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

Cut it any way you want, but we have only won under 5 games a year since he has been here.


I am not saying it is his fault, but still, we don't win games.

Just saw the post above where this was.

I don't agree with the proclamation that the Browns have a clear plan and are sticking to it.

What is the plan for Xavier Cooper, and Nate Orchard, both of which should be developing yet are being overlooked or phased out, or not given enough opporutnities, or not used/coached correctly, or treated as an after thought because of GM regime change.
Take your pick.
I like both Xavier, and Nate, I think they're better players than we're getting to see. Why did production fall off from 2015 to 2016, and what about this shows "having a plan and sticking to it."

Does "having a plan and sticking to it, involve parting ways with just about the leading receiver on your team 2, or 3 years in a row, or more.
Benjamin, 2015. Barnidge 2016, Pryor 2016, and What about Gordon, Hawkins, and another.
^ But all that aside, what's the plan and sticking to it involving Nate Orchard and Xavier Cooper in their 2nd years.

Ask these guys...



2015 Josh McCown (8) / Johnny Manziel (6) / Austin Davis (2)
2014 Brian Hoyer (13) / Johnny Manziel (2) / Connor Shaw (1)
2013 Jason Campbell (8) / Brandon Weeden (5) / Brian Hoyer (3)
2012 Brandon Weeden (15) / Thad Lewis (1)

That's cute but irrelevant.

How many other teams bid on Schwartz's services besides KC?

Jester, I think you made a great point. I have seen the Browns and so many other teams do this...........they create needs and then are forced to address them in the draft or sometimes in FA.

When teams like the Browns, Jets, Bills, etc have a ton of already existing needs............why in the hell create more needs. We all talk about how valuable draft picks are, but when you have a plethora of needs and create more needs by cutting players or letting them walk..........there is no way in the world you can possibly fill all those needs.

This is one of my big problems w/the FO thus far.

Oh, and before the usual suspects have a fit..........I am NOT saying I don't like the FO. I am simply trying to be objective. They make good moves and bad moves. They are neither terrible or terrific.

I don't know, but I wouldn't expect many that would pay near-LT money for a good, but not elite, RT...

But, didn't the Browns just pay huge money to a freaking guard?

LOL.....there is no hope for reasonableness from some of you.

How bad are the other teams FO that didn't sign or make an effort to sign such a talent?

And people knock mac for being biased. LMAO

Yrs but they accepted the money Schwartz refused it!

For all we know, all 32 teams offered him a contract.

Again, the question has no relevance to my comment.
If you do come up with something even the least bit pertinent then I will be happy to address it after I get home from work tomorrow. But I all you keep doing is trying to change the focus from the point I made onto something that has nothing to do with it.

I think the revealing part of the conversation is Sashi saying they are building a team to grow together. The 4 - 6 year age difference between the people cut/didn't re-sign last year and the draft building blocks that the Browns are working with now, may be all part of the plan. They may just want a young team that will grow together. It would explain not chasing Pryor.. and not keeping the players in their later 20s and early 30s. They will keep essential veterans.. but will not overdo.

This is pretty much what I have been thinking (better articulated.)

Yet we made Zeitler the highest paid G this year and he's certainly not the best G in the NFL. lmao And people applaud that.

It shows me they learned their lesson from last year and are now willing to pony up like they should have then. They were a rookie group last year but it looks like they're learning from their mistakes. Wish they'd have known it before they rebuffed Schwartz but you live and learn.

That last line sounded like a Trump commercial. lol

Our offer was the highest (reportedly). Either we offered more than market value or Schwartz wasn't thought of highly (which I doubt). Comparing Schwartz's situation to Zeitler's is "apples-to-oranges"...different scenarios.

Same for Pryor on the $$$. The reason this argument keeps getting re-hashed is because people keep saying the Browns are either 'no longer being cheap' or that they've 'finally figured it out'. They were not being cheap and they are clearly following a plan.

A reasonable, critical view on the FO would be that they should not have pulled the offer from Schwartz (if that's even what happened) or they should have rolled with Pryor's one year deal request. Two things I personally would have preferred...yet I understand why they did what they did.

However, claiming that they were cheap has proven to be incorrect. Disagreeing with how they handled a certain situation (not $$$-related) is personal preference and is difficult to judge as being correct or incorrect. But that is the only thing to debate...there is no debate that they were willing to pay/over-pay MS & TP...cheap is off the table.

just clicking...

I find it interesting that so many people are still talking about Schwartz .. when Irving was drafted, many wanted him at Right Tackle because they said he was so much better than "Revolving Door Schwartz ...."

Evidently, absence ( for more than a year ) makes the heart grow fonder .. or you don't know what you got til it's gone..

In any case, isn't it about time to stop beating this dead horse ?

Pro Football Focus rated Wisconsin product the No. 7 offensive guard with a rating of 87.1 on a scale to 100.

Top 25 NFL offensive linemen this season

Sam Monson | 5 months ago



23. Kevin Zeitler, RG, Cincinnati Bengals (85.7)

Cincinnati’s offensive line has had its issues this year, but those issues are coming from specific players along the line, and not the unit as a whole. Kevin Zeitler is having another good season, giving him a remarkably-consistent run of solid play dating back at least three seasons now. Zeitler has only been responsible for a single sack, and has allowed 14 total QB pressures for the Bengals this season while run blocking well and opening up holes for the RBs.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-top-25-nfl-offensive-linemen-this-season/


Ranking all 32 NFL offensive lines this season

Senior Analyst Sam Monson ranks the league's offensive lines from top to bottom following the 2016 regular season

13. Cincinnati Bengals (4)

Top overall grade: LT Andrew Whitworth, 91.3 (No. 2)

Top pass-blocking grade: LT Andrew Whitworth, 92.5 (No. 2)

Top run-blocking grade: RG Kevin Zeitler, 83.1 (No. 9)
-------------------------------------------------------
14. Kansas City Chiefs (17)

Top overall grade: C Mitch Morse, 82.5 (No. 14)

Top pass-blocking grade: G Laurent Duvernay-Tardif, 83.9 (No. 26)

Top run-blocking grade: LT Eric Fisher, 82.8 (No. 11)

Mitchell Schwartz didn’t quite live up to his last season in Cleveland,

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-ranking-all-32-nfl-offensive-lines-this-season/

LOL...........many people? I don't remember anyone saying that.

Agreed. Call the ASPCA. He may become available again. So what would you pay to get him back, if you wanted him back at all.

Kind of a sidecar to this that the Browns need to address is what type of team will we be? FO is part of that as well. Build a line for predominantly passing or mostly running? Power game or on the ground or balanced running with more mobility. All lines need some of each, but build the tools you need. We kinda stunk at both IMO. Doing one well helps both. Run to pass or pass to run. Hope the defense can hold up. Our secondary was the "break, seldom bend" too often last season IMO.

I remember quite a few, and they were citing how we had to fix Right Tackle, that we hadn't had anyone there since Tucker. That right Tackle was the weak point in the line and we had to fix the position. This talk was on the board.. in the Plain Dealer and on talk shows. I remember Drennan and Grossi on STO talking about it a lot. Now, of course, Schwartz is/was the greatest RT in Browns History, because he wasn't resigned.

He had a good year, during his contract year, and the talk died down. I just think it is time to let the rest of the talk die down too. No one brings up Anderson or Colt anymore. Perhaps it is time to let Schwartz go as well.

This poll does not back up your claims:

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1072845/schwartz-or-mack#Post1072845

Not for nothing, but I'm pretty sure had we caved in to Mitch, we'd have had some say it was a terrible move because he's not worth the money..

There is always going to be someone looking for something to complain about. Shame really.

I didn't vote on that poll so I did not see the results. The poll was AFTER his contact year, which I stated was good. I advocated that I liked Schwartz at the time, that PFF had him rated much higher than the "fans" did.

Polls are subjective, and it does not say that no one thought that Schwartz was not good. After all, we had a Big Poll in November, called a Presidential election, and people are still talking that both candidates had/have Problems.

Schwatz is no longer a Brown, hasn't been for more than a year, and will not be this year or in the foreseeable future. Isn't it time to move on ?

Read the comments. Most people said they wanted to keep both players. Someone even mentioned that Erving was drafted to replace Mack, which is what many people said in many threads.

I think it's time to move on. I didn't bring up Schwartz. I am just responding to what I feel is an inaccurate statement about how most people felt about Schwartz on this board.

I think we get derailed and muddied by bringing in talking points that are either impossible to know or maybe are at a tangent to the point at hand. Yes some posters did under value Schwartz play imo, but does that have any bearing on what the FO did? And in any given year the "top" plAyer at a given position always gets something of a landmark contract ... What does it matter a year later, with a larger cap, a smaller talent pool and a poor draft class for OL that we paid the top OG big $$$$... Does it show The FO learnt something or does it show the FO was ahead of the curve when assessing the FA class and draft class? Take your pick.

The fact is we gave Schwartz the best offer he received last year.

Fact is we were worse off without him.

Fact is none of us KNOW what happened after Schwartz went shopping in FA and didn't get what he thought he was worth.

It **appeared** As if we had the opportunity to sign him at the same contract that we originally offered but didn't. But we don't know why. We don't know if it was naivety, rookie mistake, eagerness to set a tone with negotiations ... Or if the original offer came with a clear caveat that it was only good if he signed it without shopping his services on the FA market .... That's an area that has many disagree on and debate but there is no fact to prove anything one way or the other ..... He walked and we were worse off for it.

Pryor was a little different, but once again the FO made the best offer Pryor received. . . . As I said in an earlier post, based on these two negotiations I believe they will positive!y influence future contract negotiations with future FA's .... Showing a history of accurately gauging the market for a players skill set and making fair offers provides a pretty strong opening position moving forward.

Here's the problem with that simplistic and "Everything is the Harvard Boys fault" approach - other than it's been discussed maybe 100 times before.....

If you want to try and condense everything into a singularity and blame 'someone' ... it's just as simple (and accurate) to say

"No - the fault is 100% with Schwartz he was offered the best contract by the Browns and didn't sign it - that's on him. The FO did their part. End of story"

But I am wasting my time and energy. You go ahead and keep blaming the Harvard Boys for everything and anything, knock yourself out.

Mac,

You are the opinion that the FO really wanted Schwartz and Pryor signed at all costs. Your whole argument is based on that assumption. Sashi has stated recently, that they are building the team so everyone can grow together. Have you considered that the FO did not want Schwartz or Pryor at all costs. That they were not in the plans for the rebuild ? That they may be a veteran presence, but not what were considered to be essential personnel down the road? Is it not possible that you and Sashi do not place the same value on Schwartz and Pryor?

The value you place on players is immediate, this year. We have had many FOs that had that same value, and nothing ever really improved. We kept treading water, same 4 - 7 wins every year. We simply needed too many pieces to improve beyond a certain degree. Maybe, Sashi is sacrificing today for tomorrow ? That the value of the contracts offered are for that purpose. The FO may value a player based on what they will mean to the scheme in 2019.. 2020.. etc. and not what their value is for 2017 ?

(Assumption.. the word was used as a statement as in assuming a premise is true. The censorship program rewrote, then deleted my first paragraph due to the word.. ????????? )

Oh come on Vers. Even you have to admit, except for MS last year here people were calling for his head every other game.

You make it sound like were done already, were still building and it takes time. Course you know that, you just want to argue.

If we didn't want them why did we offer them anything.

If they wanted to stay why didn't they sign the best contracts offered them?

Pryor didn't want to be here, but I think MS did, he just got bad advice from his agent. He should have just had his agent sign the contract. Oh well, onward and upward!

So they could give the appearance of wanting to sign their own free agent talent, when in fact they didn't want to sign them at all and have no intention on trying to improve this team. Luckily, we have a poster right here in our presence that has the remarkable ability to see through these shenanigans and the courage to call them out.