DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Free Agency

I know Tannehill played really well for them, but there has to be some tight sphincters in Nashville about giving him $30M per year.

Jack Conklin is going to cost about $16 million a year against the cap. That's a lot for a guy who PFF ranked as the 12th best tackle in the league.

12 out of 64 is pretty damn good.

Especially when a combination of Conklin and an OT at 10 solidifies the problem with this team.

Callahan MUST HAVE major input on the Tackle at 10.

I am sure he will be there when we bring guys in for private workouts.

j/c:

It's odd that Joe Thomas retiring doesn't get discussed much on here. Losing him put this organization in a bind. We were already weak at RT when Joe hung them up. Replacing two OTs is tough. The new FO has their work cut-out for them in that regard.

I agree it’s pretty good. It’s just not highest paid linemen in the league good. I won’t be upset if we sign Conklin, I don’t think we will, but I I also won’t be happy about his salary going forward. I think signing a veteran at both tackle positions and then trading down from ten is our best option.

I don't think it would be wise to go into a draft w/that mentality. I think you have to stay true to your board. If a guy is available that you have ranked very high, you should take him. If not, then sure, you trade down.

I think a lot of people don't consider the long-term benefits of drafting the BPA and the negative consequences of passing on them.

I'm all for signing Jason Peters to a one year deal (or a 2-year with the inevitable out after one), but I don't think that changes the draft strategy.

Then again, I'm terrified of the idea of going into next year with multiple rookies on the o-line.

Conklin would be nice, too, but I still have a man-crush on Jedrick Wills and until the draft happens I am hesitant to sign pretty much anyone to more than 3 years (and he will almost certainly be looking for a 5-year pact)

Is Peters looking for a 1-2 year deal? I’m not sure if he would accept that at this stage

J/C
I'm sure I'll get criticism for this post but I'm fine with that.

It seems I could be wrong but I don't think so, that these possible acquisitions are routinely discussed in isolation to all other contract and roster considerations. By this I mean, I don't doubt Conklin would improve our OL but I would be concerned that a $15 mill/year contract would limit what we need to do elsewhere. And not just this potential signing. The Schobert situation suggests to me that the FO has assigned a number to various positions and they appear at least, to me to want to be disciplined in their team building. On the other side, impulsive cutting of players with high cap numbers without a plan is equally disastrous.

The pending CBA and the uncertainty of its adoption by the players has to temper what the team does. They have to be preparing for either a rejection of the CBA or its acceptance and have scenarios prepared for both. Conklin or any other player is not a MUST get. It has to make sense financially for more than the current season. A win now and all other consequences be damned approach is not the road to sustained success.

So, if for example, the Browns max number for a FA tackle is $12 mil a year for a contract of 3 or more years if they can get Conklin great if not, go to plan B. Before spending huge on Conklin I would explore a journey man vet on a short term deal and draft two high-end prospects to play tackle on rookie deals.

Peters is 38. He's only getting a 1-2 year deal from any team.

I think that it is this sort, and level of strategic planning is where Depo comes in, but I'd be surprised if these are as set & unwavering. I'd be much more inclined to think that he offers the baseline plan, but comes up with proposals and strategies for opportunities that maybe require more spending in one area than the baseline plan provides for. Simply carrying one extra rookie on the roster over a vested veteran can make up such a difference.

OK, what you say is reasonable, within limits. You have to be flexible in business. What would be harmful is a drastic diversion from your plan.

I think the word "huge" should be taken in context. The current contracts are based on those who have signed over the past four years. Looking at a RT 2019 contract may bring things a little more in focus. The Eagles signed RT Lane Johnson to a contract that averages 18 million per season.

https://www.pennlive.com/philadelphiaeag...man-report.html

The salary cap increases every year. Contracts are based on what salaries will be over the lifetime of that contract. Signing Conklim to 15 mil. now may seem high. But two years from now it will most likely look like a bargain over the life of the contract.

I hear u and am worried your right BUT they had no problem way overspending for Zietler so that gives me hope ... the top tier of FAs always get overpaid .. way overpaid ... the upper middle class of FAs always get overpaid just by not as much as the top shelf guys ...

I think/hope they assign a number to each individual player and then see how that number fits into the overall team/cap ... were about to start facing a problem we’ve never had ... keeping talent ... lets hope Andy makes the problem bigger by bringing in more talent ...

I don't doubt that market forces will force contracts upward. For me that's not enough reason to pay excessively for Conklin. There is a monetary point beyond which I would not pursue him. He is not an absolute get at any cost. This is why I said that acquiring him can't be approached in isolation. Let me be clear, I want the team to look into signing him.

The Browns will have to fit Garrett, Mayfield and probably Ward into second contracts. I would not compromise my ability to resign any of those players. Also, where did the old axiom go of building through the draft and using FA when you are a player away from making a deep playoff run? This team has several problems to solve before that.

I don't think giving Baker a new contract is a given. Of course, it benefits the Browns if he plays well enough to earn a new contract. But, after last season......it's pretty hard to say they have to pay him. He was probably the worst starting qb in the league last year considering the talent he had at his disposal. He runs his mouth all the time. He doesn't want to work w/QB coaches in the off-season. He has called out coaches and players. He has more commercials than wins. He almost always fails at the end of games. Hopefully, he turns it around in more ways than one.

I respect your opinion on Conklin. It's a good take. I think I would pay the guy, but that is just an opinion. I do think the Browns have a dire need at the tackle positions. I'd rather fix "needs" in FA than reach for guys in the draft.

One other thing, bro.............the CBA thing should mean that the cap and player salaries go up. Signing guys now might be a good idea.

That is one of the things that is baffling me about not paying Schobert.

Honestly, I think Scho just wants to check out the experience of being a Free Agent. I do not think this means he is gone.

What makes you say that after his comments about wanting to stay in Cleveland and Berry's comments about him earning the right to test FA?

I guess I can see why Berry's comments might make you think that. And you could be right. I got a different impression after reading all the known information.

I do hope you are right and he will be back.

Since, after Berry's comments, we haven't heard any chirping from his agent attempting to negotiate in the media. There have been no leaks, no whispers, no comments or leaks taking shots...

Simply, they met, things ended amicably, seemingly, and all we have is Berry saying that "he has certainly earned the right to check out free agency". Nothing from anyone suggesting hard feelings of any kind from anyone.

Maybe we don't keep him, but I don't think it is a case where he wants out... i think he wants to see what it's like. Maybe he sees enough from another team to move the family, maybe he doesn't see enough to make it worthwhile. Either way, I just sorta came to the conclusion he wants to just have the experience and see where it goes. That might be elsewhere, and it could still be here.

You might be correct. I get the feeling that we won't keep him, but it's just an opinion.

It's probably as likely as anything at this point.
It has been oddly quiet in the run up to free agency. We haven't heard much from ANY agents talking in the media.

My position is this... new CBA or no CBA I think it's unwise to commit $60 to $75 million dollars to the right tackle position. That's if he signs a $15 mill/year deal. It could go higher.

Okay. That's fine. I disagree. Hope that is fine, as well?

If the new CBA is agreed to the salary cap could go up around $40 million next season. That is a huge jump. Does that mean a team should overpay for a player under the current cap based on the future cap? I don't know. I am glad we have very smart people in the front office to figure dilemmas like that.

Yeah I’m not sure ... cuz I thought “why not just sign Garrett, Chubb, Ward, or whoever we deem a franchise guy right now”

This is just an insane amount of money; part of the reason why my enthusiasm for pro sports has waned over the past few years. I put the blame squarely on the owners, not the players. If all salaries of players were cut by a factor of 10, they would still earn a decent living and you could actually afford to take your kid to game without it costing you a bank loan. Simply out of control...

#Bills have agreed to terms with CB Josh Norman to a one-year deal worth $6 million base value with incentives that can get him to $8 million. Norman reunites with Sean McDermott, his defensive coordinator all four seasons with the #Panthers.

Josh Norman spoke to several teams following his release and quietly visited Buffalo. He decided on a one-year deal with the #Bills because of his familiarity with the defensive system and the talent around him, including Tre’davious White on the other side of the field.

https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/1236970404750778368

J/C

I'm not bothered by others having a different take on Conklin. Of course, I want a long term solution at RT but I would go about it differently in a way that is less likely to tie the hands of the team going forward.

Like it or not, I'd sign Mike Remmers. He's played for the Vikes if not for Stephanski as OC, then in an offense, KS had a large part in implementing. He zone blocks. He would be adequate and reasonably priced.

I"d draft two tackles. Remmers can provide depth at RT and Guard once the young RT is ready to play. This is why the Browns brought in Callahan, right? To develop the OL. This makes more sense to me than overpaying for Conklin.

You bring up some interesting points and I'd hope that someone is presenting that avenue for consideration in Berea.

The problem is that we need both a RT and a LT. The way I've seen it, we need to get at least one of those positions locked down in FA. Is that Conklin, Williams? I don't know. But the odds of getting starters at both those positions out of the Draft I would have to think are pretty slim. IIRC this FO has the OL valued either 2nd or 3rd (based on that graphic someone periodically shares)... If say someone like Conklin can get it done for us, I think it might be cheaper to overpay a little in the near term than trying to put a bandaid on the position hoping we can develop someone to step in.

Although I suppose locking down 1 side and putting a band aid on the other while developing a guy might not be a bad idea.

buffalo already has a really good CB in White, so it might help Norman to be the 2/3 CB and cover the second tier WR

Just a real nebulous question here. As we gear up for FA, and as the voting continues for a new contract with the players' union, are we better off ponying up for FA's now, even overpaying a bit (that seems to be synonymous for top-shelf signings) now, when overpaying on this FA might look like a brilliant bargain after we potentially go to more games? I would buy enough tackles\guards to be respectable and draft one or two more. Not sexy, but needful. Do we not expect salary escalation if the new contract passes? I mean, unless coronavirus cancels our season. Hope all dawgs are OK!

Hope that you are right, Purp! I want him back. Especially in light of the potential pandemic; Scho and others might want to jump on guaranteed money.

So you are of the opinion that paying (over paying is a relitive term) for a very good RT would be a mistake?

Personally I do not buy into RT / LT debate. To me either is as important as the other.

The OL is only as strong as its weakest link.a

I feel that what some see as "overpaying Conklin" now will look like a bargain after the new CBA and the increase in the salary cap over the next couple of seasons. The annual raise in the salary cap will make it easy to sign Conklin and still have cap room to sign our other core players when the time comes.

So, are you just going to hope to be able to draft two tackles every four years as rookie deals expire? Hope isn't a plan.

The contract Conklin will get will be pretty much the same as if we had drafted him four years ago and now we're trying to keep him... his rookie deal just expired, he's up for his first real contract. We're getting a young, proven NFL RT who is probably Top 10 in what he does (someone should check that ranking, I'm going off the top of my head). It will likely be more than anyone wants to pay, but that's what it takes - especially in a Seller's market where he's pretty much all there is available.

PFF had him ranked at the #10 OT last year and that was including LTs also.

Then, that is money earned right there.
Pay the man. Six year deal, fat cash with lots & lots up front.
Fix the right side for the long haul.

j/c...

Another option to consider at RT (if the Browns don't want to pay Conklin-type money) is Bryan Bulaga. Reports are the Packers have not met with his agent to discuss a deal. The Athletic reported, after the combine, that it was unlikely GB would be re-signing him.

Bulaga just turned 31, so he likely won't get a big deal like Conklin will.

However, the Packers switched to a zone-blocking scheme this year and Bulaga had one of his best seasons. The Packers led the NFL in zone blocking run plays at 70.3% per PFF. Stefan skin in Minnesota rant the second most zone blocking run plays at 66%.

For comparison per PFF:

Bryan Bulaga
Overall - 77.8
Pass Blocking - 73.1
Run Blocking - 80.1
Total snaps = 898

Jack Conklin
Overall -78.0
Pass Blocking - 72.4
Run Blocking - 80.5
Total snaps = 933