DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Free Agency Part III

You could be right.

I think he has overvalued himself and is just hoping another team comes forward with a better deal.

If he wanted to sign a cheap contract with a contender, he would have already done that by now.

We reportedly offered Clowney $12 million per year:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-r...ter-deal-later/

I am OK with Clowney in our house on a fair and lower contract. I am also OK with him listening to his ego and being out of the ;league for a year. Seems to enjoy turning people down.
I don't see a real ambitious pursuit of him myself. He is turning down offers.

Rest up.

perfect. I’d give him that for sure (crazy its his best offer too)

Heck, I'd offer him that for six years AND throw in incentives.

Purp, you are in charge.That should be plenty! Sign him. What an awesome line we would have.

He can have his own special spot on the Island! Make it so.

I agree.

The question now is if another team that Clowney considers a contender will match the offer we made. Doesn't seem like it has happened yet or is likely to happen.

My bet is that is what Clowney is hoping for.

If there is no movement at all does he sign with a contender for 8-10 Million or take the deal with us?

I think we’ll know more once facilities open up and he can visit in person to get a physical

My guess is the holdup is his agent knows Vernon makes 15 mil and knows we cut Vernon if Clowney signs, so he may just want to suck up the other 3 mil.

I'd like to keep Vernon even if we sign Clowney, at least for one year.

We could do it. I think I would rather use Vernons money to lock up Garrett for another 4-5 years. Give him that money in the form of a signing bonus.

Garrett and Clowney for the next 5-6 years sounds pretty darn good to me.

I want to get some guys locked in a year early. They have incentive to do so. They have incentive to do so, get your big payday early without risking injury this year, and the team does because we get it cheaper because taking a year of risk away from a player is worth something.

Look at Pryor. It may sound cool to bet on yourself, but I'll bet he wished he didn't make that bet.

Mashed potato's with no milk, salt, pepper, butter and gravy aren't all that good. Face it, simply boiled potato without any seasoning isn't all that good. It isn't bad, but not good.

Some food for thought on Clowney and why the Browns probably won't offer anywhere near 17 million per year.

Excellent find. Thanks. I forget about Clayborn.

No way I want Clowney for 17 mil. The 12 figure being thrown around, I can live with that.

Clayborn, I did forget about him, and as a guy who gets Falcons games on local tv I see them fairly often, he is a disruptive player.

Good take my man.

and he is making less than 3 million per year.

That's a really nice find.
It definitely improves my feelings about us signing Clayborn (who I, too, forgot about). If Clayborn can be at least average against the run, then we don't need Clowney.

That sounds like a nice idea ... sign Clowney and use Vernon’s money to front load Myles

That definitely gives some context behind his hesitance to sign with us with the offer out there.

its also telling what other teams feel about him right now

I don't think it is anything bad. I am thinking they want the rest of Vernons salary for this year.

I honestly would rather keep Vernon this year if we decide to add Clowney.

His contract is off the books after this year and we can give that money to Myles.

I'm more than just a little confused by some of what people are saying myself. Last time I checked we had around 38 mil in cap space. That would leave 15 or so for Clowney and still leave 23 to extend Garret and front load some of that money.

I agree with this, we have the money, I would rather keep Vernon and add Clowney, but if Vernon had to be cut for Clowney, I would not do that, I like a healthy Vernon over Clowney. JMHO

Vernon can’t stay healthy either and is not as talented as Clowney.

That's your opinion and I respect that but I don't believe Clowney is better than Vernon ... JMO

Olivier Vernon Career Stats

(Years) - 8 (G) - 113 (GS) - 95 (Total Tackles) 353 - (Sacks) - 54.5 (Assit) - 255 (Solo) - 98 (TFL) - 75 (QBH) - 141

Jadavien Clowney Career Stats

(Years) - 6 (G) - 75 (GS) - 66 (Total Tackles) - 236 (Sacks) - 32.0 (Assit) - 172 (Solo) - 64 (TFL) - 71 (QBH) - 80

SO HERE ARE THEIR AVERAGE PER YEAR IN DIFFERENT CATEGORIES: Olivier Vernon Actually Played in More Games Per Year than Clowney ...

(Games Per Year) OV-14 JD-12 (Games Started Per Year) OV-12 JD-11 (Tackles Per Year) OV-44.1 JD-39.3 (Sacks Per Year) OV-6.7 JD-5.3 (Tackles for Loss Per Year) OV-9.3 JD-11.8 (Quarter Back Hits Per Year) OV-17.6 JD-13.3

JMO. Vernon, when healthy, is a more productive player than Clowney. If we could sign JC at the right price I would like to keep OV. We can afford it for 1 year as Vernon's contract is over after this year.

Yes, we know.

LOL

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool mom.

Captain Penny

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/timmy...eal-per-report/

Timmy Jernigan was supposed to sign with Houston but decided not to ... he’s an experienced DT, although has had some injury history.

He started for Philly’s 4-3 DT and was effective when healthy .. and he’s still 27/28

I wonder with Berry’s time in Philly and our need for DT depth if he’s an option

I was wrong about how long he played. It was 11 years. Not 14. He started double digit games 9 of his 11 years, so he was a starter most of his career for multiple teams.

My only point is just because a player doesn't meet fan expectations doesn't make the player a bust. You are a bust when you are drafted high and coaches don't play you and you wash out after 4-5 years. A guy like Bosworth or Manzel, they were busts. Warren or Clowney aren't.

a healthy vernon>clowney. problem is you don't get a healthy vernon very long, and then on other hand no way in hell is clowney with anywhere near what he wants.. if i'm the browns, i just stand pat at DE, or maybe get Griffen. We need a LB more than we need DE

until we see what we have in the schemes we're running isn't sufficient, I don't buy this, at all. I think that what we have is "good enough" given that our D isn't driven by the LBers. As a group, they are the least important in the system, by all accounts I've seen so far.
In fact, if the other parts do their jobs appropriately, I'm betting that the LBers we have will suddenly look like studs.

I hope you're right, but I don't think you will be..LB's are instrumental in stopping the run, we haven't done that in years, going to be even harder with this group.. Let's hope the rookie and the 2nd year guys show up well, Hope they arent counting the FA we signed to do much. I still think at least one starting LB isnt on the team yet

Virus, Protests, New Head Coach, New NFL rules in 2016 ish. to limit offseason two a days,

I hope at least if one startng LB isn't on the team yet, they get enough time to work together.

Funny how some people want statistics to prove your point and when they get them they act like they mean nothing smh

Young players usually either progress or fall by the wayside. And by your own reasoning I have no idea if we are "good enough" at the LB position. We have no idea of the exact system we will be running or how much these young guys have progressed. So although I'm using some of your own logic I simply can't arrive at the same conclusion.

I will also, by that same logic, not predict doom and gloom either.

I realize that I'm going out on a limb a bit here, but given the amount of thought and planning this group is known to put into each and every move, I don't think we'd have gotten this far without having done more at LB if we weren't comfortable with the young kids' level of "good enough" for this system.


I do think it is likely to be a group we address heavily next offseason, unless the young bucks stud out.