DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Reuben could be sent back.

Damn... we posted the same thing at the exact same time...

Hey, this is Cleveland lets blame everybody except the OL.

Quote:

---

There is nothing but Tony Grossi saying that there was talk.... so the sole basis of this is a Cleveland reporter claiming that there was talk of this in Denver.

---

That could be true. I can't imagine why Denver would want him back. He isn't that good.

Despite what all the posters say, I still think that was a stupid trade by Savage. I wonder if Denver would give us Eck and Myers back for RD?

Seriously though...........as I said last week, I wonder if Droughns will even be w/the Browns next year? I can't see anyone trading for him, but I think there is a good chance he will be released.

J/C

Droughns is probably done in Cleveland that is a given or it could be a ploy Savage is using to get Houston to sweeten the deal because they want AP real bad I guess we will find out if Savage has an ace in the hole comming up.

Sorry Toad, I feel for ya...

I told yall!!! I told yall!!!

we should trade Droughns and get something for him while we can, and then sign Jamal Lewis (the better RB between the two), and then draft Adrian Peterson in the 1st round of the 2007 draft...

Having those two guys would be the epitome of what the Browns want to do when it comes to running the ball..

DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!
DO IT!!

Adrian Peterson and Jamal Lewis!! DO IT!!
Adrian Peterson and Jamal Lewis!! DO IT!!
Adrian Peterson and Jamal Lewis!! DO IT!!
Adrian Peterson and Jamal Lewis!! DO IT!!

Here's something you gotta consider...

At Savage's year ending PC he flat out said that Droughns might be a good fit at FB. When the guy who signs you to a nice contract (to be the starting RB) the year before comes out with that statement, the writing is on the wall...

Perhaps Savage views Droughns as a FB?

If so, I take Smith as the bruiser and a younger Vickers as the versatile threat over Droughns any day.

Vickers anyway.

I just don't see us paying the bonus. We would be better off putting the cash in someone elses pocket.

Just looking at the numbers... we will save a little bit of money, but nothing significant... a few hundred thousand to a million at the most.


His contract extension was worth a maximum of 13.5M. It was reported as a three year deal with bonuses prorated over 4 years (no idea how the hell that one works).

Salaries from nflpa.org
2006 1200000.00
2007 1250000.00
2008 1750000.00
2009 2750000.00
---------------------------------
Total 6,950,000.00


Add in his 1.75 bonus due him and we're up to $8.70M of a maximum of $13.5M, so the most the signing bonus could have been was $4.8M. Prorated over 4 years is $1.20M cap charge per year, so the maximum accellerated hit to 2007 would be $2.4M for a savings of only $600k. With us still sitting at least at $20M under the cap, that's chump change. The roster spot is more valuable at this point, and even that not until August.


As Toad pointed out, if he is let go or traded, it has nothing to do with money.

The posting I nabbed that from was dated March 3 of 2006 (it was a KFFL posting), so that's not likely. I can't believe I can't remember more about his deal from just a year ago... I'm feeling senile, lol

I like Dominic Rhodes, RB. I would give him a second chance re his off-field DUI charge but, only a second chance. JMHO

I'm also aware the Giants are very interested in him.

That would be pretty awsome to have those two in the backfield, thy'd be almost unstoppable. Finally Lewis could run over Ed Reed for a change instead of our guys.

I would be very excited if this happed, but the only thing I wonder about is Lewis's pitt patering feet. But I guess our new o-line will be good enough to open up holes for him and AP.

Just think

((epitome))

.. " Mav ".. glad to discuss the Pros & Cons with ya & even agree to disagree , But with calling Ruben a Bum , you loose all credibility !

I am not a fan of Droughns and think he leaves a lot of yardage out on the field, but IMO trading or cutting Droughns would be a bad move. We wouldn't save that much money, and he provides enough to this team to justify keeping him around. At worst he is a solid number 2, and he can play fullback as well. We have the cap room, might as well let him hang around one more year unless a team offers something above Droughns' value.

His SB was 2.5M...

Signed a four-year, $13.2 million contract on 3/5/2006. Droughns gets $2.5 million to sign, a $1.25 million roster bonus in 2006, and a $1.75 million roster bonus in 2007. His base salaries are $1.2 million (2006), $1.25 million (2007), $1.75 million (2008), and $2.75 million (2009).

He's a 3.625M Hit if we keep em'...

He's a 1.875M Hit if we let em' go...

3.6 ain't squat if we draft Peterson...Solid 1-2 punch...Coupled with a Rook...

I say keep em' cause if we don't draft Peterson we're in trouble...As we stand right now...

If there is one certainty with Savage, it is that he isn't going to pull the trigger on something like this until an equal or better option is in place to take over.

He has not, that I can think of anyway, made a single move like trading or releasing a player that there was not an immediate follow up replacement on board within a day or two.

IF this were to happen, we've either aquired another RB already, are about to or we're on the clock in April with a future starting running backs name on a card that is about to be turned in.

Yeah...Our cap situation has nuttin' to do with this one...I say we give it to em'...

Fraley and Steiner combined won't be 6M in hits this year...

If we started with 30M...We;re at 24M or better right now...

there could very well be some merit to this. after denver trades bell, they have shown interest in at least three other RB's. if rube goes there, he already knows the system and could impact faster than any of the others.




Broncos one of few looking at McGahee


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glut of rushers weakens market

By ALLEN WILSON
News Sports Reporter
3/4/2007

Click to view larger picture

Mark Mulville/Buffalo News
The Broncos have "a serious interest" in Willis McGahee.

There are teams interested in acquiring running back Willis McGahee, but free-agent shopping in the NFL could severely hinder the Buffalo Bills' ability to deal their starter.
The Denver Broncos have contacted the Bills with an interest in McGahee, NFL sources told The Buffalo News. The Broncos are in need of a starting running back after trading leading rusher Tatum Bell to Detroit on Friday.

One league source said the Broncos have "a serious interest" in McGahee.

However, the Broncos also have other options in free agency. They entertained free agent running back Ahman Green of Green Bay on Saturday morning. Then they set their sights on former Bill Travis Henry, who was released by Tennessee on Saturday afternoon because he was due to get an $8.3 million bonus Monday.

Henry immediately got on a plane and headed for Denver, where the Broncos reportedly have a strong interest.

Bell rushed for 1,025 yards for Denver last season. His departure left Denver with only two running backs on the roster - Mike Bell, who rushed for 677 yards as a rookie last year, and Cedric Cobbs, who carried three times for 9 yards in 2006.

The opening of the free-agency period represents the first opportunity for the Bills to get an attractive offer for their workhorse running back. New York Giants General Manager Jerry Reese revealed at last week's NFL Scouting Combine that the Bills had let teams know McGahee was available in a trade.

Trades of established veterans often do not occur until close to the NFL draft or on draft weekend, as happened when the Bills acquired Drew Bledsoe in 2002.

However, there are reasons why it might behoove the Bills to make a move sooner - if they are determined to deal McGahee.

One reason is the lack of teams in need of a starting running back.

The Giants, who have acknowledged an interest in McGahee, entertained Indianapolis free agent runner Dominic Rhodes on Saturday, but he left without signing a contract.

Besides Denver and the Giants, the only other teams with an obvious need at running back are Houston, Cleveland, Baltimore and Green Bay. The New York Jets might want to add a starting back. But the Jets got by with a committee of backs last season, and their presence in the AFC East may prevent the Bills from wanting to send McGahee there.

Green Bay is interested in bringing Green back if he does not sign with Denver. Baltimore is rumored to be interested in McGahee, but it appears re-signing free agent Jamal Lewis is its first priority. Tennessee may seek a back in Henry's absence but probably would want someone with a different style than McGahee to complement incumbent big back LenDale White.

If Henry lands in Denver and Rhodes lands in New York, options for McGahee outside of Buffalo could be few.

Meanwhile, Chicago's Thomas Jones has one year remaining on his contract and has reportedly asked to be traded.

If the Bills were able to move McGahee, what would they do for a running back?

The Bills would like their own free agent, Anthony Thomas, to return. They have been talking about a new deal with him. Thomas' best option in the game of musical chairs for runners probably is to return to the Bills. There also is a strong chance the Bills will look for a back in the draft after the first round, whether they retain McGahee or not.

Any team that acquires McGahee likely will want to sign him to a long-term contract. His deal expires after this season.

The Bills could do nothing and just keep McGahee. It's doubtful they will give him a new contract before the season starts, and they could be looking at a training camp holdout.

I'm not sure I would feel about the trade. Obviously his production was down but that can not be put only on his shoulders. I felt like he ran hard, a very punishing back for sure. Remember the pollack tackle? I felt like he ran hard all year but with his disappojinting season and his lack of production in the second half of his first season here I could see why we would get rid of him.

j/c...my 2 cents about RD

I mentioned that I thought he was slow the first game he played for us. But everyone loved him because he was a new Brown...and then everyone said he was great because he gained a thousand yards. Now, he's crap.

In thinking about RD, what can he do?
He's a pretty good blocker.
He can catch pretty darned well.
He's a pretty good runner.

Do we have any back that can do all of those things?
How good is Peterson at blocking?

how many times did he fumble again? lol..

The only problem I have w/ Droughns is that he has no burst.. u need burst to have a successful running game...

Get Peterson!!
Get Lewis!!
Get an extra pick for Droughns!!

In thinking about RD, what can he do?


my 1st thought was, he sheds the 1st tackle. that's what i like about him the most. i will always have visions of him carrying 5 steelers down the field.

Iam curious Why would u want Brown over henry and lewis...he has not produced at all... And remember Its what have u done for me Latley...in the NFL........

If you can't tell yet, I haven't really ever been a Droughns fan, but even I don't understand why we'd cut him just because of his contract. If we're going to use the money elsewhere, that's fine - I just don't see how we're going to. I'd much rather have Droughns on the roster backing up Peterson than someone like Wright (if I had my choice). Of course, a decent pick from Denver could certainly change my mind.

I'd be greatly surprised if we dumped RD. Especially at this late date. I could see Phil trading him but frankly I doubt he has much real trade value at this point in his career. I guess we'll see shortly how Phil values Reuben.

Ok wart toad First of all That is if Droughs was cut and we were to get a FA RB in here that is my opinion of who i were to prefer... Brown of Course is injured all the time.. Lewis yea he has had his fair share of trouble..and Henry as well.. But I would prefer Lewis Who has been a bruiser coming out of the back field as well.. more so than the other 2 above so... that IMO...!!! Second of all Droughns did start all 16 games in 2005 but injured in 2006 often... So ur correct about that.. But in the RedZone he is a DUD....BUM... ok

I could see Phil trading him but frankly I doubt he has much real trade value at this point in his career.

didn't we get him in a player for player trade? i can't remember, but i can see trading for something else we could use. i keep thinking this is just smoke anyway to get someone to trade up to get peterson.

SEE

Others do AGREE>>>>>>>> [

intersting quote from RAC about Ruben and Lewis on... 3-1

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/article.php?id=6522

On Lewis, Crennel said: "Everybody is on the radar screen. Even though Reuben Droughns is on our team and we're not looking to replace him, I've said all along we're trying to get the best players for our team."

translation... we wern't planning on shopping Ruben but if somone has an interst... we will trade him b/c we want lewis and we believe he is an upgrade.

My point is that I doubt that we'd get someone that would be as useful to us as Reuben is. Even if we do draft Peterson and RD ends up a 3rd down or relief back. I assume we could trade him and get someone but I just don't see it happening. And certainly not after we've paid his bonus.