DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns off-season player movement

Myles Garrett, huh?

Whatever man. Keep on doing you.

PFF uses edge to make a distinction between players who rush the passer regularly and those who don't. Myles Garrett is an edge defender. Kyle Van Noy is an edge defender. Joe Schobert is a linebacker. Dont'a Hightower is a linebacker.

I should have been more clear in my previous post.

So they are 0-2 on player negotiations

I don't fault the FO for this one, I like Kirko and its a position of NEED, but we all assumed this before the data crew was here.

Too many injuries, too many dollars.

Im very concerned of the direction of the team. I have voiced my opinion on the structure this team has built concerning the organization chart.

But truth be told, I think this is a move Berry AND Dorsey make. I was and am a huge kirko fan. IDK who couldn't be a fan of the guy given his attitude and demeanor. But the football guys and data guys I think agree, the best ability is availability. Kirko has given us nothing on the field, because he cant stay healthy. If he would have restructured, I would have kept him around for a prove it year as we are thin at LB. But this is an expected move by ANY FO in the position.

I try to save my reactions for what they do to improve the roster. Roster turnover is to be expected. I agree with you on the availability issue. Unless they for some reason decide to pay Joe more on the FA market than they would have to sign him at his asking price, which makes zero sense to me, there will be two holes in the LB'er unit. People can say what they wish but Mack Wilson is not a starting caliber NFL LB'er. He just isn't.

So until I see what they do to address the issue I'll stay in wait and see mode.

The hole was already there because he wasn't on the field.
This just made it official.


On a side note, when reading the news, my brain was simultaneously thinking "what, already???" and "well, it's about time".

Everyone KNEW this was coming.

I love how everybody just assumes the FO doesn't have a plan to fill his spot. I'm in the camp that thought they should release him anyway. All he has done has been a cheerleader for two years. He is being paid like a guy who has contributed, when he hasn't been able to. I like him, and when he played he was pretty good. But losing him is no big deal.

I'm not sticking up for the FO, these are just my opinions. I too, think Dorsey would let him go also. But the team has money to fill the void. Until they make a move at the position, I'll hold my judgement of them. This does seem a little too familiar, as Vers was suggesting, so I'll wait and see their next move. I hope it isn't a repeat of before.

March Madness is basically like Christmas here. Every year a group of buddies and I take the first Thursday and Friday off and hang out at casinos all day. It's good times.

This just in: Stay stupid America! Geezus people, turn off your TVs and get informed already. SO tired of the crap that the media spreads in an effort to either affect the election cycle OR to distract us from what is REALLY going on in Washington: THEFT. Just stop already! SMH

You should take your own advice, there is a thread in EE forum specifically for you to learn. Please visit.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I'm more bummed about losing Kirksey than I was Schobert.

Gonna miss you Kirko!

Probably so. I think the difference is that Dorsey would attempt to trade Kirko or at least wait to sign his replacement before releasing him.

This FO has a history of letting guys go BEFORE they have replaced them. I don't think that is "smart." And before anyone says that Dorsey would have been unable to trade Kirko, please remember he traded stiffs like Kessler, Hogan, Kizer, and Coleman.

I am not really upset about the move, but I think it could have been handled w/more intelligence. I know there are several of you talking about availability, but are y'all willing to give me 10 to 1 odds that Kirko won't be available to play next season?

Also, the justification and excuses some make to defend every move the FO makes after they trashed Dorsey doesn't sit well w/me. As soon as I saw the phrase "off the ball" LBer, I knew what he intent was. It's a bit galling that some people think all others are incapable of reading and they prey on those who can't read very well.

No one was going to take on that contract.

If he would have taken a reasonable contract, he'd still be here.

what doesn't make sense to me... cutting players when we have the cap and no one to replace them with. Let's get players to replace players with and after, cut the dead weight. that's how the good teams do it.

we just have GM's who like to cut players with no one to replace and hope we can get lucky with the bottom of the barrel to fill needs.

I think you should go after someone other than cfrs. He's providing information on something he's obviously studied. He's more matter of fact than opinionated.

Having said that, this FO doesn't appear to have any sort of plan other than creating cap space. Schobert was a must sign, IMO. One aspect I think is important is keeping a group together. We are always changing out pieces. No one gets the opportunity to improve and grow individually or together. Everyone wants to focus on who Schobert is as a player today and pretend he won't get any better. Meanwhile, the Steelers have a group that grows together, develops together, and stays together.

I cannot stress this enough. This season is going to be a disaster.

I am not really "going after" cfrs. At least I talk to him. I won't even speak to the other guys. cfrs is intelligent. I have no problem w/him and I disagreeing about the respective FOs. I do understand language, though. Like I said before........as soon as I saw "off the ball" I knew what his intentions were.

It's not a terrible thing, but some people have different interpretations of what is proper or not in arguing your cause. I'll leave it at that and not respond again about that particular conversation. I have no problems he wants to fire back one last time. I'll end by saying not all of us are dumb. Some of us can actually read quite well.

I would like to talk about this. One of my biggest beefs w/the Analytic FO when they were here the first time was they created holes before they filled them. Now, they are back in charge and doing the same thing again.

Like I said in earlier, Dorsey would wait and try and trade a guy or replace him w/another player before cutting him. Another poster said that no one would have traded for Kirko given his contract. That might very well be true. But, why couldn't we hold onto him and a guy like Carrie until we have secured their replacements? I just think it's dumb.

It's like when we cut Haden because he didn't want to renegotiate his contract. I thought Haden was overrated by some folks on here, but you just don't cut him because his contract is higher than you think it should be and leave yourself w/out an adequate replacement. They might be "smart" in academia, but I don't think these guys get "football."

Did the Browns have to cut Kirko by a certain date to get any cap benefits?

I don't know. If so, then it would make more sense.

If he had a roster bonus, they he would have to go before the new league year starts.

So, why did the Browns have to cut him before they secured a replacement? That is what I don't understand.

I would guess that they decided to move on from him no matter what. (unless he took a huge pay cut)

I probably would have hung onto him for now, but would have done everything in my power to upgrade his position.

A bit premature seeing as how Free Agency hasn't already begun.

I'll at least give them credit for trying to restructure his deal. Maybe he'll come back on a one-year, 5 million dollar "prove it" deal...but I doubt it.

At least he gets to start free agency as a...err...free agent, I guess.

We are kind of forcing ourselves into a corner for OT's and LB's now, though.

They offered him a re-negotiated deal. He refused it. This isn't difficult...unless you want it to be.

He's not worth the money he was slated to get. Simple.

Like Dorsey, he didn't like the new arrangement and he left. That isn't creating a hole like trading McCourty before we signed HIS replacement. Kirksey already WAS a hole.

We were in a corner whether Kirksey took his new offer or not.

They knew he wasn't going to be in the plans at that salary and did him "a solid" by doing now so he can sign on with another team. (Likely at a much lower contract.)

I agree with your post - but I also understand that until you get a better option in place, why cut a player if it does not have a salary cap implication if you do it now or later?

I thought Kirksey was decent. Above average when healthy and with decent players supporting him. . . while he's been injury prone and while he's not worth $8m per ... unless you can actually get someone better, why eliminate the possibility that you can call on him?

Does a player fill a hole if he can't stay on the field?
Can a player be a leader if he can't stay on the field?

Do either of these players types SUCK up cap space?

Inquiring minds want to know!

It was premature and this FO is known for it.

I don't think Kirko will be back under any circumstances. I read his farewell statement. He didn't sound all that upset. He had to live through this FO's blunders before and is probably glad he is getting away from them.

Well said.

Blessing in disguise.

LOL.........that sounds familiar.

SAM 56 Harvey, Willie CF19 59 Young, Trevon SF19
MLB 44 Takitaki, Sione 19/3 55 Davis, Tae W/NYG
WLB 51 Wilson, Mack 19/5 48 Grace, Jermaine SF19

Near as I see, this is the LB room. Holy Moly... I only know Taki and Mack

Glad the "smart" guys are back in charge.

Schoebert was criticized for making tackles 5 yards downfield, can't wait to hear the bitching about this LB group.

A lot of the stuff you're saying here is made up and you're just trying to deceive...

For starters, this isn't the same front office that was here a few years ago.

Saying the difference between Dorsey and this front office is that Dorsey would have attempted to trade Kirksey is nothing more than pure conjecture on your part. Don't try to issue this as fact.

A year ago Dorsey released Collins and Fells without having their replacements in place. Teams actually do this. Quit trying to insinuate this is something only the current guys in charge have ever done.

Oh, and trading a punter for a 4th round pick isn't considered a great move by the front office?

You're being ridiculous. In fact, you're doing the same thing you're chastising other people doing but doing it with Dorsey. Gosh, that guy could do no wrong, eh?

Are you disputing that teams are in nickel and dime more than they are in their base defense?

I think they knew that there was no way they were keeping him under that old contract. Not a chance. IMO rather than jerking him around (aka waiting to see if something changes...that simply wouldn't unless he took less $$$), they man-to-man said that we would like to keep you here, but it has to be under a more-reasonable contract. He declined.

We can debate whether Kirksey was good or average when healthy, but the issue was that contract. Even at his best since he signed that deal, he's been a very highly paid guy with average production when healthy (a rarity it turned out) and a ton of missed games.

This FO should be given kudos for talking straight with him and seeing if they could work out a different deal to try and keep him here...and doing so now...rather than playing games when they KNOW they weren't paying that contract.

I'd like to see them take some of that savings and sign Joe Show...even if they think they are over-paying him. Not sure what's up with that, but Joe isn't worth 15mil a year but might be a 10mil/yr guy. I dunno. I'd overpay Joe...I wouldn't overpay Kirksey.

I am wondering what the new coaching staff thinks of Montrel Meander. Is he a CB, a SS, a FS, or a LB?