DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Free Agency Cont’d

Personally, I would rather sign Warford than Peters, but should we sign Peters, would Wills be on the bench or would he start at RG?

Curious, Is it an easier transition from RT to LT or from RT to RG?
It RT to RG is easier, that could explain the Peters possibility. Giving Wills an easier transition expecting there to be too little off season OTA's/training camp for him to make the more difficult transition.

Re: Warford. It was mentioned above that he brings about $7 mill in salary. It's actually $8.5 mill with bonuses, etc. AND he is an UFA next year.

Didn't NO release him? If so, then isn't he a UFA now, and has no salary?

I took it as those were the numbers you thought he would expect to get to sign with a team.

I think there have been comments about the challenges of moving to LT for Wills - but I think the overwhelming noise I hear / heard was Wills can and will move to LT and is expected to handle the transition. I think Stfanski or Berry came out and stated that after the draft .... so the plan is to have Wills at LT.

Whether Peters is a great mentor/coach/safety net ... and be willing to assume that role? Different discussion.

I don't think it is at all accurate to imply that there is suddenly a doubt about Wills moving to LT and a change in opinion about his ability to transition.

I am in the sign Peters camp.

If he is coming from the same system he was in in NO, why did they cut him? Aren't they on the prowl for a SB run? Was it just $$$?

That was my first thought .... Peters to LT and the rook to RG for a year or two ...

Pit might have a stroke about transitioning from RG to LT but I’m willing to risk it ... *L* ...

We drafted Wills w/the 10th overall pick. I don't think a guy drafted that high [non-qb] should need time on the bench to learn.

https://www.si.com/nfl/saints/news/new-orleans-saints-potential-salary-cap-casualties

The Saints releasing Warford was a thought weeks before the draft. With a 2020 cap hit of 10.6 million (including bonuses) he was expendable even with the 5.6 million dead money because the Saints only had 4 million in cap space and needed room to sign their rookies.

When looking at Peters, some here believe he will come cheap. Yes, it's true his base salary was only 3.5 million in 2019 but he also had a 2.67-million signing bonus, 2-million Roster bonus, $500,000 workout bonus and a guarantee of 5.5 million with a cap hit of 8.66 million.

With that said, getting Peters for less than 8-million would appear unlikely and Warford slightly more in the 9-million dollar range.

Alabama offensive tackle Jedrick Wills, drafted by the Cleveland Browns at No. 10, will sign a contract worth about $19.7 million, including a signing bonus of around $11.9 million. That would mean Wills cost to the Browns in year 1 would be approximately 13.85 million.

So what do we have is the Browns go get Peters and Warford with Wills on the team. According to reports, neither Peters nor Warford are interested in 1-year deals.

Peters: Starting LT with a 2-year deal at 16 million with about 10-12 million guaranteed with a year one cap hit of about 13-15 million.

Warford: starting RG with a 2-year deal at 18 million all guaranteed with a year 1 cap hit of about 15 million.

Wills: 1st round draft pick sitting in wait for either position. 4-year deal at 19.7 million all guaranteed with a 5th year option and a year 1 cap hit of about 13.85 million.

Total year 1 cost would be about 41.85 million for 2020 for these 3 guys together.

I totally agree with Vers that the #10 pick overall should step in as a starter. I don't think you draft a project at #10. Secondly, if the Browns move him to RG (some scouting reports have suggested that would be eventually the position for Wills) that you would have to agree that spending the #10 pick overall on a guard is a very big reach.

Now signing Peters for the next two years might fix the situation at LT and RG with Wills but the Browns are still putting their faith into a 38-year old player at the critical LT position with a suspect injury history. Now next year there are four true LT's expected to go in the top 10. Depending on this years success, the Browns might have to trade into the top 10 to address that position. The drawback, the defense is ignored again and appears to be a weak portion of the team as it stands now.

Big decisions for the Browns. I do find it interesting though that there seems to be questions now about Wills moving to LT. Interesting indeed.

I'm sorry to disagree. I think the risk of Wills moving over to LT is more than just assuming that he can do it. First, let's ignore the writers' because most, if not all, just parrot themselves and really don't know the technical aspects of both RT and LT from a learning perspective.

And I am going to ignore what the Browns' FO says because, having drafted him, they aren't going to say "We think he can make the change."

The facts are these: The Browns first checked with Callahan to get his opinion, and he gave the ok. He has done it before so that's good. But....it has not been done that often. There have been many failures.

Given that, I don't consider it an automatic for Wills. And how about this line of thought.....If the Browns' interest in Peters is legit could it be an insurance policy in case Wills isn't able to make the transition? We are all talking about letting Wills learn for a year while Peters plays, but wouldn't it be smart if the Browns also considered Peters as a long-term possibility in case Wills can't cut it?

We drafted Wills w/the 10th overall pick. I don't think a guy drafted that high [non-qb] should need time on the bench to learn.

That makes sense in multiple ways, but man, that would be a helluva lot of money to be paying your RG.

I agree w/you. But, I liked how sTrife was thinking. It was creative and made sense on certain levels.

I replied before you edited. I think I'll just leave your addition alone. LOL

If we sign Jason Peters is it possible that Conklin moves to RG, Peters slots in at LT and Wills stays at RT?