectations (or someone suggested swapping 74 and their 4th which equates to a late 3rd).

Per salary, spotrac says 3 yrs, $46,407,427 is his market value - that's 15.4/year and would be 4th highest tackle. That feels a little high to me based on his age, but it provides a number.

j/c:

That's a possibility. However, if we can believe the rumors that are out there, there's still a line of communications between the Browns and Skins. To me that would indicate that the price the Skins are now asking is more closely aligned to what the Browns are willing to pay. If the asking price was too far out of line, there would be nothing there to negotiate about.

LETS GOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooo

No chance in Hell.
Chase Young is NOT worth OBJ + whomever we'd get at #10.
The kid is good, but nobody is THAT good.

I wonder if Trent is the contingency plan if the top Tackles on the board aren't there. Quite a few teams in front of us need tackles ,so if they're gone, then maybe we pull the trigger.

Trent Williams trade rumors: Four teams in pursuit of Pro Bowl left tackle, including Browns, per report
The Eagles, Jets, and Vikings have also shown the most interest in Williams

3 hrs ago

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/trent...wns-per-report/

The Washington Redskins appear to be on the verge of trading Trent Williams and have plenty of teams vying for his services. The Cleveland Browns have been the team linked to Williams for quite some time, but the Washington Post is reporting the Minnesota Vikings, Philadelphia Eagles and New York Jets are also among the teams showing the most interest in the seven-time Pro Bowl left tackle.

Cleveland, the fourth team that has shown significant interest, has competition for Williams. Washington has been asking for a second-round pick, but has been willing to compromise with teams that are offering the Redskins picks in the mid-to-late rounds. The Redskins haven't been able to deal Williams to this point because teams haven't been able to reach a new deal with the offensive tackle, who has one-year and $14.5 million remaining on his contract.

The Eagles are considered a surprise suitor for Williams, considering they are in the same division as the Redskins and have a left tackle they traded up for in the first round of last year's draft in Andre Dillard. Pro Football Talk has reported there is "zero truth" in the Eagles' interest in Williams.

Could Washington be using Philadelphia in an attempt to drive up the trade price? There's some merit to that theory, but it's worth noting Eagles general manager Howie Roseman never had a face-to-face interview with Dillard prior to last year's draft and Philadelphia thought he would never be on the board at No. 22 when the franchise traded up to select him. Per Jeff McLane of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Dillard struggled to adapt to the city of Philadelphia and the NFL locker room. That could play a factor if the Eagles did inquire about Williams.

Cleveland has been interested in a trade for Williams for some time and former Redskins head coach Bill Callahan is the Browns' offensive line coach. Callahan was the Redskins' offensive line coach from 2015 to 2018, helping Williams earn four consecutive Pro Bowl selections and establishing him as one of the best left tackles in the game. So it appears Williams would be a natural fit to join the Browns. ESPN's Josina Anderson has reported "everything is still open at this point" regarding Williams and the Browns.

The Jets have committed toward revamping their offensive line this offseason, signing Greg Van Roten, Connor McGovern, George Fant, Alex Lewis and Josh Andrews tin free agency. Williams would complete the revamp as the protector of Sam Darnold's blind side.

The Vikings have Riley Reiff at left tackle, but Williams would be an immediate upgrade there. Minnesota could move Reiff to right tackle (where he played in 2016 with the Detroit Lions). Reiff has two years and $27.15 million remaining on his contract, but Minnesota could save $8.8 million in cap space if the Vikings were to release him.

The market is heating up for Williams, as the seven-time Pro Bowler appears close to finding a new home. Williams' saga with the Redskins may have finally reached its conclusion.

I had heard yesterday somewhere that the skins are now just trying to get maybe a 2 or a couple lower round picks bundled together-because they say we are still the odds on to get Williams but they noted that there are 3 other teams still in the hunt. One of those teams-Philly said nope-not in the hunt.
I would throw a 3 out there or a contingent couple of picks-probably one from next year and tell the skins to take it or leave it-and i would want to know by #7 pick if it is a deal or not and also have a plan in place because the lions at 3 (cost too much) and the Panthers and Arizona are both looking to trade down. I would trade for Trent and then move up 3 spots for Simmons

That’s what i was wondering ...

Are we gonna wait til after our pick at 10 and see if the tackle we want is there ... if not we make the trade ..

Who knows what the plan is ... we’ll know soon enough ...

I'd give our 3rd if we got their 4th back... and that contract would be acceptable. I would do this deal, though I still think we can get him as a free agent in a few weeks.

Aside from that, there is no way I give up more than a 4th.
They have no leverage at all and have stuck to their guns way past the point where they had any. They completely missed the boat on selling high and now they will eventually realize that they are in the boat of just trying to get anything.

I think, but am not certain, that the passage of time has decreased the asking price because no team offered the king's ransom that Washington was reportedly asking for. The season is approaching [hopefully] and I doubt Washington wants to go into another year of just keeping him in limbo. It's kind of like the supply and demand thing.

Of course, I could be dead wrong. Just speculating.

I actually do not believe there are four LT's in this draft worthy of the #10 pick. I highly doubt we have more than two of them targeted with that #10 pick. So to me it's more than likely that we'll be trying to make a trade for Williams than not.

I agree, Pit. I think we continue to try to trade for him up until our pick. I think if we try after the pick at 10 (if we don't take an OT there), then the price goes up. The perception at that point could be that we didn't get who we wanted, so now we're desperate and have to pay more.

Actually having four teams looking at a deal for Williams makes a lot of sense to me. With Miami at #5 and the Jets at #11, I think it bolsters my opinion that a lot of teams do not see as many top LT prospects as the media is telling us.

I don't believe this article for one second. The Eagle's interest has already been debunked.

I suspect that this is just the Skins talking to writers to try to bump up the appearance of interest.
The Jets are literally the only other possibility of the teams listed because the Eagles are not in it and the Vikings would have to be trying a player-for-player trade in order to take on his salary and still be able to sign rookies; not likely.


Since we're picking at 10 and they are at 11, one of us two will likely end up with him, but I'd venture a guess that we're both sitting tight to see what players fall to us in the Draft.

While it seems some others disagree, I do agree with you. Of course some people feel we are the only team looking at trading for Williams. There are a lot of teams in need of a LT and to think there are a lot of them in the draft who are just "plug and play" I think would be fooling ones self. Landing him before our #10 pick would certainly be an advantage in terms of leverage.

I totally discount the possibility that Williams will just be released if the skins don't take a deal now. At any point over the first few rounds of the draft he could be traded at any point and the demand far outweighs the supply.

Do you think the asking price is the same as it was during last year's regular season? We were looking at reports of a first rounder and more.

I could be wrong, but I don't think they will receive that much right now.

This is where my head is as well Purp, although ideally I would like to have this done before the draft. I think it could change our strategy a bit and help us come away with better players that are ranked higher on our board as opposed to drafting for need.

That is assuming we don't have any of these OT ranked in the top 10..which I am reading more and more of, that the media is hyping these guys more than team actually view them.

prp...sorry for not replying but here in CORN COUNTRY, OHIO we have rain about to start at any time and I had to go do some mowing before the rain started.

Trading with Daniel Snyder is likely to be "a test of wills" with Depodesta and Berry seeing if they can out-wait Danny Snyder and his folks.

Hopefully the Browns have a plan B ready to go when the draft begins. I sure as hell do not want to see the Browns get taken in a trade with Snyder.

It would be much easier for the Browns to focus on drafting the best OT available in this draft rather than attempt to deal with the Skins for their 32 yr old OT.

Yep, I agree this is how it works. Washington has no leverage right now. Once tackles start coming off the board, we lose some leverage. Once we make our pick, if it isn't a tackle, we lose our leverage....though we still have the option of Peters as a last resort.

Washington, by waiting, could see Trent's value go up. But, they also risk getting stuck with him and having no leverage if he is still on their roster after the draft. Also, any compensation at that point would have to come in the form of a player or next year's draft pick.

The Skins have precious few hours left to get something for him in this Draft. If it happens at all during the Draft, it would likely be tomorrow before things resume; maybe Saturday. The pressure to get something done is all on them; not us.

I just don't see us panic buying, and I don't see us not having him changing our strategy. I think our strategy is a constant and whether or not we get him depends on what comes to us. I think we are BPA all-the-way unless we have two equally ranked players sitting there and one fills a higher need. If following that leaves us still needing a LT, then we'll circle back. Just my feelings on things and how I'd approach it.

One thing I absolutely will never worry about is Berry & Depo losing a battle of wits with, or getting taken by, Dan Snyder.

Redskins might be hoping Dorsey was still here and they took his weekly call offer of a first rounder.

Most certainly not. That ship sailed last year. I think teams will look at it as a complete picture. One has to look at it as the overall price tag and not just the draft capital.

When you combine what he will demand in terms of a contract along with the draft capital, I would be amazed if they even receive a second round pick for Williams.

If a trade including a first round pick could have been made, I think that deal would have been done before now.

well, we could have told them that in February.

I could see the Vikings stealthily being interested. The Jets are totally interested. Philly, definitely not.

The Vikings don't have the cap space, currently, to make it happen. They'd have to trade a player as part of it to make it even remotely work, and then they'd still be in a quandry for signing rookies.

Its to bad KJ left us in such a ”mess” or maybe we could be in the mix for him ... ...

I read somewhere that a lot of NFL Execs are saying that Trent would be the highest rated LT in this class even at age 31. That is nuts and speaks to the potentially overhyped media portrayal of the Tackles in this class.

Give up a 3 and don't look back. He have the cap space, the need, and the draft capital.

The smoke is all saying we land Trent Williams today for a third round pick (or later). That is good news.

Let's suppose they are correct about Williams being better than any LT in this draft class. By most accounts he is a top five LT in the league.

So what are the odds that any of these LT's will be a top four LT in the NFL and why would drafting a top 10 or 15 LT in the NFL at #10 be a bad thing?

If that would be the price tag I'm all for it.

I'm not going to really be excited until i find out what kind of contract they agree to with him

What we really care about is that the one we potentially pick becomes a quality player. The chances of that are not great especially considering we will be picking the third or fourth tackle in the draft.

If we give up a fourth round pick or less then I could care less what the contract is. That is insane value.

The argument could be made that Williams is the best LT in the league - not a top 5. Second, the success rate of a first round pick is about 55%. Outside of that though, there will be a run on tackles in the draft in front of the Browns. If that is true, then that would mean the Browns would be using that #10 pick on the 4th or 5th rated tackle or worse. There's also that possibility that the tackle available is not a LT.

LT is the 3rd most valued position on the team after QB and Edge Rusher. Would you be satisfied with the 15th rated QB or Edge Rusher? Williams will give the Browns 3-4 years of solid play in my opinion. Any rookie we draft will never get to Williams level in the next 2-3 years. You have to ask yourself, is that acceptable?

Money, to be paid the top rate of LT the money is going to be around 17-18 million per year. The Browns could front end load it with bonuses where they would have no dead money in years 3-4 if Williams needed to be released. However, when people talk about giving a Clowney (who'd be the off side edge rated as #7 in team value) 18-19 million but are hedging on Williams is a little mind numbing. Top rated QB's are making close to 30-million. Top end edge rushers are in the low 20's. Top end LT's are in the 16-18 bracket. If you want the best then you have to pay the price.

Now the Browns could go cheap and get an old FA or a 2nd or 3rd tier player. Or the Browns could take a chance on an unproven rookie. Or the Browns could trade for a proven commodity that has value and addresses the LT opening with value.

What the Browns do with the LT position will have a huge bearing on the success of the team this year. If you do not believe the LT is of that great of an importance, wait and see what happens if the FO makes the wrong decision on the position. The Browns have suffered offensively since Joe Thomas retired and there's a reason for that - LT is a critical position to the team. If the Browns go cheap it will reflect in the offense this year and all the other moves will have been a waste. It happened last year and if not addressed will happen again this year.

To me it's more about where have the remaining LT's slotted on our board than whether it's the third or fourth LT selected.

As an example. Now I don't expect you or anyone else to agree with me on how I have the LT's rated. But I'm simply using this as an example.

I have Thomas as the top rated LT. Then I have Wills as my second rated LT. To me, I have both of those LT's ranked as a top 10 pick.

If per say the top two LT's taken are Wills and Whirfs taken in the draft, Thomas would still be there at #10. In that case I would select Thomas.

So to me it all boils down to where our FO has these LT's ranked on their big board far more than it is which ones are selected before our pick. I believe each team has their own boards and their ranking won't all be the same. I don't think our team or any other team should abandon their big board based on the selection of other teams.

Hopefully I laid that out in manner that makes sense.

The caveat I have in your scenario is how will the cap hit of Williams impact the re-signing and future of our roster? You don't build a team on FA's.

Every draft pick comes with risks. And yes, I think a LT that ranks in the top half of the league would do just fine at a fraction of the cost. I would certainly love having Williams here. But to me it's not an all or nothing proposition as some seems to feel it is.

That just tells me he aint the one to go to for QB predictions.

Also just wondering...that praise for Manziel was that after he became a Brown (which I believe Joe Thomas was a teammate of his what else would you expect him to say). What was he saying before he became a Brown is worth more...I know that is me also, once they become a Brown they are automatically HOF material...hey what can I say I'm just a freaking FAN nothing more. If it comes to pass that I am a journalist who must be more critical of the team so be it. But I AM NOT...I'm just a fan.

Well Joe Thomas is a FAN and at that time a teammate why would expect anything less???

Now he is a journalist and he has to be more accurate and not so passionate. But if you notice they put him in charge of everything Cleveland Browns cause they still are a passion of his

jmho

JT was right; Manziel was a great QB, in college!!

I'm beginning to wonder what if there has been a deal and it's being a close held for different reasons?

I took a break about an hour ago and checked on my ipad and there was a story on CNN about a "possible" Trent Williams trade shaking up the top half of the first round.
King said there have been a couple suitors all along and he guessed that a late comer could be Seattle and Tampa Bay.

I then checked the twitter sphere and there was a tweet from a blogger with the skins who said that there was a good source that said that the trade to the Browns heated back up in the last few days and was basically done. He also said they would wait till later tonight and the comp was either third or fourth from tonight and a second from next year.
I would in that scenario make this year a 4 and make next year contingent on Williams making x number of starts or the pro bowl.

And with that being said, if it were true...I still think i would see what it takes to move from 10 to 7 if Simmons is still on the board.

Like other negotiations with other clubs?

Hope that is not true. I wouldn't give up anything more then our late 3rd this year for the guy, adding next years 2nd rnd pick is way to much Williams.

Hmm.. damn wish I was a fly on the wall listening in..

yep!

I would still bet that half of that is last minute pre-draft hype and the other half is the Skins trying to drum up interest because their window to get something worthwhile in this draft is closing rapidly.

No bet.

I'm keeping busy..

I just organized the table in my den in front of the TV with my laptop so I can ZOOM my tailgating buddies.. my draft magazines and the Big Board Top 150 list and a 4 color pen with a ruler to line out taken picks.

Oh, and a shot glass filled with tequila for our pick.

Also, just ordered 3 Grateful Dead face masks.

Can't help it. Draft Day is the biggest day of the year for Browns fans.

Not anymore ,,,

I don't why he would publicly hint to what the Browns were thinking ahead of the draft. What is the point of making anything public?

If Washington trades out of #2, say with Miami, I believe that could be an indicator will trade Trent to us and select the best OT at #5. Could be...

I think picks one and two are locked in.

I didn’t get much out of what he said.

Agreed.Probably more likely than not.

JC

Hearing the Raiders wanna trade Gabe Jackson for cap reasons .. late rounder might do it?

pit, I do not know much about contracts, but if we got williams and could load his dollars into the first two years, we could have money available in two years for what we hope is a franchise qb’s second contract and maybe also an elite corner’s second contract. These would be on top of Myles contract next year.we would need to be free of the big money. we need to draft one o f the other tackles this year to allow him to spend two years developing.

If we gget Trent, then draft Terrance Steele, Texas Tech, with one of our 3rd round picks. (I believe I've said this before...lol).

Who are you hearing this from?

Not sure he fits the scheme we want to run and according to PFF he was their 40th ranked OG last year plus he's making $10 mill a year.

Thanks

Do we gotta get this guy? Not sure it is a huge need. Can he be utility help in more than one spot?

Seems mobility is also a concern with this offense. I don't know his game.

Someone check on steve0255.

Hey, I'm here and I do have a thought on the Browns pick.

It would appear odd that all the tackles except for the best LT prospect in Thomas fell to the Browns for their choice. That might have been a sign of the quality of the players. Picking Wells out of the bunch on the surface appears to be a real head scratcher. Really, 3 out of the 4 drop to the Browns and they select the one OT that hasn't played a single game at LT in high school or college.

Now I know that the idea being thrown around is that Wells can be switched to LT. I'm not so sure. If LT was so easily interchangeable, the position wouldn't be so highly valued. If this is the Browns plan then expect the TE to be lined up on his side every play. LT is a high skill set that makes the position highly valued. Putting a young man into that spot that has never taken a game snap at the position seems very suspect. I'm sure that there are some people on this board that played interior line in college. Maybe they can talk to this but I'm sure they would agree that LT isn't an interchangeable position overwise you wouldn't see them so highly sought after.

Now most of the analysis I have read on Wells is that he was a great RT in college but has the body and movement capability of a guard at the next level. Staying on the right side and moving inside to RG next to Conklin would be an easier move. It would also fix an area of need. However, you might question the thought process of drafting a potential RG at #10 in the NFL draft.

In summary, I don't think you draft a project player at #10 in the NFL draft unless he's a QB. A top 10 pick has to be a plug and play player and if Wells is not that player than the pick was a waste in my opinion. The learning curve is going to be greater than it would be for a normal rookie LT because Wells has never played the position. Those are just the facts.

Now maybe the Browns are still in the market for a LT and Wells is planned to be the new RG. I just question using the pick on a RG with so many other holes to fill. If Wells is inked in as the new LT then they failed their franchise QB by not getting the most valued player to plug and play at the #3 valued position on the team. So the question I have for the board and the Browns FO, can you say right now that without a doubt you have upgraded the position of LT with the drafting of Wells over what you had at the position with Hubbard last year? Right now, if you're truthful, the answer to that question is "I don't know!" If that's true then you would have to question using the #10 pick overall on a player that is an "I don't know player" that has never played the position in HS or college after you just spent the last 2-years building a power offense that's missing one critical part - LT!

steve...calling Wills "a project" is a bit harsh imo. Might be best to see how Wills does before at LT before we attempt to label him.

I've read that Wills has been practicing the LT position with the likely scenario that whatever team drafts him will move him to the left side of the line.

Then there is the possibility that the Browns still add a veteran LT in trade and do move Wills inside to RG. Maybe the Brown move Conklin to LT and play Wills at RT.

Whatever the Browns do, at the worst the Browns improved their OL and now have addressed a glaring need. Wills at LT sure sounds better than Greg Robinson.

Wills played RT for a leftie, so he protected the blindside. Sure, there are differences but from the bits Ive read, this kid is the best plug and play prospect, excels in run and pass pro, has great feet and has a mean streak. Callahan and Joe T will polish the edges off. I think it was as good as pick as we could have made.

Wills.

Not that it's all that relevant at this juncture, but I'm perhaps a little more curious now about the talks for Trent Williams. If nothing else but to shed some light on thought processes of our FO operations.

.

This seems like the logical thread for those conference calls .... *L* ,,,

Its a joke feel free to unclench for a second and *L* ... or be your anal self and don’t ... your option ... *L* ...

Yes, I am aware.

It has been moved.

I c u chose option 2 ... *L* ...

I c u and I have varying definitions of that term.

Getting this in the bag may help with a more reasonable pricing of TW if talks continue. A Williams/Conklin duo is solid. And look at what the rook gets potentially for help.

I am not a "TW regardless of price" guy, dawgs. Not many in the NFL complain about their OT play being excessively good, more than needed, or that the QB is horrifically clean all season. <G>. A three-tackle set with our backs could be a hard option to handle.

Welcome aboard, big man. Win.

I think that Wills will play LT and the Williams thing is probably dead. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

J/c

I think Berry’s comments about wanting youth on the OL kind of ends the Williams speculation .. he said last night they felt it was important to find the right young guy

I believe you are right and I'll add that we may not be done with a further addition to the Oline, possibly an OG or OC...

Small sample size, but the majority of the plays of Wills shown on some critique videos I watched showed him not getting much help (TE was on the other side). Could've been a product of the play selection that went into making the video... but one of the questions that came out of the conversation over Wills and RT vs LT conversation was the idea of 'playing on an island'. Looks like he might've been doing that, just on the opposite side w/ a leftie QB.

Obviously, I'm not Berry so I can't say anything absolutely definitive, but I'll state as definitively as any outsider can: a trade for Williams is dead. I'd lay money that he was a contingency plan in case we couldn't get someone we targeted in the Draft.

We got our LT; this offense has no holes at all. None.
This is just about as complete and stacked as an offense gets.

It just needs to stay healthy now.

Why is he commenting on anything related to personnel?

Because he owns the team?

I guess I'll ask again, why is the son in law of the owners who's job is not personnel making any comment whatsoever on personnel?

The Haslams are simply the worst.

When you are the owner you can do whatever you want.

The Haslams are definitely the worst.

because he was giving a non-answer when asked a question.

J/C

Ive said numerous times that JW seems like such a tool. He has no form of qualification for football personnel ... but we’re going to be forced to deal with him for a long time IMO

That's what I thought too. Reading it, I wonder why anyone would be upset by that answer.

Yup. He made noises that formed words, but he didn't say anything.

Haha perfect

I simply don't think it is particularly wise to quantify how many guys you are interested in with your pick before you consider doing something else. It seems to me that was their direct strategy, and I don't know why you would say anything close to that. A 'couple' could have meant 2 or 3, and considering all teams knew that the Browns were in need of a LT, that could have encouraged teams to trade up and leap frog the Browns for the same guys they too also might have liked. Luckily, it didn't happen (either by teams not pursuing it or not being able to agree to terms on a trade) and the Browns seemingly got their guy, but I think he could have been more guarded than that.

I believe it call comes from my own mindset that I think the JW, although not knowing him, comes across as rather stupid.

I think you're maybe reading WAY too much into what was said.
It was literally a "nothing", a non-event.

I never do that.

So this time is an exception?

Read what he said.

"I think we're going to just see how the board falls. We've got our eyes on a couple people who we really like ... We'll just see how things shake out"

That's a Bill Belichick type non-answer. You guys are going nuts over him saying, literally, nothing. What key information did you get out of that non-answer?

WHAM ....

The molehill is now Mt Everest ,,,,

Given my opinion of JW, his answer was far better than what I would've expected.

Everyone agrees the Haslams are the worst and that they've created one of the most dysfunctional organizations in all of sports.

Yet we can't agreement that JW should probably just be quiet.

The Haslams being the worst and their son-in-law speaking on personnel matters are not mutually exclusive events.

No one is upset. Just an observation.

I imagine the response of personnel people thru out the league would have been very minimal and not seen as an aha moment.
Those that have met him already consider him to be a tool and not a great source of info.

If someone does something wrong, you call them out.

If someone does nothing wrong, why still call them out - just because you don't like them? There's no honesty in that.

FWIW now ... bird cage liner maybe .. *L* ..

TRENT WILLIAMS
T, WASHINGTON REDSKINS

ESPN's Courtney Cronin reports the Vikings remain in pursuit of Redskins LT Trent Williams.

Minnesota had previously offered a Day 3 pick to the Redskins last week, but Washington apparently wants a little bit more. The Vikings can make it happen with 12 picks across the next two days, but the Redskins are running out of suitors after the Browns and Bucs both drafted tackles in the first round Thursday night to pretty much eliminate themselves from the Williams sweepstakes. The Vikings don't have much cap space to work with, so Cronin suggests Minnesota could send a pick and incumbent LT Riley Reiff to D.C. for Williams.

RELATED: Riley Reiff, Minnesota Vikings
SOURCE: Courtney Cronin on Twitter
Apr 24, 2020, 11:43 AM E

That is actually the best, most sensible deal, yet.

That also buys the Vikes the cap space they need. It's nearly a wash, actually - until they have to give him a new contract, anyway.

Washington gets a decent OT and potentially saves $2 million, I think.

I'm betting they get him for a 4th or 5th and Reiff.

You're going to take an honesty stance on something that is completely your opinion? Come on.

Opinions should at least be based on some type of substance in one direction or the other. Nothing the guy said gave anyone an insight to our drat plans.

If you're going to choose to be disingenuous in your assertation of a situation based on nothing more than whether or not you like his in-laws, then yes, I absolutely am going to call you out for dishonesty.

We have a difference of opinion and you're having a hard time with that. That's a you thing, not me being disingenuous.

There's basically two sides here. There's a side that doesn't think it was a good idea for him to speak on it, to say anything at all. There's another side that says it was no big deal. Both sides are opinions. Yet the side that says it was no big deal is coming back with takes calling the other side dishonest and disingenuous. That doesn't make any sense when it boils down to a difference of opinion.

Adding Reiff to the mix definitely makes a whole bunch of sense for both teams.

When you say you hold the opinion of how he said nothing based on the family he married into, that is a You thing. The Me thing is simply pointing out the absurdity in that.

Why are you talking about trades in this thread?

Ha! You right. My bad. :-p

That's not a very intelligent take away based on what I said, considering the long lineage of dysfunction under the Haslams. And I am not calling you unintelligent. I don't believe you are unintelligent. But you are crafting your own narrative to support your emotional response to a difference of opinion. You are having a hard time with this difference of opinion. Maybe we should chalk it up to a bad day.

No, I'm not having any problem at all, I'm just having a conversation.

That said, I'm ending it here because this is PF and our conversation definitely isn't PF, nor Trades.

Washington played out this scenario about as bad as they could have.

They screwed the pooch alright.

Well, you are a fly. I guess you are on the wrong wall.




LOL....just poking a finger buddy, you know I love ya.

A funny moment in my life...I was up at the lot and you called me for some reason to tell me the gianormous van had a flat and you told me you were waiting for AAA to show up.

I relayed the message to Brian, who was wondering where you guys were, he was counting on you to be there to help....LOL...I am really laughing right now....he looked at me with this look of combined shock and rage and said, "What are they doing? Standing on the side of the road like a bunch of dummies staring at tire? Change the friggen thing!" LOL...seriously, it was hilarious. "None of them know how to change a tire!!??" "Waiting on AAA???!!" LOL...I swear, I am laughing my guts out right now.

Oh Man, I had to compose myself.....funny stuff.


Brian, I don't know if you'll see this, but you without question provided me with one on the funniest memories of my lifetime. Thank-you.


LOL, that was classic. Hey, I was just the messenger, but damn glad I was....LOL

That’s what I thought. Minny took Cleveland, correct? So us, Tampa and Minny, who were the ones supposedly interested in Williams, all drafted OT.

Well played by the Skins, indeed

He'll probably wind up being cut if he continues to voice his opposition to staying in DC. Well played by the Skins indeed. I can't remember a team mis-handling a top tier veteran like this. We laugh at BOB in Houston .... but at least he gets something .....

I agree about Washington, but I think Trent didn't play this well, either. He made some really odd comments early about the medical situation. He also didn't change his stance even after the HC and GM were fired. I think most folks w/a clue knew that he was after a big contract and I think that demand along w/his odd behavior scared some teams off.

That could very well be part of the case as well.

I don't know for certain, but it seems like both the team and the player didn't handle the situation properly.

I would agree.

I think his wanting 20 million per year scared everybody off.

IF this is true Williams appears to be a douche ...


TRENT WILLIAMS
T, WASHINGTON REDSKINS

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports Redskins LT Trent Williams declined the team's proposed trade to the Vikings.

Vikings added a first-round talent, Ezra Cleveland, to shore up Kirk Cousins' blindside in the second round of Saturday's festivities, leading Williams to reportedly nix any movement to Minnesota in the process. Whether the Vikings have done well in the draft (and they have through two nights) is a moot point as their organization was realistically one of the last remaining suitors for 31-year-old Williams to land with. At this point, it can't be completely thrown out that he steps away from football entirely in 2020. There's no conclusion to report as long as Williams refuses to play for Washington and, on the other end of the spectrum, other franchises refuse to give in to his lucrative demands. He remains up for grabs as one of the best left tackles in all of football.

RELATED: Ezra Cleveland, Minnesota Vikings
SOURCE: Ian Rapoport on Twitter
Apr 25, 2020, 1:32 AM ET

He is obviously not looking to do the Skins any favors.

Was Williams worried a out the compitition from Cleveland?

I think he wants to go somewhere warm. Probably also somewhere without state income taxes.

At this point I wouldn’t touch Williams at all ... too much drama, money, unknowns, etc

I think each side blew this up. The poor screwed pooch is overworked. TW has the bar too high and a reputation for baggage or sideshow or whatever. The Skins didn't help themselves. So while I am sharing the "blame" for what may be an entire season blown for TW, I also am really wondering about the agent in this. Did he blow up client's ego to "rightfully" expect and demand more? Refuse to bend? Posture more than bargain? Or owners stonewalled to "reward" some announcements. Not a two-sided pyramid, the go-between has some kind of presence.

May need to be a bargain to play. Or just retire after what today may represent. I assume his stock is dropping.

Or maybe he’s not a douche ... *L* ...

TRENT WILLIAMS
T, WASHINGTON REDSKINS

Agent Vincent Taylor, speaking for Redskins LT Trent Williams, said "there has been false reporting that Trent and I objected to particular trades."

Taylor added, "I will continue to respect the Redskins' right to negotiate a trade, and hope that the negotiations quickly lead to a trade that is in the Redskins' interest, Trent's interest, and the interest of the other team." This dispels a previous report from NFL Network's Ian Rapoport that Williams declined a trade to the Vikings. This situation just keeps getting worse for Washington. Waiting this long to attempt to get a trade done was curious enough, and now they're seemingly leaking false information in an attempt to swing the public. It remains to be seen who Williams will suit up for in 2020, but it almost certainly won't be the Redskins.

SOURCE: Adam Schefter on Twitter
Apr 25, 2020, 11:08 AM ET

Trent just got traded to the 49ers for a 5 today and a 3 next year

And Joe Staley is retiring, so that makes sense

Brent Sobleski Retweeted

Adam Schefter
@AdamSchefter
·
1m
49ers are trading RB Matt Breida to Dolphins for fifth-round pick, per source.

Nice get for the Dolphins.

To be fair, did the skins lie to him about a tumor? I wouldnt be too keen on being nice to them either.

Also, if they would lie to a player about his medical conditions, I wouldnt put past the team for leaking fake rumors about him either.

Wow, I can't believe how cheap Williams ended up going for!

Seems like teams always hold out on the Browns and the rich get richer lol. Garropollo also went to the 49ers when the Pats wouldn't trade with us, at least that one was to prevent in conference competition, this one just seems like typical Cleveland luck.

We will see how Williams plays and how much he costs ... I really wanted to acquire him, I'll be hoping he isn't as good as I imagined or continues to be a drama queen! Shany pulling the trigger and knowing him makes you think he's going to be good though ... Shany and Lynch were getting all sorts of props from the media and this board day 1 of the draft.

Well it would appear that all the rumors were false and Trent Williams was not as expensive as what people assumed.

Now people can go blindly along and think the Browns made the right choice or you can question their decision. As of now, none of us know exactly what the contract is for Williams so that still might be a "no go" on the trade but on the surface it looks like we missed the boat.

Now Joe Staley LT for SFO announced his retirement so they had a huge need. They also appear to believe that Williams will fill that need and keep them as Super Bowl contenders again in 2020 and so on. It would also appear that SFO didn't believe all of the OT's in the draft would fill their need since they had a shot at one and turned it down by trading out of the pick and allowing TBB to get that player. Now SFO did draft an LT in the 5th round but he's surely a project player with Williams inked in as the 49ers starter as of now.

Now the Browns drafted their plug and play LT at #10 in Wills. Wills has a huge upside but the question still remains about the switch. Having never played LT in high school or college, can Wills make the move to such a valued position? On paper, it would appear that player for player, It could be said that Cleveland has a higher or equal level of talent at every position except LT, RG & QB when compared to SFO today. The Browns would have fixed 2 of those positions by pulling the trigger on Williams and moving Wills to RG. That would only leave QB which would also change if Mayfield returns to 2018 levels.

I wish the Browns the best in their decision making for the team. I certainly hope that the decision was right. For Wills, I think he has a difficult road ahead switching to a position he has never played. Unfortunately, I also think his play will be compared to Williams play in SFO and what could have been. Fair or not, the Browns FO put this added scrutiny on Wills. Whether you agree with that or not, Wills will receive the comparison. Good move or not, my hope is that Wills lives up to the hype. Go Browns!

Or the Browns made an offer and Washington refused. Only to get desperate later. I am sure the cost for Williams went down as the draft went along. Once we drafted Wills and the first round ended, the market dried up.

Value or not? I would like to see him here for that, but the contract terms of the package could have been deal breakers for me and perhaps it was for our FO. Just hope TW is healthy. Suddenly needed out there, but, for us, here, not that much. Hope our new folks mesh and play.

Trent is now just another guy to beat.

Go, Browns!

I think the rumors were true.

It's just the fact that no team wanted to pay what the Redskins wanted each step of the way and they had to settle for such a piss poor return because they seemingly didn't consider that this was a deep class for OT and should have lessened their asking price and made a deal before the draft---not the third day of it.

Wouldn't it occur to someone in the Redskins FO that the pond had dried up and his stock had been going down? Maybe they see this as a huge and acceptable return for a problem, that being rid of it was reward enough. But many issues on the 'Skins and TW's sides seem to be all over this race to the bottom. Song lyric comes to mind: "Too much, too little, too late."

I had figured higher price tag at the closer, less asking price, and that earlier, before draft maybe? They stood by their guns and by God showed each other. Well deserved praise all around.

Depressed price, and California taxes to boot! Poor Trent.

TRENT WILLIAMS
T, SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

49ers coach Kyle Shanahan said the team won't immediately begin extension talks with newly-acquired LT Trent Williams.

“Trent has been out of football for a year and a half, and Trent made it clear to everyone he wants to come back and didn’t want to do a deal right away,” coach Kyle Shanahan said, framing the slow start in talks as Williams' wish. “He wanted to play and try to get back into it and see where he was at with the rest of the league and pick up where he left off." In a way it makes sense, but the if the 49ers were ready to pay Williams, he would not decline. It remains possible, if not probable, that Williams gets extended before Week 1 after the Niners can finally see him in person and gauge where he is at after missing so much time. Williams is due $12.5 million in the final year of his contract.

SOURCE: Profootballtalk on Twitter
Apr 26, 2020, 10:43 AM ET

By the time San Fran's pick came up four LT's had been selected. At that point they weren't sure their LT slot could be filled with a year one starter.

Four other teams ahead of them did. Right or wrong, all of those teams chose a draft pick over paying a huge contract plus draft capital for Williams. The situation dictated that San Fran make the move they did. I actually thought you might stop droning on about this after the draft. Guess not.

I was just about to hit the "like" button until that last sentence. Why do you do stuff like that?

The guy has laid out his opinion exceptionally well - if perhaps too lengthy - and never got his boxers-in-a-bunch when someone disagreed.

He has simply been expressing his opinion on a current need for the Browns.

It's a posting style that has been cultivated by a few on here for a while. It's maddening when you agree with everything someone says, but then they just HAVE to add that little dig in at the end.

It's a stylistic expression.

San Fran got him for relatively cheap (not counting his salary)... the draft capital was a lot lower than if he would have been delt last year....

I completely agree with you, oobernoober.... kudos.
You’re usually wrong but this time you nailed it.

... and here I thought I would regret posting that.

Hey, your opinion is just an opinion and I'm fine with that. Also note, I don't take shots at you but so be it if it meets your needs.

First of all you're wrong about the 49ers. They had an opportunity at one of the top 4 tackles because they had the 13th pick and 1 was left on the board. One of three reasons occurred for them to not make the pick. 1) Their board had a different player as BPA. 2) Most likely, the player left was a RT and making a pick at #13 for a player that doesn't play the position is high risk. 3) The top 4 OT's are over hyped and we can address the position later in the draft which they did two ways by drafting a LT in the 5th round and trading for Trent Williams.

Please just think about it for a moment. What was the gain or loss for the 49ers trading out of the #13 pick for the #14 pick. They got the 14th pick an additional 4th round pick for the flip flop giving the 13th and a 7th rounder and didn't have a solid plan to address their LT need. They then traded up giving their 31st pick, 4th round 117Th and 176th 5th round pick to MIN to get the 25th pick which they took a WR with. Now they have no 2nd, 3rd, or 4th round pick nor did they have a solid in road to Trent Williams. With LT sitting wide open with Staley's announced retirement, why would the 49ers trade out of the spot where they had a shot at what some considered the best OT prospect in Wirfs? According to you (not my analysis) you're saying the 49ers were not sure Wirfs could fill their need as a year one starter.

In that statement, I agree that the only answer is Wirfs didn't meet their needs and he did meet the TTB need for a RT. So they took a 4th round pick in exchange for their pick and then reached in a selection at #14 for a DT which most analysts give them a B- for the pick. The issue remains though as to why the 49ers skipped on one of the 4 top OT's all of which were graded very closely and deemed plug n play players.
Wirfs actually started a couple of games at LT in college so there was limited if not very limited experience at the position.

So why the skip on LT? Is it because they were over rated? Is it because the switch from RT to LT is more complicated than what we think? Was there a huge drop off between Wills, Becton, and Wirfs or were they equally talented as advertised? Of the 4 advertised top OT's in the draft, only 1 has never played a single game at LT in high school or college and that was Wills the Browns pick. So again, why did SFO pass on Wirfs and trade out of the position for an additional 4th rounder when they had as glaring a hole at LT as the Browns had? Or maybe, the 49ers scouting reports on those tackles tell a different story than what the Browns reports say.

Williams is gone and that boat has sailed. That doesn't mean the Browns made the right decision nor SFO for that matter. However, just because you did not agree with pursuing Williams and I thought it was a good move doesn't make either one of us right or wrong at this point. Wills production on the field and the ability to be a day 1 plug and play will determine that disagreement. Like I've stated, the Browns offense has been built to win now not 2-3 years down the road. Drafting at #10 required getting a plug n play player at whatever position that would contribute on day 1. If Wills cant do that or worst yet not able to make the conversion of switching from RT to LT then I call the draft pick a waste. As of today, the Browns have a player, they don't necessarily have a LT solution. That remains to be seen. IMO, the 49ers didn't think it was a good idea to draft a college RT for the NFL LT position so they traded the pick. The 49ers had the opportunity to get 1 of the top 4 OT's on the board - Hmmm, you are wrong on your assessment, and the 49ers passed. The reason why is up for debate.

actually the 49ers obviously didn't want to takes Wifs.. maybe they were high on Wills or Becton but they weren't there... we don't know... ultimately they made a good trade for a guy who should be able to help right away... of course Williams has been out of football for a year after having a tumor removed from his head... he's also over 30.... I liked Williams but ultimately I think Wills was a great move. I honestly think he'll be able to start at LT without an issue from day 1.... but we'll see... I could be wrong

Can you imagine if we gave up the draft capital (even the little that it ended up taking to get him) to bring him in and we were just gonna 'let it ride' in terms of getting him signed long-term? Having just played in a Superbowl kinda gives you some leeway to do stuff like this, I imagine.

Texans did that with Tunsel... slightly different situation as Tunsel had all the leverage due to draft capital Texans gave up and their glaring need at tackle... He signed a 60+ million deal over 3 years with I think 50 million guaranteed.... worked out well for him

I feel that it's probably smart for both sides of this trade to wait to give Williams a deal... niners get to see if he's in shape still and Williams gets a bigger deal if he is...

Did not realize/remember that.

I just immediately started imaging the drama-infused standoff if/when these talks are further and further delayed.

If I had the choice of picking Wirfs in their place, I would have passed on him too. Saying they passed on the leftovers of the four tackles doesn't mean they were wrong. It means they weren't desperate.

Point being that ship has sailed. It's obvious that Wirfs didn't grade out at the pick and I agree. I however disagree that in our situation, where we picked and with Wills still being on the board, that passing on Wills would have been the right decision.

I'll stand by my per-draft opinion. Thomas was already a LT and Wills was projected to move to LT based on his game film before the combine.

However, most had Wirfs penciled in at either RT or G before the combine. No matter how you work out in shorts, how you play the game is what counts. These players that shoot up the draft board or are given a bump in projection based on the combine are cautionary tales.

But we are talking about a different player than the one we drafted. We weren't fourth in line on the LT choices. Hell, we weren't even third on the list. I think your question, "So why the skip on LT? Is it because they were over rated?", is not even close to being accurate or even relevant here. And it's only obvious to anyone who reads it.

Why? Because you are trying to compare the LT draft class to one pick, the fourth in line. That has no relevance to the prior two or three. None. And I wouldn't have selected Becton with their pick either. None of that has anything to do with Wills.

I think the Bucs will regret drafting Wirfs unless they plan to play him at RT or G. But that has zero to do with Wills or the top two picks at the position which we had the luxury of taking.

So since we both agree the answer will only come by watching this play out, can we end the speculation until it does play out, or are we going to keep hearing this over and over again on a weekly basis until then?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Why be so upset, he didn't say one thing of value.. made no commitment at all....

yeah... typically I think you want a long term deal basically in place before a trade like this... but I guess I understand why not..

Texans screwed themselves with not having one in place with Tunsil

Yeah, a sign and trade deal is always what you want in a situation like this. Not having one may work out okay. But knowing what his asking price is and giving him all of the leverage I don't think will bode well for the 49'ers in the end.

I think it'll end up being a one year rental unless the 9ers give up a ton. I think that he wants to get to free agency and cash in big and do so in a year where the draft isn't stacked at the top with OT's

On another note, it appears the Browns are going to exercise the 5th year options on Garrett and Njoku.

https://nfltraderumors.co/browns-exercising-fifth-year-options-for-de-myles-garrett-te-david-njoku/

The price tag for Garrett will be around $15.184 million for 2021 and Njoku around $6 million.

This would appear to be a huge price tag to pay for a person not considered your #1 TE. It will also limit the teams opportunity to trade Njoku after May 3rd or next year with his hefty salary commitment and lack of production to this point.

For Garrett, you would think the Browns might be looking at a long term extension rather than the 5th year option considering the cost of the position.

These decisions are just the beginning with next year bringing option decisions on Mayfield and Ward with final year contracts sitting on Chub, Thomas and Ratley.

Another talking point, Olivier Vernon is scheduled to be paid a base salary of $15.5 million in the final year of his contract in 2020. This salary makes Vernon the highest paid Cleveland Brown going into the 2020 season as it stands. So far, Vernon has not lived up to expectations for the Browns and represents no dead cap money if they release Vernon. The question is whether Vernon's production to this point warrants the Browns having him as the highest paid player on the team? With $39,084,328 cap space available (top 51 salaries with rookie contracts) and adding Vernon's salary to the pot - could the Browns upgrade the position without affecting future possible commitments? Just a thought considering the Browns are basically renting Vernon for 1-year at $15.5 million because they will not meet his demands on a new deal IMO. Could this money be better spent elsewhere?

That's a possibility. But I think your option two makes more sense. The 49'ers give up a ton. I guess it would depend on how one views draft capital. I do think giving a third and fifth round pick for Williams considering their options was a pretty good deal.

On the other hand I feel investing that draft capital for a one year rental is an expensive proposition. I can understand why some may feel differently. But I'm of the mind that if I'm giving up a 3rd and 5th round pick for a top tier LT, I've already made my mind up that I plan to pay the man.

I’m with SF on this one ... there window is clearly wide open right now so they had to replace Staley ... before i dump huge money on top of the draft picks I just gave up I wanna see what dude is like after not playing for over a year and half ...

I'm not sure I'd make that a blanket statement for every LT candidate in this draft. But when the only one of the top rated LT's left at their pick was Wirfs I certainly agree with them.

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head, but I think they're going to have to jump pretty high to keep him from wanting to go to free agency for one last cash-in.

Of course, he's going to have to show that he hasn't lost a step at all since 2018 to show them he's still worth that deal.

Win-Win for both, and a can't lose situation for the 9ers unless he completely implodes.

Wills has a huge upside but the question still remains about the switch. Having never played LT in high school or college, can Wills make the move to such a valued position?

Unless he is the character illustrated by Steve Martin in that movie "THE JERK" especially in his dance scene...

j/c,

Why do more people not question college LTs' moving to RT at the next level, ...
as they do with a RT moving to the LT?

No, what we hear is that "he will have to move to RT" ...
without questioning whether or not they can learn the opposite footwork.

My point exactly, never question Wills upside or ability. The move from RT college to LT NFL is a huge move and rarely done because of the different skill set needed. This proposed move is not some minor move - it's s huge move and very few players can make that adjustment especially ones who have never taken a single game snap in high school or college at the position. In fact, I'm not even questioning drafting Wills. IMO, Wills has the perfect body and movement to be a day 1 starting RG for the Browns. That's where I believe Wills best high value is for the Browns. I actually think that RG is where he will eventually end up at for the Browns.

The problem is that the Browns did not address the open LT position with a LT. They haven't done in in free agency, trades, or the draft. Heck, even the UDFA they picked up in Taylor (rated as the #15 OT in the draft) has never played LT. This could still be a huge hole and a bigger problem for the Browns.

On another note but related. It is forecasted now that only 17 of the 32 1st round draftees in the 2017 NFL draft will have their 5th year options exercised by the team where they are currently members. It was only 16 until the Browns exercised Njoku. Njoku is now scheduled to make about 6-million in his 5th year. Njoku is scheduled to be paid 1.76 million in 2020. His 2021 salary would be a 341% increase over his 2020 salary. IMO, Njoku hasn't earned that Kind of raise to this point and it would appear on the surface that the Browns didn't think so either when they signed Hooper as TE#1. What changed I don't know but it wasn't performance. I would also think that with the option in place that there is or will be a zero trade market for Njoku now or in the future unless he gets a whole lot better than he is right now. Anyway, with only 17 players getting 5th year options, the success rate for 1st round draft picks is still around 53-55%. That's if you actually believe that Njoku can right now be called a successful 1st round pick.

That brings me back to Wills. Great college talent at RT with a huge upside and potential. Even with that, there's still only a 53-55% chance that he's a successful pick as a RT. Moving him to a position he has never played would have to make you think that those odds would decrease dramatically. Again, I'm not questioning the pick or the player. I'm questioning the move that some think is going to be easy - I think not. I am just confused why the Browns would have all their eggs in one basket at this point on a player that could have a less than 50% chance of success statistically.

It's about how the RT usually gets help. Often times you get a TE to chip block which prevents the RT from having to play on an island. By contrast the LT does often play on an island and has sole responsibility for that left side.

That requires a higher skill set. This is just one of the main reasons you often see college LT's transfer to the RT or G position in the NFL. In the case of Wills he was the RT for a left handed QB. So it is sort of a role reversal. In most cases you have the best and most agile player on the OL play LT, even in college.

In the case of a left handed QB your best and most agile OL player would be the RT. It's as much about ability as it is footwork. It's also why very few college RT's are projected to be LT's.

But there is a measure of muscle memory involved. Often time even college players who are projected to move from LT to RT in the NFL never make the transition. Some never make it in the league and some get moved inside to G.

So I see you have decided not to wait and see how it all plays out first. I can't say I'm surprised.

It still requires a change in footwork.
The same mental gymnastics are required.

So said LT must move to the right side where he 'will' (future tense) get some help from the TE.

This is due to his skillset, not his footwork, and I say footwork, because the technique taught can be one and the same thing, only in reverse.

Quite simply, though the center is considered the "rock" of the line and usually calls the blocking schemes and provides the stop for the shortest distance to the QB, the left tackle usually has the hardest job to do game in and game out.

Why?

Defenses put their best pass rusher lined up on the offensive left side.

Why?

It's usually the "blind side" of the QB's vision and many times he never sees them coming. This allows not only for sacks, but fumbles and tipped balls. It's so easy to slap a ball out of a QB's hands when he's drawn back to throw.

So why not put the best rusher against the right tackle if he's not as suited to stop him? Because they QB can see him coming and can either roll away or step up the pocket to avoid him.

By coming from the blind side, if the pass rusher beats the left tackle, it's usually disastrous for the QB who usually sees it too late to avoid a bad outcome.

Since the best pass rusher is also usually not just a strong guy, but the fastest pass rusher to boot, the left tackle has to have that quick initial surge to keep from being either blown by or circled.

So just being a big strong heavy roadblock is nowhere close to being enough of a resume to stopping a tall fast pass rusher. He has to be fast himself, usually faster than most right tackles are.

Left tackles with long arms can extend their range from being blown by or circled. A quick guy with long arms can sometimes give a little push to a pass rusher as he's trying to streak by that a guy with shorter arms might miss. That extra second or two can be all the difference between a completed pass or a sack.

And not that left tackles have higher SAT scores or anything, but there is more for them to know and usually many more wrinkles thrown at them. Many times an All American or even Pro Bowl right tackle has been switched to other side for multitudes of reasons and very rarely have the results been everything one would have hoped for.

The QB has to trust that his blind side is being protected. Taking your eyes off the field for even a second to check the left side rush could throw off your timing.

Rushers need to trust that a hole will appear where the play has been called and a fullback needs to trust the line can handle their usual men so he's free to concentrate on picking up a blitzer on a pass play.

Pass plays usually work or fail because of the job done by the left tackle. That's a lot to put on one's shoulders and that's why not every linemen is cut out to be a left tackle.

The vast majority of college RTs don't become LTs in the NFL because they don't have the required skillset. Of the group that were LTs in college and then move to RT, it's because their skillset isn't where it needs to be to become an NFL LT. It's a correlation thing, not a causation thing.

If the prevailing notion (the notion that had Wills drafted to the Browns) is to be believed, then that means Wills is a very unique prospect. He possesses the required LT skillset, but just so happens to have played RT. He will have to work on technique, but he would've anyways (they all need to). Not a single prospect came out in the draft that DOESN'T need to clean up parts of their technique in a hurry. Not even Thomas. The RT-->LT part adds further complexity to the technique work needed, but it doesn't seem to be a dealbreaker, it seems.


I REALLY like one thing about Wills... and that's his runblocking. There was comment that was in a handful of his scouting videos, and that was something to the effect of "Wills can contribute in the short term via runblocking while he hones his passblocking". I think that jives (or should jive) with our offensive philsophy this coming season. Him and Baker would be much better served operating within an offense that highlights the run. We'll see over the course of the next season how they handle that, and go from there.

Also we know from experience that not all who played on the Left side in college can make the change even to RG at the next level...

You get it ... its not a question of skillset with Wills.

Times have changed. The best pass rushers do not necessarily line up against the offensive left side.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/05/31/nfl-le...-defensive-ends

I tried to cover that part with this............

I think because most people are right handed. It's just more natural for a right hander to put his right hand in the ground and pivot to his right. More natural to take a wide outstep with your right foot.



JMO....some will probably call me stupid.

Yes, I'm just pointing out that the rest of it is irrelevant and that either switch has to go through a similar mental and physical process.

Sorry that I did not take the time to quote selectively Pit, my bad.

j/c,

Hey! Anyone like to guess what position "T-Bone" Tony Jones played for us before moving out to LT?

... ...

Well if my memory serves me correctly, T-Bone was an 1988 undrafted free agent from Western Carolina where he was a LT. He played for 8-years with the Browns playing both tackle spots. In 1988 he was a backup and only appeared in 4 games. In 1989 he was a backup appearing in 9-games while starting 3. In 1990, Jones became a full-time starter at RT for the Browns. He switched back to his familiar LT spot in 1991 and played LT for the Browns through 1995.

Jones played the inaugural year for the Baltimore Ravens at LT in 1996 holding the position for future HOF LT Jonathan Qgden who as a rookie in 1996 played LG next to Jones.

Jones went to the Broncos in 1997. Jones played RT for the Broncos in 1997 because the LT spot was held down by HOF and reigning Pro Bowl LT Gary Zimmerman. In 1998, Jones switched back to his familiar LT position and made his only Pro Bowl appearance. Jones continued at LT in 1999 and 2000 with the Broncos. Jones won 2-Super Bowls while a member of the Broncos.

T-Bone retired after the 2000 season.

This is not even close to being true anymore. Teams lineup their best pass rusher over the weakest linemen or where he can to the QB fastest.

You got all that from memory ?? lol

Thank you. And there you have a president folks.

U mean like we move MG all over .... ...

Except for one thing you are not looking at SKILL SET at all. Its not the transition from right to left its the SKILL SET. Which lets face it the Skill set of a College RT is so rare to be as good as those of the LT. But in Wills case throughout his starting years at RT is that he had a Left handed QB and was left for the most part without chip blocking as an aide and handled that BLIND SIDE...so comparing him to other RTs making the transition to LT is futile cause its all about the Left handed QB.

Wills has the "SKILL SET" of a LT pure and simple. Not many do. He had that special something and showed the Quick step and powerful blocking. That SKILL SET is the key not the Right foot or the Left foot....that is a pffft adjustment that HAS to be made with repetition...not some new found SKILL SET.

So he is the best LT prospect even though he played exclusively RT...the key is he played the Blind Side of the QB

So not exactly your point. It not a huge move cause you are comparing it to not a normal transition. What is more important to the transition to NFL LT...regardless where you played in college. SKILL SET available is more important than the use of the right foot over the left foot in the first step.

That transition (right to left) is done by repetition not the development of some skill set that isn't there. Repetition is something that has to take place but is not an impossible task...unless the guy is lazy. It is just something that must take place....The skill set is within the kid RT or LT does not define that available skill set.

hopefully I made myself clear on this, doesn't mean you must agree with me as long as you UNDERSTAND what I am stating.

We could really use one of those about now.

That seems to be the case nowadays, further complicated by who else might be part of the blitz package coming from either level of the secondary. And how good the individual blitzed is solo.

Reminds me of some of the craziness in our old 'UFO Defense' set; I think that is what it was called under? Palmer?

precedent

Yes, Ty, obviously thats what I meant.

Why? They have no real power anyway
... ...

You're talking back to a time when the constitution was written.

Pit, two thoughts. First I think joe t said the muscle memory training could be accomplished in two months of hard work. Second, I do not think the right tackle gets tight end help because he is the right tackle. He gets it because the best tackle is on the left, the qb’s blind side. If the qb is left handed the team puts their best tackle on the right side. Wouldn’t it follow that the tight end might provide help to the left tackle.

One other thought. Didnt bama’s starting left tackle get drafted last year. Don’t know a name but pretty sure he did get drafted, maybe first round??? He was good enough to get drafted but not good enough to beat wills out at the most important tackle position. So I think it is safe to say we got a pretty good tackle, not a guard in waiting.

Lastly would eotab or versatile or one of our other liine experts explain the difference in the skill sets from right to left tackle. Not the footwork or the te help, but what skills does blocking the right de require that blocking the left de does not.

I actually agree with you in terms of Wills. It's all about his skill set. I would not have agreed with Wirfs had he have been our selection.

Shifting positions is still a variable. But not one too great for a guy with Wills abilities.

Figured, just there were jokes, so I thought I'd help clarify.

In watching one of the YouTube breakdowns, someone thought his first step on the slide step was too pronounced. I think another liked the big step. It got me thinking, he has no bad habits from the LT yet. He should be able to learn it right the first time.

j/c:

Hmmm....I wonder who that was.

King John

so lemme get this straight.

a random reddit user named “everyonelovesnudez” went on a local Seattle radio station, said the Seahawks are trading for Myles Garrett & now it’s spreading as if that’s believable?


Damon J Kecman

@DownWithDamon


I’m posting this as a preemptive strike against those rumors going around Twitter. They are actually trending.

That's crazy.

Just some interesting facts about Wills college career and the Browns.

Common knowledge that Wills has only played RT in high school and college. With 29 total starts in college, Wills played with LH QB Tagovailoa the majority of those games but also had 5 starts and 6 halves with the QB being RH in those 29 starts.

Questions have been posted as to who was the LT on the Tide when Wills played. In 2018 (Wills 1st year as a starter) the LT was JR Jonah Williams. Williams played two seasons at LT with RH Hurts as QB before playing the final season with LH Tagovailoa as the starter. In 2019, Williams was a 1st team All American who in turn was the 1st OL taken in the 2019 draft at #11 by the Cincinnati Bengals. Williams was injured in pre-season workouts and missed the entire 2019 NFL campaign. For 2020, the Bengals basically have two 1st Rd picks ready to hit the field in Burrows and Williams.

In 2019, the starting LT was Alex Leatherwood. Leatherwood would eventually skip the 2020 NFL draft to return to Alabama for his senior season. The interesting thing about Leatherwood is he was the backup to Jonah Williams at LT as a Freshman. Wills was the backup to Womack at RT as a Freshman the same year. In 2018, Leatherwood moved inside to starting RG to get playing time because Jonah Williams still was holding down the LT spot. Wills then got the RT nod due to Womack breaking his ankle during spring practice only to reinjure it during summer camp. Womack was never able to take back his position from Wills. In 2019, Leatherwood moved back to his normal LT position with Wills manning the RT spot.

As we know, the Browns then drafted Wills at #10 and plan to move him to the LT position. Interesting fact is that Wills will be playing twice this year against the LT teammate from Alabama Jonah Williams who was drafted #11 a year earlier. It will be fun to see which player actually lives up to the hype surrounding them for the NFL 2020 since they are both basically rookies heading into the 2020 campaign and in the same division.

Finally, Leatherwood enters his senior season as the Tides LT All American candidate. Early mocks have Leatherwood going in the top 10 of next years NFL Draft.

In fact, 2021 could be the year of the LT since 4 players who play LT in college are projected to go in the top 11: (3) Penei Sewell - Oregon, (6) Walker Little - Stanford, (10) Alex Leatherwood - Alabama and (11) Sam Cosmi - Texas.

Interesting that it could mean that Alabama could have 3 top 11 picks at LT in 3-years (even though Wills technically isn't a LT). That's quite a run.

LOL! Keep em coming. I enjoy the entertainment.