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

We've heard all this before, it's not new. it just amazes me that Mac can't grasp it.

Anyway, thanks for repeating it Vambo

So in your eyes, wanting more money from other teams and not getting it equals "wants to be a Cleveland Brown?? ... To me it reads "not wanting to be a brown and only interested in the biggest contract" . . . I don't fault Schwartz for that in the slightest, but I don't believe for a second that it means he wanted to be here.

I think Schwartz's ranking amongst right tackles might plummet this year. He faces the Broncos (Von and Ware) and Raiders (Mack and Irvin) twice a year in KC. I want to see his match ups with Bosa and Ingram, too.

I read that as the Browns offered 7 million a year, and Swartz wanted to test the market. He came back to the Browns wanting to accept the original offer and the Browns for some inexplicable reason pulled the offer.

Sorry this is a bad move by the FO. I don't agree with mac often, but he is right on this one....the Browns blew it on Swartz. I think they had zero shot in retaining Mack, but Swartz wanted to test FA and see what he could get, and the Browns were somehow offended by that and let a young pretty good RT go for nothing.

It was a horrible decision then, and is a horrible decision still.....no way to sugar coat it.

The problem with Schwartz is that he's an amazing player. Definitely one of the best RTs in football. However, the Browns need to start thinking about grooming a replacement for Joe Thomas, for when he retires, and Schwartz was never going to be it.

So what? Because he can't replace Joe you let a 26 year old good RT walk? How about we let him stay on the right side for the next 5 to 8 years and bring in someone else to replace Joe when the time comes? Now we still have to find Joe's replacement AND a RT.

j/c

We offered to overpay him to stay. He indicated he'd rather play somewhere else. When no one else was willing to overpay him, he came back still wanting to be overpaid by us. The FO wanted players that wanted to be in Cleveland, his actions indicated that wasn't the case, so they moved on. Farmer should have re-signed him earlier. It is what it is.

Thank-you.
That is a very concise and accurate assessment.Very few will believe you.

I still call BS on the Browns on this.

They hadn't "moved on". Moved on to what? Moving on implies that they had already committed to another player. That didn't happen. The Chiefs signed Schwartz on the 9th. (the 1st day a team could sign another team's free agents) We signed his supposed replacement (which didn't work out) Alvin Bailey on the 11th. The Browns didn't have another deal in their pocket at that point.

Further, I doubt that anyone in the Browns front office knew what numbers Schwartz was discussing with the Chiefs, and I doubt that his agent told them.

This was the Browns playing some stupid "Take it or leave it, but don't test the market" game ..... and Schwartz wanted to take a quick look at the market. He came back to the Browns before any player could even sign a contract with another team, and yet the Browns still played hardball with him, and lost. It is inexcusable for a team with millions and millions of dollars in cap space to reject one of their best players because they wanted to look tough, or something. I also don't think that it helps them with future free agents, both on the Browns, and those the team might want to sign in the future.

Weren't you guys crying all last year about how much help Schwartz needed from TE's during the season?

I don't understand why people are that upset he was gone. Besides, if he wanted to be here, he would've taken the contract offered.

If a team offered him more initially, he was gone. Let's be honest here.

I'm not upset over someone who didn't want to be here, and needed help blocking anyway.

I certainly did not complain about Schwartz. There were some people who did, but I was probably one of his staunchest supporters.

In your first post listed you state emphatically "the Browns didn't want him!", yet in you next post you state "the offer the Browns made. " which contradicts yourself so which is it did the Browns want Schwartz or not?

What was reported is that Shwartz had until the beginning of the FA signing period to sign his deal. He agreed to sign the deal before the FA period began. The offer was pulled. People keep trying to spin that.

does it really matter at this point? really? he is gone period. to be honest I don't miss him.

Truthfully, who's to say that report is even true? There's just alot of opinion, speculation and 'I read that...' regarding what happened to Mitchel.

Truthfully, again, I wish we'd all just move on. The only people who know what "really" went on, if he wanted to stay or not and just all the things being said is Mitchel, Sashi, Mitchell's family/close friends, agent and etc.

Are any of you any of the above? No, so until someone with real credibility says something, can we please just move on? He's in KC now, best of luck to him.

So you are saying the $ 7,000,000 offer was because the Browns DIDN'T want him?

I don't see the spin.

Not only that - if you judge how much a team wants a player by how much they offer him.... the Browns wanted him more than any other team did.

Obviously something happened between the offer and the end of FA period - or whenever the offer was withdrawn.... No-one knows what that was for sure.


If we want to play silly buggers and go on and on and on and continue to try to manipulate the facts or what was said etc based on an agenda .... What we could say: is that we know .... the Browns wanted him more than anyone else (biggest contract offered) but Schwartz didn't want to be here (because he didn't sign the offer.)

Not in guaranteed dollars, they didn't.


Both sides were stupid - there isn't one side where all the blame gets assigned. They both screwed the pooch.

It seems to me that both sides got greedy and lost out.

I don't really see the point in debating it further.

Yes under the following conditions.

Replace an expensive RT with a high draft choice who can play either spot in 5 years.

I loved Schwartz. I wasn't crazy about the choice when we picked him. I though we should have done exactly what I listed above, draft a RT who can flip to LT. But Schwartz worked his butt off that rookie year and I instantly became a fan. Against many people who didn't think he had a good rookie or sophomore year. I loved Schwartz and would have loved to keep him. However, I get the logic of letting him go.

Just ONE GAMER? can you provide say 5 more games he didn't need help?

Who?

So if Schwartz, accepted the $7,000,000 the Browns would have pulled it? Is that what you are trying to say?

Do your homework before you attack me for doing my own homework.

If Haslam was having financal problems he would not be firing coach after coach and paying them to do nothing.

What money was Jimmy Haslam forced to spend the last 2 years? If you're talking about the Pilot Flying J stuff, none of that is coming out of Jimmy's pocket. The private company is a limited liability corporation (LLC), and as such operates as it's own legal entity. Pilot Flying J has $22.9 billion in annual revenue. The Department of Justice fined the company 92 million in 2014, and I'd seen a ~80 million in paybacks, so let's say they paid out $200 million. $200 million is less than 1% of the total annual revenue. The last figure I could find for Pilot Flying J's profit margin was 1.5%, so even with the fines the company was still making money.

Haslam bought the Browns for $987 million, the team/company was last valued at $1.5 billion, and has an operating income of $34.7 million.

Haslam's personal net worth is $2.4 billion. I think he's okay on the money front.

Forbes-Pilot Flying J

Profit Margin reference

Forbes-Cleveland Browns

Forbes-Jimmy Haslam

hold on, let me try this logic out for a second.

The Dolphins did not value Jamar Taylor's ability to help in coverage...The Browns were happy to have him.

....Did Schwartz only play 43 seconds against the Broncos? What about the rest of the game?

That throw by McCown looked terrible btw.

No my man....that is like a stickey second......I don't want that.....we made a good offer and they elected to play off of that and couldn't find a player....we realized we had offered too much...nobody else was willing to beat our offer.

Agreed.

Hey, here's 7 million, you want it?

No, I want more, and I'm going to go get it.

Ok.

Later, "hey, I couldn't find more, so I'll take that 7 million.

We aren't offering it anymore though.






Just imagine the outrage some would have if the FO would've let him determine what he was paid here. Some would be all "see, even the players play the front office. Our front office sucks. They let the guy shop around, and when he couldn't find a better offer, they put their tail between their legs and paid him."

I no longer care, MS is gone, he's a KC Chief now and who gives a care why? If our FO made a mistake in negotiations, they'll learn from it. They aren't stupid, they went to Harvard. Unlike Mac.
Pasztor the Tilsonburg Mauler will do the job anyways so let's move on from Mitchell freaking Schwartz.

Yet, they still pulled the offer.

Losing good players is never a good thing.

Not signing good offers is a problem.



To me it's kind of like asking a girl to the prom or to take your hand in Marriage and she says sure, unless somebody better asks.

I am not really worried about Schwartz. I am a Brown's fan.

They make one dumb move after another and they have sucked for years and years.

You guys blaming everyone but those in charge does NOT change the fact that the Browns suck!

yea I have not seen Hue Jackson make one dumb move after another yet...nor the FO either for the matter.

Yeah like getting a draft pick for Justin Gilbert.

Did the browns only have about 10 offensive snaps during that Denver game?

For a highlight reel, it wasn't all that impressive, Mac.