DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Browns Front Office...not ready for prime time...

...Did Sashi negotiate contracts when Farmer was here?

I was under the impression that he did, but this article is saying that he never has.

...Did Sashi negotiate contracts when Farmer was here?

I was under the impression that he did, but this article is saying that he never has.

Gee...an article from just who?

After 1 day of FA... grading and summarizing their complete body of work of how they handle FA 3/10/2016...oh and making sure they put in that dig about analytic studies.

It not an AHA factual moment. Yeah we didn't want to spend money on guys who didn't wish to be here.

We didn't wish to compete with teams on certain players we targeted as those teams were mandated to Spend a specific amount of cap or else suffer penalties from the NL.

Until the entire offseason is complete, its impossible to even start judging the new FO. I'm disappointed with some of the FA losses but, by in large, they were overpaid or just wanted out (Mack and Benji).

Plus I think Hue has nailed it questioning why people are upset that we lost pieces from a 3-13 team. I mean, if you want a different result, you have to change how you approach it.

This franchise cannot afford to allow only Sashi Brown and his Haravard boys to run the upcoming draft.

Until the entire offseason is complete, its impossible to even start judging the new FO. I'm disappointed with some of the FA losses but, by in large, they were overpaid or just wanted out (Mack and Benji).

Plus I think Hue has nailed it questioning why people are upset that we lost pieces from a 3-13 team. I mean, if you want a different result, you have to change how you approach it.

All that being said, we will need to knock it out of the park with the draft if we want to be at all competitive this year. Lotta holes to fill with a lot of question marks.

This front office is in need of personnel who have experience IN FOOTBALL..

The sides that people are taking are extreme.

I agree w/those who say it is too early to properly evaluate Sashi and company.

The first order of business was an epic fail in my opinion, but that doesn't mean they will continue to fail.

I guess that thing that makes me the most wary is that Haslam is still in charge. He says the right things, but when things don't go well, he blows things up.

The sides that people are taking are extreme.

I agree w/those who say it is too early to properly evaluate Sashi and company.

The first order of business was an epic fail in my opinion, but that doesn't mean they will continue to fail.

I guess that thing that makes me the most wary is that Haslam is still in charge. He says the right things, but when things don't go well, he blows things up.

The part I bolded is what I am doing. To this point it has been an epic fail. Now do I know how they'll fair in the draft?

No, I certainly don't. But the lack of football experience as it refers to the drafting and evaluation of talent in our FO should leave everyone a little weary and concerned.

Until the entire offseason is complete, its impossible to even start judging the new FO. I'm disappointed with some of the FA losses but, by in large, they were overpaid or just wanted out (Mack and Benji).

Plus I think Hue has nailed it questioning why people are upset that we lost pieces from a 3-13 team. I mean, if you want a different result, you have to change how you approach it.

All that being said, we will need to knock it out of the park with the draft if we want to be at all competitive this year. Lotta holes to fill with a lot of question marks.

If they let him walk because he used our offered number as a negotiating tool, we have every right to be upset. Giving up a valuable, much needed asset because egos determined they needed to play hardball is amateurish at best and negligence spurred by incompetence at worst.

But that's just guessing our response to an imaginary scenario that may or may not have happened.

I may get upset if I knew what happened. I may not. I don't know what happened so it doesn't matter.

First I believe the comment about Mack leaving for less money is deceptive at best. All players and agents look at is guaranteed money. Any team can cancel a contract by cutting a player. The only thing a player can count on in a contract is the guaranteed money. So when looking at a contract, the actual total amount included in the contract is very deceptive and means nothing.

When it comes to Schwartz, I don't know what happened. What I do know is that you offer a player a contract that you feel is fair, that should be a standing offer. Not hold it as ransom and pull it if he shops his services. There's no other reason Schwartz would turn down the deal that the Browns offered him other then the Browns deciding to renegue on the offer.

All you have to do is look at the quote by Sashi in my sig. and then look at the results. We have two holes on our OL today we didn't have a couple of weeks ago. That's going backwards. Losing Gipson created yet another one.

I understand that some people see it differently, but the outcome is clear no matter which way anyone believes it happened. We are a worse team today that when the FA market began. That's a fail.

Pitt, I can't disagree with you that the team as it is currently today is not in as good a shape as it was when those individuals were here. However, FA is not over, the draft is still to come, and the FO has decided to rebuild from the ground up.

Mack's contract with the Browns was voided by him. He went out and signed on the first day with the Falcons. It was widely stated that he would have gotten more money from the Browns if he wanted to stay. However, he (Mack) claimed that winning was important to him as well as the relationship with Kyle Shannahan and the offensive scheme that he runs. So Mack really wasn't going to stay with the Browns regardless of what the Browns offered. I supposed they could have paid ridiculously stupid money and kept him, but I also think his wife wanted out of Cleveland if her tweet after he signed with the Falcons was any indication.

Schwartz, we could argue about forever, but no one really knows what happened in that series of events. I tend to think that when Sashi came out and said that the offer was not pulled that he was telling the truth. Especially after other players and agents stated that the FO was very professional and that they would be willing to work with them in the future. I believe that was Mack's agent. If anyone would say something negative about the way the Browns do business it would be him considering the way the old FO screwed the pooch on Mack's last contract, you know the one he opted out of.

The offer to Schwartz was given prior to free agency and thus when Schwartz decided to go into free agency he by definition turned down the offer. So why should the Browns keep the offer on the table when they know that he was offered less somewhere else. For Schwartz it was all about the $$$ and when he didn't attract big time interest and dollars he came back looking for the offer that was given to him before he decided to become a FA.

The sides that people are taking are extreme.

Agreed

I agree w/those who say it is too early to properly evaluate Sashi and company.

2 for 2!

The first order of business was an epic fail in my opinion, but that doesn't mean they will continue to fail.

I know my prior posts on the subject may not reflect it, but I really do get why you and others consider it a fail. Honestly the only reason I'm not declaring the same is because I'm trying to take a broader approach to our FA period and preseason as a whole. I can't disagree that these players leaving puts us a few steps back, but there is still plenty of time left to see what this FO does to take steps forward and to compensate for those losses. This will be a great test for this FO because this has got to be their "worst case scenario".

I guess that thing that makes me the most wary is that Haslam is still in charge. He says the right things, but when things don't go well, he blows things up.

I'm not plugged in to the media as much as you or other Dawgs are, but based on things you've heard or seen, objectively speaking, how hands on do you believe Haslam to actually be? I think when he first bought the team he thought he could take short cuts. Now I think he's more personally involved which CAN be a good thing, so long as he's learned to get out of his own (and the FO's)
way.

I get his point, lamp, and I also understand that it's incredibly easy to reset the memory banks and take yet another "this time may be different" perspective while it's too early to judge based on certainty. Point of fact, the only FA loss that I am upset about is Schwartz, because it was unavoidable. We do know that. Inexperience likely led to that loss, egos may have played a part in it, and while this regime may indeed be difference, they are certainly, without a shadow of a doubt, inexperienced.

In my view, and this is JMHO, the inept move of letting a starting right tackle walk, in the midst of an evolving environment when the right tackle is increasingly more important, before a season that could result in the debut of a potential franchise rookie QB is moronic and inept. Couple that with the signing of a fragile one year wonder with a laundry list of documented issues like an entitled attitude, poor mechanics and a questionable work ethic and I am forced to wonder if we're not staring at another "we're the smartest guys in the room" implosion right in the face. The fact that they believe they're going to change the way football is managed, and the fact that all we keep hearing is how smart they are isnt reassuring in the least.

A betting man casually observing might believe that the odds are in our favor for positive change, but careful study of the trend while factoring the staggering inexperience, might simply lead one to believe that the odds are stacked entirely against success.

Have a gambling problem? Odds are that you don't.

Pitt, how do you consider what they have done so far an epic fail.

I guess that thing that makes me the most wary is that Haslam is still in charge. He says the right things, but when things don't go well, he blows things up.

I'm not plugged in to the media as much as you or other Dawgs are, but based on things you've heard or seen, objectively speaking, how hands on do you believe Haslam to actually be? I think when he first bought the team he thought he could take short cuts. Now I think he's more personally involved which CAN be a good thing, so long as he's learned to get out of his own (and the FO's)
way.

The people running the Browns front office are not qualified based on their performance in free agency.

mac, I am not an apologist for the FO, but it's too early to make summative evaluations.

Well, I was the first one that said it was an epic fail. I'll explain why.

First of all.........another poster said something like it's not a fail because the draft hasn't happened yet and some stuff about preseason. I never insinuated anything about that. I said, thus far. Secondly, I said it was too early to evaluate them properly. It bothers me when people turn my words around.

Moving on.........

--There are a lot of people on this board saying that the previous regime is to blame for us not signing the players. Or, that the players did not want to be here. Yet, they also say none of us know what went on. LOL.....that's seems odd to me.

--32 provided a link that listed Sashi's duties w/the Browns BEFORE his current role. One of his job responsibilities was "Contract Negotiations." I fail to see how he can be given a pass on not negotiating new contracts for the players in question when that was what he was being paid to do.

--Some will say that Farmer didn't let him. Yeah, okay. We are supposed to believe that Farmer didn't want any of those players back?

--Some have said that Sashi only had a month to negotiate the contracts. I don't agree w/that because of the above points, but so what? How long did KC have to sign Schwartz? A year? 6 months? A month? Or less? Same goes w/every other one of the guys we lost. The other teams did not have more time than the Browns did.

--Some will say that all the guys didn't want to be here? Well, if true, what does that really tell us? That all four guys are "horrible" people? Snakes? Liars? Traders? Or, that they see an organization in disarray that is led by an owner that blows things up every couple of years? And folks, Jimmy Haslam is still here.

I do agree w/the statements that say none of us really know all the details of each situation. There is ONLY one thing we all know, and that is the bottom line. And the bottom line is that all of the players we should have kept are no longer w/the team.

That is why I said it was an epic fail. That does NOT mean I am saying they won't do better in the future. I will evaluate each move they make as it happens. I am not asking you--or anyone else--to agree w/me, but I think my logic is sound. Some will say I am a coward, illogical, a hater, negative, etc, but hey, what's new?

I do have to make an amendment to my earlier statement. I actually like the signing of RGIII. So, thus far I will say they failed miserably w/their own free agents but made a good move by bringing in a low-risk, high-reward quarterback.