DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Big Brain front office - not ready for prime time...

Browns' new brain trust's curious start to free agency makes no sense

Jason La Canfora / CBS Sports NFL Insider
March 10, 2016 03:21 PM


As debuts go, even by Browns standards, this one was inauspicious.

Owner Jimmy Haslam, on the heels of blowing up his franchise, yet again, and going a curious route in his latest attempt to restructure and reconfigure his front office, assembled an Ivy League dream team of lawyers and thinkers, anointed his former legal counsel and negotiator to the role of head of all things football operations, and set out on yet another new path. And, well, less than 24 hours into the start of the first new league year with his new paradigm in place, the Browns were certainly standing out as outliers, only not in a particularly positive manner.

The perpetually struggling team lost four of its more reliable starters -- and they don't have a plethora to begin with -- wounding an offensive line that had been one of its few strengths. Couple that with the new front office adding nothing from other teams to this point. Already facing needs and voids all over the roster following the flameout of the Mike Pettine/Ray Farmer experiment, the team created new ones at a time when an already talent-thin free agent class was being picked bone thin even before the new league year officially kicked in, and with the Browns sitting on a whopping $44.5M in available cap room.

So all of that will raise eyebrows around the league, and it did, quickly.

And I would say, to all of that, no need to panic, yet. It was only one day. Free agency is generally fool's gold, especially when grossly overspending to sign players whom their current teams are willing to part with, and the Browns are so far from competing that going out and trying to morph into a contender via free agency would be pure folly. That's not the issue here. This class is light on star power and the money got too crazy too quickly. It wasn't a debacle or a disaster, as some have characterized it, though it certainly heightened some of the growing pains of this latest rebranding of the front office and added to the team's perception problems among some agents and among its fan base.

When new football czar Sashi Brown himself says before free agency that retaining existing talent is key and then, fairly rapidly, receiver Travis Benjamin, center Alex Mack, right tackle Mitchell Schwartz, and safety Tashaun Gipson all depart -- some under duress and carrying less than positive feelings about the new Cleveland front office -- it's fair to say there may be a disconnect. In reality, sources said, the Browns were really only going to be competitive to try to retain one of those players, Schwartz, where, oddly enough, things turned contentious.

It started with occasional grumbling and griping from the agent community about the Browns' approach to engaging in contract discussions and concerns about the inability to get what agents believed was a straight answer about their players. Those disagreements about how to value certain players began boiling over early this week as the negotiating period opened up Monday. Frustration mounted, words like "confusing" and "mixed-messages" were thrown around, and numerous agents expressed a belief it was exceedingly difficult to get a fair deal done with Brown. Then, Wednesday word spread that things had turned ugly with Schwartz, a solid right tackle, to the point the team had pulled its offer, prompting Schwartz's brother, Geoff, an NFL offensive lineman himself and current free agent, to reference the "nonsense" his sibling went through on his Twitter feed.

Whatever you may think about the players who departed -- Mack's play has certainly declined, Gipson hasn't been as impactful since his injury, Mitchell is "just" a right tackle, Benjamin is a feast-or-famine burner who flashes -- the reality was this market spoke, and it spoke loudly enough for all of them. The two offensive linemen combined for $35M fully guaranteed at the time of signing alone, and while right tackles didn't come close to approaching the $9M per year figure some agents had hoped for, there were ample teams interested in the Browns' prominent free agents.

And there is nothing forcing the Browns to keep all or any of these players, and they are surely entitled to their evaluations and I don't even disagree with them not pushing to keep all or most of these guys. But the message is skewed given the recent statements from the new man in charge.

The fact that the Browns have made waves in the agent community doesn't help. The overriding reality for any front office in Cleveland is that, given the perpetual losing, the less-than-glamorous locale, the constant change of coaches and general managers and team presidents, the constant lack of a quarterback, and all the dysfunction over the years, the Browns will likely have to overpay, perhaps substantially, to land or retain players. That will be a factor that agents weight into their evaluations of contracts with the woeful franchise.

And if the process leaves some players and their reps feeling insulted, if they feel as if their time and energy has been wasted, that doesn't help. If they feel the team is being "overly coy" or "dishonest" with its verbal offers, as some have expressed to me ("They are a hard team to trust," as one powerful agent who did not represent any of the four departing free agents put it), that's not great. Several agents not involved in Wednesday's affairs used words like "incredibly indecisive" to describe the team's negotiating style. Sounds like some bridge building may be order.

Schwartz's camp would maintain that they had a legit offer on the table from the Browns, shopped it around, could not beat it, and when they returned to the Browns to accept the figures exchanged before the market officially opened, they were told the Browns were going in a different direction. Browns sources would say that the pre-free agency offer was somewhat take-it-or-leave it, there were no guarantees it would still be there down the road, and that Schwartz would have made millions more had he taken their original offer.

Schwartz's camp isn't angry -- he moved on to a playoff team for good money -- they just find it a little "crazy" the way it all went down given the amount of the original offer (clearly the Browns valued the tackle), and the amount to cash and cap space available to the team and the fact they spent none of it elsewhere in the first wave of free agency. Wave 1 is already over, believe it or not.

Everything I've heard from Browns people about what went down with Schwartz I believe to be true, and it's fair to say all sides probably could have done a little bit better. But the thing is, agents don't have to sell tickets for a sagging product or galvanize a long-suffering fan base and try to get people to literally buy into their latest vision for the team with their wallets and the minds. So as best I can tell, the Browns were right in this particularly evaluation of Schwartz's market, but where did it really get them?

They lost one of their few recent quality draft picks and a player they had grown and developed over four years, under a cloud of discontent. They have irked an already on-notice locker room even more, managed to land more bad press, and as of now they still don't have a proven viable right tackle on the roster. So what did they win? And with all that cap space, would it have been worth it to swallow pride or take the high road or whatever you want to call it, and tried to work it out with Schwartz rather than walk away?

You can only draft so many players and they have a great many holes to fill, and having all of these guys walk, while wayward Johnny Manziel lingers on your roster, is not the best look, either. And for a team long fighting a perception war, looks matter. It also has execs around the league talking about how new head coach Hue Jackson might be feeling about his bosses, with the offensive guru losing three starters from an already talent-starved unit. This is Jackson's last chance to establish himself as an NFL head coach, his owner is notoriously fickle, the front office is unproven-at-best, and given all the issues between football operations and the coaching staff in Cleveland over the years, and the fact that one of Jackson's closest friends in the media was one of the Browns' biggest vocal critics on Wednesday, well, let's just say that people are talking.

None of this, in and of itself, is damning.It's not the end of the world. Hell, they won three games with this group of players as it stands. It would be silly not to try to trade aging left tackle Joe Thomas now, because the Browns need picks desperately, and he's one of few tradeable commodities and he won't still be playing by the time this latest rebuild is complete (if it ever is complete). There's nowhere to go but up, right?

Perhaps the Browns will cash in on the compensatory picks they get for the departed players (although by 2017 who knows how many of the assembled cast is still in place; that's like five Haslam Years). There is no shortage of brainpower in Berea and this was always going to be another challenging transition, regardless. So hope is not lost.

But maybe a more direct, less-meandering approach with agents could help in the future. Finding a little different bedside manner might be worthwhile. Cultivating and sticking to a message would probably help. Digging out of this hole was never going to be easy, and no matter what transpired on the first day of the league year, that wasn't going to change. Time will tell if anything that went down thus far has really made that chore all the more difficult.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jas...esnt-make-sense

Very good article.

And cue the "bozo" comments.

IMO the reaction of some that because Sashi stated the importance of retaining players yet they were unable to retain any of the 4 as being some sign of... incompetence or a failed philosophy is a bit heavy on the hyperbole. Just because we didn't retain all 4 doesn't mean what he initially said is no longer true. I don't recall him ever saying that he promised they would be retained at any cost.

Shwartz: As I don't know a lot about evaluating O-lineman, I'm in the "wait and see who we get and if he works out" boat.

Mack: If we are all honest with ourselves, the odds of him staying were slim to none to begin with. While we do take a hit with the loss of talent, no one should be surprised or overly upset.

Benjamin: I don't think he'll be hard to replace.

Gipson: The guy is a talent, no doubt about that. But he's also got injury issues, no doubt about that. IS he a guy that you can count on to play 16 games? And if he isn't, how much impact/production is he going to give you when he is healthy? What is that worth? If he's Ed Reed 2.0 calibre, maybe he's worth it. Ultimately, do the Browns really look that stupid if Gipson gets hurt and doesn't play a full season next year?

Manziel: I heard the Browns are waiting to see what the League has in store for him. Something about not having to pay certain monies if he gets suspended. If another team hasn't shown interest, I'm not surprised he's still here at the moment.

Bowe: the guy has been a scratch all season, buried at the bottom of the roster. Does anyone really think Bowe is important enough to warrant an ounce of attention from the FO? He'll get dropped soon enough.

It is not that there was no retention. Who knows, we may be better off not having those guys?

It is the dismissive and disrespectful negotiation position that was taken with the agents. I haven't negotiated 7 digit deals, which is a different world than 5 or 6 digit ones, but even if your position is very conservative and you will likely walk away, there is a better business way of handling it. The best business practice is to preserve relationships with agents even though the particular services of the client are not wanted. Not to pull a Tony Grossi, but "football is ultimately a people business."

Perceptions.
They allowed the players that we actually valued, wanted, and needed to get away; yet the player(s) that offer us nothing but bad publicity and headaches (Manziel, Bowe) are kept around past the point where we could have gotten rid of them, despite the fact that there is nearly zero chance at all that anyone will ever offer us anything for them.

It doesn't instill confidence that they have any clue whatsoever as to what they are doing.

It occurred to me while reading that article that since last offseason's moves we have now strategically and systematically decimated every single position group on this team.

There remains not one single strength to this roster; none. We are below NFL average talent in every respect - and it has been done deliberately. Someone actually CHOSE to create this.

Analytics!

All four? How about 3 of 4? 2 of 4? Hell, even 1 of 4?

Here is what slays me. There are posters on here who become incredulous anytime the Browns are criticized. They belittle others by calling them shameful, bozos, clueless, Negative Nancy's, Haters, etc.............and meanwhile they are proven wrong every freaking time. Yet, they never change their tune.

I repeat some of the conversations I have witnessed on here to friends, co-workers, and family. They don't believe me when I cite some of the things that people say on here in defense of the Browns.

They say, "Awww, come on.....no one is that dumb." LOL.....yet, the the same people who are being discussed are the ones who act like all the rest of us are dumb.

LMAO man............it's hilarious.

Agree totally. It is a hurtfully honest, meritorious football opinion. On the business and marketing side, I assert the past several days have been hurtful as well, perpetuating negative perceptions those locally and nationally have of the organization. The front office's interactions with agents/players during negotiations (regardless of result), was an embarrassment. When pure business, non-sports, magazines run articles regarding it, an all-time branding low may have been reached.

I am not being my usual sarcastic self..........Can you expound on that? I am interpreting in different degrees. Are you suggesting they are:

--clueless

or

--deliberately trying to sabotage things to pull off something even more sinister?

I'm honestly not sure if I'm insinuating anything or not.

I just know that:
1. it's been a series of conscious decisions by various people for this to happen
2. it has decimated every single position group to where we have no strengths, at all

Whether or not there is some nefarious underlying master evil plan, damned if I know... but honestly, lately, I don't know that I'd put it past these guys. The odds of casual idocy affecting each and every position group so precisely is probably slightly on the order of astronomical; which is what has me scratching my head and raising my eyebrows a bit.


At the very least, there is a heavy dose of clueless permeating the Berea compound.... beyond that, who knows?

LOL. Agree. I wish I could find more merit in having a more positive take on the Browns, but I can't.

I don't belittle others for not sharing my views. And I am aware my views can be unpopular and in a minority. What is mildly surprising, even for an internet forum, is the vitriol with which some attempt to insult, discriminate, or outright verbally attack in a bigoted fashion, when they read something they happen to not like about the team.

Okay, thanks. Your post just got me to think about things from a different angle.

Like setting the stage for a team move to London, or something?

or, perhaps Haslam just deliberately trimming roster salary with an edict that we ride that 85% minimum salary line to maximize what he puts in his pockets?

Yes....

It is sad to see our depth chart on CBS Sports.

LT: Thomas, Miller
LG: Pazstor (Bitonio will le back in here when the season starts)
C:
RG: Erving, K Johnson (Greco might be back here when the season starts)
RT:

Yep ..... 2 completely empty spots. Now I know that we will probably slide Erving in a Center, and hope like crazy that he can handle the spot ..... but we have nothing at RT right now.

If we take another OL in the 1st or 2nd round this year, I may just snap. I am tired of perpetually rebuilding the OL, at the expense of everything else.

Get ready to watch Haden, Thomas, Greco, Desmond Bryant, Kruger, Dansby, and Whitner all be shown the door. This stinks of a complete tear down, and we didn't have a lot of talent to start with. Bleh. This team is going to be a 1 win team this year, and probably next as well, and that's if Hue Jackson is one of the greatest head coaches of all time. He lived through the complete disaster that was the Oakland Raiders after Al Davis died, and he might just be in a worse spot now. I wonder if he's starting to 2nd guess his whole "any head coaching job is better than not having one at all" position yet?

This looks like it's going to be a long, long, long,, long year for Browns fans. Almost makes me wish I still drank.

well Haslam is the owner not part of any "regime". And Sashi was here but not in the same capacity as he is now. I am quite certain Sashi had no part of the past FA's loses or hires. I also do not think he any sort of say in the past draft boards or their selections. That being said I am curious to see what this off season will bring or not bring then and only then will I make a my own personal decision on how well they did or did not do.
Not saying that personally that I would not have gone after a guy or two in FA. There are a number of guys I would have liked to have seen us chase. I guess what I am trying to say is that I am still in a wait and see mode.

As has been said before, it is no secret that the Schottenstein's are interested in the franchise, regardless of stadium lease length. Haslam ultimately did want to own a team, not necessarily THIS team, unless it was a stepping-stone. The price was right and an easy take from the last absentee English soccer-fan owner.

I have opined this before, including JH's hand in Ray-ray's antics in the past.

What are the odds, do you think, that Thomas and Haden "request" trades?
They and Kruger represent our top 3 salaries.

right now I am a little bit dumbfounded...but still in a wait and see

While I'm not as much about the "wait and see" attitude you hold, I would like to say something for your possible consideration.

Building a team is not an isolated event. It's a series of events. Each event earns its own merit or lack there of. I don't consider losing Benji a big event. I believe he was overpaid by a country mile and would never have gotten into a bidding war for him. We have plenty of Smurfs.

But the FA market and retaining some of you top talent is most certainly an event that will help determine your success or failure. When trying to build a team and your first act is creating more holes is an event that needs to be strongly looked at.

These players were very good and did not demand huge contracts for their talent. They actually pulled an offer from the table that may have kept one of them here. We have tons of cap space to have made these deals possible. If there is a plan to draft a rookie QB, we just made the environment for him to succeed much harder.

So while you may not be ready to judge them in their entirety, I believe it's easy to judge that in the case of this event in relationship to building a team, they failed miserably.

I really don't know. I am still processing some of the earlier thoughts that your earlier post provoked. Not saying I agree/disagree. Just thinking........

I don't believe you are seeing things as they really are.

wow a little off topic maybe...but dang

Ah, a voice of reason...

Play nice...

I am. I was laughing at your joke.

You knew that I wasn't joking...

I very well could be, as I have no information as to what he actually did for us then. just seemed logical to me.

Sooo...we keep Gilber and JF but let everyone else walk? I am dying to find out what their mega plan is?

You'll have to wait. They aren't done analyzing. As we speak, they are throwing data into the computer, waiting for it to analyze.

We'll probably end up with some baseball players, and a Harvard grad or 12.

So., you're thinking we might trade for Weeden, then?

Wait! What?

Devil said this:



Who the hell said the Browns had to retain all four? The Browns did not retain ANY of the four.

And you call that the "voice of reason?" Seriously?

Ahhhh...........now, I get it. You called it the "voice of reason" because he was defending the FO w/out merit and that is the same take that you have.

I see.......

I chuckled out loud.

You never know. It has to be analyzed. And apparently the computers are down in Berea.

What I'm asking is.. WHY DO WE STILL HAVE BOWE ?

Devil was being objective, trying to take the emotion out of the equation, while I am trying to see the rationale behind the FO moves. And no, I don't believe you get it...

Because we already paid him and it's March.

I don't get Schwartz... I und stand the other three... Don't particularly like it but understand the other thre... But what the hell with Schwartz... We're going a different direction?? What the hell direction are we going?


I understand letting the guy go and weigh options in the market... If he comes back take a few million off the original offer or stick with the original offer but why the hell do you just pull it with no really good back up plan