DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Front Office...continued

Like I said before, I acknowledge that we don't know all of the facts, and probably never will. Your scenario is just as probable as mine, with the most likely being a hybrid of the two. Who said/did what is pretty much all speculation... and it was a year ago, and no amount of hand-wringing is going to allow us to go back in time and do it differently.

One thing, though, is that the agents have the luxury of being jerks, and the FO folk don't. That's just how it is because the agents work for the players, and their job is to get the best contract possible. The FO has the job of building the best team.

Which is why the FO made him the best fair offer in the first place he rejected it.

Joe Thomas: Browns rebuilding approach is 'best for the long-term health of the organization'

http://www.espn.com/blog/cleveland-brown...he-organization

Joe Thomas has one regret about the Cleveland Browns long and slow rebuilding project: He's not 25.

Because Thomas believes that the chosen path of building with young players and draft picks is wise.

"The strategy gives this franchise the best chance to turn things around," he said in a recent interview. "It's an approach that takes more time, but if you leave time out of the equation the probability of success is the greatest.

"I haven't talked to him about this, but I think that Jimmy (Haslam) felt that he tried the quick approach that most organizations try and it failed. He was willing to go the long painful route if it gave him the best chance."

The negative for Thomas is that he will be 33 in December, and he has 10 years of Pro Bowl wear and tear on his body. Thomas would like to play forever, but even he admits there will come a time when his body will not allow it.

He still likes the path the team is taking.

"It's an approach that hurts the veterans but it's what's best for the long-term health of the organization," he said.

He also stands by coach Hue Jackson, saying Jackson is "a great X's and O's coach and an excellent leader and manager of people and coaches."

"If anyone can turn this franchise around," Thomas said, "it's him."

Thomas understands the pressure that will follow a one-win season, especially with the team using an approach that includes analytics. In baseball or basketball, analytics can help turn a team around with one or two players. It takes more in football -- especially when a team has question marks at quarterback.

"It will be interesting if there is any pressure to change the approach after this last season was more miserable than anyone expected," he said.

At the Pro Bowl Thomas opined that he believes the Browns should draft a defensive player with the first overall pick in the draft. That was a mild surprise given his past emphasis on the position.

"We've given ourselves a chance to find a quarterback," Thomas said. "But finding one is still a gamble. Most GMs know you only get one chance to draft a quarterback, because if he fails it's your job on the line.

"So they are very careful and cautious about picking their moment to pick their quarterback."

No it isn't, but business is business at all levels.


That said, I would have rather we retained him. I am sure we would have matched and even bumped the offer some had we been given the chance. They went back to KC and signed.


We did offer the best deal. What we don't know is how many times they came to our table and walked away seeking better.

At some point you have to say no. I suspect we knew we had the best offer or they would have come back and played that offer against us to see where we might go. THAT NEVER HAPPENED.


They kept using our deal to drive another, which never happened for them. We don't know if we gave them a final offer, but I believe we did. I seriously doubt we simply pulled it witout letting them know we were going to do so if they walked away again.

JMHO, FO has NOTHING to do with moving E out to tackle, FO had a responsibility to TRY to resign Mack...However Mack wanted to be on a winner, wanted to play for Shany and his scheme, and got good money....the FO was NEVER going to win that battle- proof is in the pudding- last place in Central vs Super Bowl/playing on fractured leg...Thomas would have played with an amputated leg.....GO Browns!!!

Hey Diam,

Things are going quite well, and thanx for asking. hope all is well on your end.

Maybe you have a better take on this than I do. But I heard some speculate that one reason Schwartz's contract was pulled, was in part to us not thinking he would fit the new scheme of power run game...and he is more of a zone type guy?

I am not really an X's and O's kinda guy, so not really sure what to think about that...but if true sounds like maybe it might have some merit.

or could be the FO did get butt hurt when he checked the market.

or could be that the FO saw nobody was offering more the we were. and so pulled the overpriced contract (in their eyes). started to put together another contract that reflected the market value for him? an he then went to leave and sign elsewhere before we finished drawing it up and offering it?

or maybe we did offer a new and lower contract. And he said "what? I was worth more than that to you last week. WTH?". and signed elsewhere. (doubt it though).

or, or, or, or, or lol

too many things about that, that we do not know. like you said I way over it.

would I have liked him to stay? at the time to be honest didn't really bug me. as I didn't think he was that good.

after last season, I'm starting to question that lol.

and lastly.

What is this talk about hiring Tyrod Taylor's QB Coach? and that meaning we targeting Tyrod? Honestly I would not want Taylor. I googled him and saw he is 6'1" tall...I'm tired of being the only team in the AFC North with small QB's. while the other three have 6'4" an higher.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=ch...+is+andy+dalton

Was about to say Dalton isn't anywhere close to 6'4".




...

Naaaa ... we offered him a contract right out of the gate ... its not like our blocking schemes changed between when we offered it and when we pulled ... only one thing changed ...



I don't think it was that ... but like u said .. we'll never really know why .... i just don't like the fact we offered a contract and then pulled it and let a good young player go ...

It was a mistake ... it happens ... i don't like this FO at all but u don't see me going around slamming them for everything ... all FO's make mistakes .. it happens ..

The only reason i ever chime in on this one is that some folks just can't admit it and go beyond stupid to make excuses for the mistake ....



No worries ... I highly doubt there's a connection there ... at least i really really really hope not .. *L* ...

Well Peen, we're just going to have to disagree on this one.

While I agree that business is business, the NFL is far different.

You only have 32 buyers and a very limited number of qualified players.

It's sort of funny actually. The league itself allowed the players a couple of days to test the market before signing. It was set up in contract negotiations. Yet the Browns punished Schwartz for the very thing the players contract was set up to allow. To me, that's a lot more how business works.

Yet the people punished the Browns for the very thing the players contract was set up to allow. To me, that's a lot more how business works. Browns make an offer the agent makes a counter offer or they accept or adjust the offer this continues until the reach an agreement or impediment and they part ways.

huh...thought he was taller

... and then he allegedly came back, and we (allegedly) tried to save a couple bucks.

Let me put it a different way. If they had low-balled him right out of the gate, and he walked because of that, then (to me) that would actually be a little easier to understand. That would tell me that his value/skills to the club aren't as high as I would've thought. People would have still debated this until the cows came home, but the FO would've been able to say that they had a plan and stuck with it. Instead, now they look like Scrooge (saving a couple bucks while sitting on the largest amount of cap space).

The second offer wasn't a low ball it was higher over all lower in up guaranteed money.

$6.6 million a year average makes him the second-highest paid right tackle in the NFL...The Browns were willing to pay Schwartz $7 million a year, more than he's getting from the Chiefs. His $15 million guaranteed from Kansas City is more than what the Browns were offering,

https://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/03/what_happened_with_mitchell_sc.html

They were willing to pay him $7mil... until they weren't. They didn't even make a second offer, just pulled the first one. They tried to Scrooge him, but ended up just hurting themselves (in terms of the offensive talent they put on the field).

That same article also stated that players shopping offers is a common practice, and stated that a talking head said the Browns didn't negotiate in good faith (I don't totally agree with that, but that's closer to my opinion than what you're saying).

I blame his agent, opinion.

If he truly wanted to stay and the original offer was more than fair it should have been a done deal...enter agent.

Do we really need to ask? Haha.

Nor do I. However, have you noticed how pleasant the board has been this week? But I'm sure the two are completely unrelated.

True. Anybody notice the Dow is down on lower popcorn sales...

Papillon

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

Where do you guys come up with some of this stuff?

Schwartz was given a very good offer before Free Agency to keep him from hitting the market. Schwartz and his agent refused the offer because they thought they could get even more then that through Free Agency but they found out otherwise. When Schwartz and his agent came back to the Browns they were told the offer was pulled because the Browns believed Schwartz had no intention of re-signing with the Browns and that they were just being used to drive up the price that Schwartz could get from the Chiefs.

Link?

Schwartz was/is good. He is no longer on the team. That is a failure.

What i noticed is that the football IQ on the board has been cut in half with him gone ..

Yet the posse is still in tact ... the board would be much better off with posters like U and Deputy and DaMan and 6 or 7 others weren't here ... Vers .. say what u want about his style ..... the football IQ suffers way to much with him gone ...

I resemble that remark

Yep...in half is totally legitimate.

I am astonished you that feel this way...seriously? Every poster contributes something to the board to a greater or lesser degree. Each post contains something of value that adds to our "corporate" knowledge whether it be football or about the poster.

I don't know where you stood at the time. I know I said I liked him, but there were many posts about how he sucked. Dozens.


Just saying

Diam: "Your're schmoopy!"
Vers: "No, you're schmoopy!"
Diam: "No, you're schmoopy!"
Vers: "No, you're schmoopy!"
Pit: "You're both schmoopy!!!!!"

Yes, you are so right!

I remember reading daily how he was "the weakest link on the line", how badly he was getting beat, we need to draft a new RT, etc. It wasn't until he handled Von Miller last year and national analysts talked about him, that people took notice to how good he was.

Did he get beat every now and again?.....of course, they all do. But since the day the guy was drafted, Schwartz was huge to this offensive line. It sucked the way the whole FA situation went down because he was young and we had the money to keep him for the bulk of his career.

For someone that was in his corner from Day 1 but understands the possible long-term approach to how the FO handled this...it still sucks .

omg i miss quality tv like that =)

Here is an article from Bill Barnwell on what Cleveland should do with the draft & FA. There are things I don't agree with but I respect his arguments. The link below give information on all AFC North teams, but I pulled out the information about the Browns.

Five moves each AFC North team should make this offseason

CLEVELAND BROWNS

1. Franchise WR Terrelle Pryor. The Browns have $108 million in cap room even after re-signing Jamie Collins, and their only other impending free agent who might justify the franchise tag is punter Britton Colquitt. Pryor had a stunning season during his debut year as a wideout, catching 77 passes for 1,007 yards on a team that had five quarterbacks attempt 20 or more passes and cycled through three starters. Cleveland should be in no rush to commit long term to Pryor, and with this cap situation, the team doesn't need to be.

2. Wade into free agency. The Browns are more likely to be players in free agency this year, given that they are unlikely to lose anybody who would generate a compensatory selection and won't incur that sort of opportunity cost by making their own moves. They are projected to pick up four compensatory picks in the 2017 draft after letting key contributors walk in free agency last year, though they sent one pick to New England for Collins and another to the Eagles as part of the Carson Wentz deal.

Sashi Brown shouldn't be heading into free agency to try to reach toward mediocrity, but the Browns will need some help building the infrastructure necessary for their future stars to succeed on either side of the ball. Cleveland would be smart to look at what the Raiders did in rebuilding through players at the line of scrimmage.

That starts on offense, where the Browns at least have an anchor in left tackle Joe Thomas. 2015 first-round pick Cameron Erving has been a mess on the interior and moved to right tackle for the season finale in 2016, where he looked competent against the Steelers. If the Browns want to keep Erving at right tackle, they could consider moving guard John Greco to center before going after one of Hue Jackson's old players from Cincinnati, Zeitler, to play guard. If Erving is going to stay at center, the Browns might look at Rick Wagner of the Ravens on the right side.

Defensively, the Browns might want to try targeting risky players with upside. As they move to a 4-3 under new defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, the Browns will want a penetrating tackle next to the massive Danny Shelton, who held up well as the nose last year. Nick Fairley has had injury issues in the past, but he was productive for the Saints last year and certainly possesses the athleticism to create havoc on the interior. If the Panthers let Kawann Short hit the free market, which seems unlikely, he would be another fit for the Browns. They also might consider trading their third-round pick to the Jets for Sheldon Richardson.

3. Sign QB Tyrod Taylor. The one free-agent move the Browns should force is for their quarterback of the future. Taylor isn't your prototypical QB, but the former Ravens backup was wildly productive in a scheme built around his strengths in Buffalo, where he was both a running threat and a viable downfield passer. Jackson has shown the ability to craft offenses around quarterbacks with atypical skill sets, and he made the most out of Andy Dalton in Cincinnati.

Picking up Taylor doesn't preclude the Browns from drafting a quarterback in the first round over the next two or three years, but he's the best option they're likely to get without using a top-five pick on a passer, especially in 2017. He also won't cost the Browns any of the draft picks they would need to send to the Patriots to acquire Jimmy Garoppolo, which is a massive savings in itself.

4. Trade out of the first overall pick. It might drive Browns fans crazy, but if somebody offers Cleveland even a moderate ransom for the first overall pick, the Browns are going to make the correct move in trading down more often than not. If this were a draft with an obvious quarterback to take at the top of the first round, the Browns would be smart to hold onto their pick, but that doesn't appear to be the case in 2017. We know that NFL teams are each more confident in their own ability to pick players than they should be, and given how aggressively the Browns went after extra picks to start their rebuild last year, I suspect they feel the same way.

Presumed No. 1 pick Myles Garrett looks to be an excellent player, but we won't know whether he's the best player in the draft until it's way too late. Anecdotally, here are all the No. 1 picks who weren't quarterbacks since 1990 with two comparable lists of players: the second overall picks in those drafts and the next player chosen at their respective position, regardless of whether it was with the second pick or the 25th.

YEAR NO. 1 PICK NO. 2 PICK NEXT PLAYER AT POS.
2014 Jadeveon Clowney, DE Greg Robinson, T Khalil Mack, LB
2013 Eric Fisher, T Luke Joeckel, T Luke Joeckel, T
2008 Jake Long, T Chris Long, DE Ryan Clady, T
2006 Mario Williams, DE Reggie Bush, RB Kamerion Wimbley, DE
2000 Courtney Brown, DE LaVar Arrington, LB Shaun Ellis, DE
1997 Orlando Pace, T Darrell Russell, DT Walter Jones, T
1996 Keyshawn Johnson, WR Kevin Hardy, LB Terry Glenn, WR
1995 Ki-Jana Carter, RB Tony Boselli, T Tyrone Wheatley, RB
1994 Dan Wilkinson, DT Marshall Faulk, RB Bryant Young, DT
1992 Steve Emtman, DT Quentin Coryatt, LB Sean Gilbert, DT
1991 Russell Maryland, DT Eric Turner, DB Eric Swann, DT

(sorry, this didn't come out well. Click link for graphic)

Is it really clear that the guys taken first overall were better than the players on either of the other lists?

If somebody wants to give the Browns a 200 percent return in terms of draft capital to move up to the first overall selection, the Browns would be smart to take the offer. This is simply what smart NFL organizations do as they rebuild their rosters, from Bill Belichick in New England to Ted Thompson in Green Bay.

5. Continue to trust the process. The Browns will be better next year. They were unlucky to go 1-15, in terms of their Pythagorean expectation (3.5 wins), their record in close games (1-5 in games decided by seven or fewer points) and the sheer fact that they needed five quarterbacks to take meaningful reps to make it through the season. They're probably not going to be good in 2017, but there will be signs of progress, and Cleveland is doing a lot of things that bode well for the team's future.

With more draft capital to invest than anybody else in football, by a comfortable margin, the Browns can control the draft in years to come. They will likely continue to take advantage of teams undervaluing future selections by trading picks from this year's draft for better selections in future drafts. There's no guarantee it will work, but the alternative is no guarantee either, to which the Rams and Jaguars can currently attest.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page/Bar...7-nfl-offseason

Really good article, like a lot of what he's saying.

I don't know man. His #s aren't awful but Tyrod doesn't excite me for some reason. Not sure he's a winner.