DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Reportedly Could Have Long-Term Deal In Place With OLB Jamie Collins By This Weekend

Good stuff.

If we had paid Schwartz, (and we pretend that Mack didn't hate playing here his entire career), I wonder what percentage of our total cap would have been tied up in the O Line if we had signed those two and add in Joe, Joel, Erving, etc...? I'll bet it would be really high. Thus, the importance of a great O Line coach.

Not saying you were, but weren't you one of the guys complaining about the particulars regarding Jimmy G's possible salary? If not, did you respond to mac, Da-Man, and others who complained about Jimmy G maybe getting Osweiler money?

Yeah that would've been the highest paid OL in the league. We were back in the day too with Joe, Steinbach, Fraley, Tucker and Shaffer but that also gave us our best season. But I won't pretend line Fraley, tuck (at that time) or Shaffer were as good as mack or Schwartz. I think if anything that supports having a balanced OL with no weak points

Just that his contract is shorter and less total than that elite group he's now compared to. 4th highest is the important figure. He also got a massive percentage guaranteed compared to others. My guess is a large portion of that will be the 1st two years but they haven't released that info yet.

Mac many of us tried to tell you he answered. You specifically refused to go back and look and proceeded to badger the rest of the board every single page. It's very childish. STOP

Thanks

mac, I have answered your stupid question several times.

J/C ......

The details of a contract tell the story. The initial "X years $X" is an ego boosting exercise. How many times have we seen a guy become "the highest paid player in the NFL at his position", only to have it turn out that his deal is really a 2 or 3 year deal, with a massive final year or 2, that he may never see. Also, as the cap goes up, the impact of a single huge deal lessens.

It will be interesting to see how the deal is structured, and it will tell a great deal more of the whole story than the press release.

Pairing Gregg Williams with Jamie Collins could be worth $50 million

http://www.espn.com/blog/cleveland-brown...orth-50-million

Raise the flag and sound the alarm -- the Cleveland Browns are not waving goodbye to one of their key players.

The signing of linebacker Jamie Collins is a positive first step for this offseason. It's also a step that has been missing the past few years.

The Browns kept a good player whose potential in an aggressive, gnarly defense is enticing. He's been to the Pro Bowl for New England. He's got tremendous ability. He's a Brown for four more years.

Now it's up to Collins to prove it was the right move. Because the numbers, as reported by ESPN's Dan Graziano, show that the Browns paid Collins like an impact, game-changing player, among the best in the league at his position.

His deal is worth $50 million, or $12.5 million per season, which puts him fourth among linebackers in the NFL, behind Denver's Von Miller, Kansas City's Justin Houston and Green Bay's Clay Matthews and ahead of ahead of Carolina's Luke Kuechly. Kuechly is considered the best inside linebacker in the NFL.

Not bad for a guy who finished with two sacks in eight games in Cleveland a year ago.

Did the Browns overpay? Only if about $750,000 per year is too much, but for a team with more cap room than it knows what to do with it's not outrageous. The salary cap site spotrac.com had pegged his market value at $11.74 million and his outside linebacker rank at fourth. Collins got $12.5 million, fourth among outside linebackers.

In his eight games in Cleveland last season, Collins impressed with his ability to run and make tackles. Missing were game-changing plays. Collins was good to very good; he was not great.

His 69 tackles (in half a season) ranked third on the team, but he had two sacks, no interceptions, and one forced fumble. His numbers when combined with his Patriots stats look this way: 112 tackles, three sacks, two interceptions, three passes defensed and three forced fumbles.

Another Browns offseason addition may be the key to this contract working well.

The presence of Gregg Williams as defensive coordinator may help Collins achieve his potential. Collins would seem to have the kind of skills that fit Williams' up-tempo style.

For Williams, game-changing plays are vital. Collins has the ability to be disruptive. If Collins is as good as he's touted, he could be the centerpiece to Williams' attacking approach.

In some ways, it seems like a perfect match -- which is a pretty good offseason starting point for a team coming off a miserable season.

Looks like the numbers match with market value. A bit of a premium, but nothing gross.

Actually, I was looking at it from the total opposite end of the spectrum. Looking to crap on the FO? No. I was actually encouraged (thinking he probably could have gotten equal/more value elsewhere and decided to still stay here). Almost like maybe he experienced something with the coaches/franchise that made him want to be here.

Well he did say that he enjoyed the friendships he had made with people on defense and that he loved Hue's positivity.

A good coach and a good culture can do some great things. I honestly feel we will be better next season.

Collins stopped by Mobile to catch up with Browns staff as per the senior bowl thread. I like that. Hugh obviously connects with his players. Green shoots?

My bad, as I read my comments of last night, they sound harsher then I intended. Sorry.

Vers - can you answer it one more time in a post by itself (so it doesn't get lost in the verbiage)? I think we would all like to put this to rest.

C'mon man, you are the only one who can do this, we are counting on you.

Or maybe Mac can go back and find the answer and copy and paste it?

This is not a Jimmy G thread.

And mac making up a story about having to sign Jimmy G to the same numbers as Osweiler is irrelevant. He is not a FA this year and we do not have to get into a financial bidding war w/other teams. We can trade for him, evaluate his play, and then pay him accordingly. His situation is NOT like Osweiler's.

Joe's current contract is definitely a deterrent towards signing a big name CB but I'm not sure if the Browns are looking to do that. (1) Because of the recent signing of Jamar Taylor, (2) the increasingly better play of Brien Boddy-Calhoun, (3) there are a significant amount of CBs in this upcoming draft to consider and grooming a new young guy, and (4) fundamentally, I don't see them going wild in the FA market. But I think the Johnson connection to Williams is legit and something to keep an eye on, so you never know. Plus he's in that 26-27 year old range heading into his second/third contract. If there was any a time I would want to go after someone, it's when he meets that criteria.

I'm also a Haden apologist. His injuries are a huge concern but I'm hoping he can bounce back. However, he's one year older. With the luxury of having so much cap space we can turn some of his annual salary into bonus money, and therefore, pay more this year. We can cut Tramon Williams, take a cap hit of $500,000 but save $7 Million in 2017. That's a start and I think an inevitability.

Vers - you are right, this isn't a Garoppolo thread. I don't always know which thread I am in.

It isn't about having to pay that, mac asked if you would pay that.

Peen' Understand your point. I don't understand the pissing match and I am pretty sure all of us are tired of it. I would cut and paste it (into the Garoppolo thread) for mac but I cannot find it. If you know where it is at PM me and I will be happy to do it.

Otherwise I am staying out of this.

j/c:

I'm assuming the Browns will be getting a third round compensatory pick for not re-signing Alex Mack. That pick will now go to NE for in order to have completed the trade for Collins. Essentially, these two transactions are aligned. So...

Who would you rather have right now?

Alex Mack signed to a long-term deal or Jamie Collins signed to a long-term deal?

I haven't given it much thought yet but that it would be a good topic since one action resulted in another.

Interesting, Memphis. My first impression is that OC has more impact but yes, it does require further thought...

I with vers on this one. You let Jimmy G. play for a year and either sign him or franchise him. Personally i'd rather franchise him and then have 2 full years of evaluation before committing to long term unless of course he just wows us. IN that case we just pay the man.

15-20 mill per year is what your going to pay an avg starting QB in this day and age so just get over it already. If he is really great it might even go as high as 25 mil per year. If that happens your going to wish he had an Os type contract lol.

Once again, I realize this isn't a Garoppolo thread, but...why would you wager a first round or even the #33 pick in order to evaluate on a one year deal? You don't have the 5th year option like the first rounders, so you are going to franchise him, sign him to top money, or worst case scenario, he isn't what you hoped and you are out that other possible piece to the puzzle.

You want to talk about evaluations, what about Kessler? We are talking about a kid that was brought in and immediately made the 3rd string QB and announced he would not see the field in 2016 barring emergency...fast forward to week two. RGIII and to some extent McCown received all off season attention to get them ready for the season. Kessler was an after thought who actually came in during that emergency period and played rather well..in fact, he played better than just about every QB since Derek Anderson's anomoly of a season. Possibly Brian Hoyer played to his level, but we knew what we had in Hoyer...we really don't know what we have in Kessler with a full off season spent getting him ready to be a starter.

Just my opinion..

If we have to trade anything higher than a 4th for him, we need to make the trade with the intent to sign him.

I agree and I will take it a step further. If I trade ANYTHING for a guy it better be with the intent to sign him.

I hear ya. My reasoning is a 4th is the start of the flyer picks. We'd simply be taking a flyer that JG works out and we could sign him later.

I wouldn't get all bent out of shape if we traded a 4th and it didn't work out. The odds are that the 4th round player we would have selected wasn't going to work out either.

You start trading 3rd,2nd, or 1st rounders, you need to make sure you can sign the guy and have confidence he will probably become a good player.

I know what you mean and I agree with you.

Memphis: Yeah im just very worried about relying on 1 year wonders at Cb especially now that they will play a new system. Odds are Calhoun or Taylor disappears. Could be wrong but this kind of thing happens a lot.

We keep talking about how nickle is the new base so our 3rd LB is of less importance. Would you say it's of similar importance to a dime cb? I think that sounds about right. Im comfortable with Boddy-Calhoun being our dime but no more until he has another year. There will plenty of injuries I'm sure where our depth will be tested.

I'm also very ok with bring Joe back but he has to renegotiate or I'd try everything to trade him. The difference in his actual worth vs his contract is a whole extra player. What Joe should be making and what johnson would get paid is likely what Joe makes now and just because we have cap space doesn't mean we should be OK with that.

With Joe getting older and possibly not willing to renig I'd love the combo of johnson and a shiftier cb for route runner wr like brown. I'm stuck on white right now. He's a lot like janoris Jenkins. Johnson on the big wr, Joe on the outside, white in the slot with Boddy-Calhoun and Taylor to compete and actually have depth for injuries. Man that would be great

There is no feasible way we trade Haden. He's always been hot or cold, more so cold and now you start to factor in he's always hurt and etc, there's just no way someone gives us anything for him. Perhaps if he agreed to reconstructure for the team being traded, I see us getting something outta him. Nothing more than a 3rd rounder. Haden has been the biggest disappointment since he got paid.

JMO of course.

There is really no point in cutting or trading Haden. We don't really save money because his dead money and cap savings are very close ($6.8M in dead money, $7.6M in cap savings).

Also, his upside is worth more than anything somebody would give us (I think).

Yeah but is his upside even worth the cap savings? I don't think he has the ability to be anything but a liability at this point.

It astonishes me that mac, of all people, has the cajones to call someone out for not answering a question... when he refuses to answer similar questions asked of him... after vers has already answered the question twice (that I've seen).

Back to actual subject here, we have the money and we spent the money needed to bring back a skilled player in his prime. It's a good signing.

How many times do I have to answer it?

Jimmy G is NOT a FA. We do NOT have to get into a financial bidding war w/other teams.

Comparing Jimmy G to Osweiler is beyond idiotic.

Look, I get that people might not like Jimmy G as a QB. I disagree w/them, but I have NO problem w/that take.

What I do have a problem with is people like mac making crap up about Osweiler, or saying that all backup NE QBs suck, or that he is too small, or that he must suck because BB may want to trade him, etc

I agree Vers...you have answered the question...it is not your problem that some people are dim.