DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Trade Mack?

A very solid move on our part. This way we don't have a rook at center next year. Erving is going to play this year. Probably RT with Schwartz moving inside. Then next year, invest another top 3 pick on the OL when Mack bolts.

Actually, that contract he got from Jax gives him the leverage to talk about "wanting to win" and nothing else. He's free to go wherever he wants, and at whatever price tag he wants.

If you somehow think that taking a lesser deal that takes away his leverage just to stay here long term would somehow say anything other than "he's got a screw loose", you might want to rethink things.

If I was Mack or Thomas or Haden or any of the other good players, I'd want to leave too. At the first chance. There is nothing worse than working for a dysfunctional organization. I want Thomas to leave and go somewhere and experience some winning. I think that guy deserves it at this point. And I won't be a bit upset with him if he does it. I think it's also cool that you can tell he really wants to be here in case this thing gets turned around. He wants to be a part of that. Makes me like him even more.

Hopefully, we are on the road to building some continuity with Pettine and Farmer. Hopefully. If either one are fired after this year ... poof ... you guys will never hear from me again. While I'm sure most would be happy about that, I really hope there is no regime change after this season ... no matter how ugly it gets.

And I think it's going to be ugly.

If winning was the most important thing.. He wouldn't have even conversated with Jacksonville..

wow. i have read some really stupid things on this board but this has to take the cake.

A guy that cares about winning.. signing with a team who has done worse than we have the passed 5 years isn't the most logical thing..

pfft. he made a contract where in 3 year he was a FA no matter what instead of the 1 year under the tag and another under the tag again. yea allowed to use the tag 2 year. no matter what he was not going to a team that was a contender. so he did the next best thing. yea stupid comment on you.

The only place that is a contender that I could see him being able to fit in cap wise is Indy, because they arent paying Luck anything.. yet.

When it comes down to money vs. winning.. he is going to have to make a choice..

and he did not have that choice. he was tag. get it now?

He was free to negotiate with any team he wanted.

And I was referring to next offseason.. anyone team that can afford him will most likely only have cap room because they aren't very good..

You make an excellent point. Why of all places would he go to Jacksonville.. They actually may be worse than us. It's the Money.. That's all it is.

I didn't understand what you were saying at first, but this brings up an interesting point - if I have the meaning correctly.

What if a "winner" doesn't offer Mack the contract he wants? Will he then follow the money? Isn't that what happened last summer? Because ThatGuy is correct, signing with Jax is not about winning. But that's what Mack keeps telling us it's about. Seems a bit two faced to me.

On a related note, I really don't understand the Browns sometimes. Do you want guys like Mack and Gipson to be a part of turning this around or not? I think Farmer out thinks himself sometimes. Farmer is like his own worst enemy. The Browns seem to be sending the wrong message in regards to their own, IMO. Just pay these guys and let's move on with it. This whole "go find your market value" is insulting to me, and if I were a player, I would find it insulting. An area I think Farmer needs to improve on is treating the players a little less like commodities and more like people - particularly the players that want to help you get this turned around and have proven to be valuable with their play. At some point the Browns need to worry less about what the market thinks of these guys and more about how valuable they are to the Browns and establishing the right culture.

Yes but they usually beat us. I don't know exactly what our record is against them but it is not good.

Well, here's the thing.

If a "winner" offered him a smaller contract than he wanted last offseason, the Browns could have just matched it and he'd be locked up with the Browns anyway for less money. What this contract he signed with Jacksonville did was take away the Browns' ability to have him locked up past the next two seasons. Had he not signed any contract, he'd have played one year under the transition tag and presumably one year under the franchise tag in Cleveland anyways, which would have kept him here the same amount of time without any guaranteed money/signing bonus past the first two years. And I'm not sure, but the Browns may have been able to franchise him a second year in a row without hitting that ridiculous escalator for 3x franchise tag.

So basically, signing the deal with Jacksonville was about being free to choose where he wants to go after two seasons, which was as good as he was going to get.

Couldn't he have signed a similar deal with a "winner"? With the same language making him free after two years?

No doubt the Browns would have matched and he would have been paid less the last two years. I get that part.

So is it safe to say it was about money in the short term with a long term view on freedom? Did he not care about winning the last two years? Did he not get an offer from a "winner"?

eo... great points.. I can see what Browns fans would be saying if we had the opportunity to pay pro bowl money to a FA who had played in about 5 games in 2 years... our fans would be up in arms about offering that kind of coin to a guy who is "injury prone"...

So I wouldn't say he loses all of his leverage because he is still, when healthy, one of the premier centers in the league, and somebody would probably step up to pay him very well... but his bargaining power to play teams against each other goes way down with that kind of recent injury history.

LOL So what does that prove?

According to this:http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/10/18/6996715/jaguars-vs-browns-head-to-head-records-scores-stats-and-more-history

We've played them 15 times and lost 10 of them. The dates are a little strange however so I'm not sure it's accurate.

Anyway, it doesn't prove any thing. The Jags haven't been relevant for a while, neither has the Browns. Bottom line, I'm not sure how anyone could look at the Jags and say, overall, they are THAT MUCH better than the Browns.

Both are and have been losing franchises.

Now, if Mack wanted to go to San Diago or San Fran or Denver or Green Bay or Pittsburgh or New England etc, then I'd say, hey, he want's to win and it's not all about money. But the Jags,, REALLY? LOL

I think J-Ville was the only Team to try and sign him

They are the only ones that made an offer, I think you are correct, but others were in the mix and probably felt as if he was just playing the Browns... I understand others shying away under those circumstances.

This. Is. It.

Period.

The fact that the deal was made with Jax was immaterial, it is the structure of the deal is what matters - and you had better believe that his agent had a TON to do with the clauses that are in that thing, because those things certainly wouldn't have been put in by any team. Jax went along with it because it was a no-lose situation for them... .if we matched, no loss. If we didn't, they got Mack on an easy to absorb contract.

This entire thing was about him getting free of the system that allows a team to squash a premier player's ability to hit the free market. Because of this, he actually now has the ability to go to a winning team for less money - something that he could NOT have done without this.

Because we had more Cap space than God and could match anything ANYONE wrote for him, so most teams didn't bother making any offer knowing that they'd either have to mortgage their future to put together a deal we wouldn't match or accept that no matter what they wrote they'd still lose out.

The fact that he was tagged killed any offers he might have gotten. That's the whole point of the deal he did get from Jax - he cannot be tagged again, so he will finally be able to TRULY play in free agency.

You know, the more I read about Mack and if he stays or will he go? If he does not want to be here, then let him go IMO

I don't think it is as simple as "he doesn't want to be here".

I think he DOES want to be here, but not if we're not getting this damned thing turned around. I don't think he wants to waste his career like Joe Thomas has by playing for a perennial loser. I think he'd love to play here, but he'd love it more if we actually stabilized as a franchise, stopped being the dysfunctional bastard child of the NFL, and actually started to win.

Okay, I let this drivel pass the first time I read it, but twice?



Why should Mack appreciate it? Do you believe the coaching staff is doing it as a favor to Mack? Name one team who would risk losing a pro bowl C in OTA's?

They're doing this for the TEAM, not for Mack.

I know you have a homer slant to things which is fine. But this one is so over the top it's hilarious!



No team or coaching staff would be pushing Mack at this juncture. But Mack should appreciate business as usual?

Ooops wrong finger.

Man that was a weird post oh geesh let me first thank you for letting that "DRIVEL" slide in the previous post. WTF?
Oh and smart ass...we are holding back all our injured players Pro Bowlers or not.
Why not appreciate it...all these young men are chomping at the bit to have some action. Its good we are holding them back...Why not appreciate it??? I have no clue on your insulting post.

But I got it now...somehow somebody died and you own this board. I'll clear my posts with you next time

Well, no, but it would help if you let somebody proof read your posts!



So every veteran who has ever been injured on all 32 teams, should be thankful that their coaching staff, in an effort to save their own jobs, want them to be healthy when the season starts in order to better give the team a chance to win.

Got it!

j/c:

The Browns need to win this year in order to keep quality players like Mack here.

Letting them "walk" as at least one person suggested is not sound strategy.

I find it highly unlikely he stays considering the porous offense we will be trotting out on the field this year thanks to "TEXT."
A porous offense can make the best of defenses tired and inconsequential.

What, exactly, is a "porous offense", and why - if it is a good thing that will make even the best defenses tired and consequential - would he not stay if we are one?

And I respond the way I feel like responding.

Yes, I do think it's silly to feel Mack should appreciate the fact that Pettine is doing the right thing for the team, not for Mack. He's holding out everyone who had surgery last year. That's a good coaching move but has nothing to do with Mack per say.

I think Pettine has the potential to be a very good HC. So no, I don't view him as the enemy. As I said before, you see this as all black and white. That there is no middle ground. That's unfortunate.

i think what he is saying here is, our offense has some holes (porous), such as TE, some may think WR, obviously QB... So by that, one could consider the offense porous.


then, he if referring to OUR defense being negatively affected, because we will not sustain long drives, which will result in our defense being on the field too long, and getting tired out.

If our offense could move the ball last year..

And we have (on paper) improved the skill positions and offensive line..

Why is it so hard to believe we'll be able to move it this year?

Watch videos of Brian Hartline.. The guy gets the ball and ATTACKS the first down marker..

Do I expect us to have a top 5 offense? No.. But I do expect us to be able to move the ball.. Play great defense.. And grind it out..

That obviously just means I'm an optimistic homer though..

+1

I've been saying it for the last two months.

I think with a strong offensive line, strong running game, and what should be an elite defense that our skill players along with Josh McCown are setup for success. It might not be likely, there are a handful of "what-ifs" that factor into the equation, but success isn't out of the question. Our skill players could be A LOT worse...Bowe, Hartline, Hawkins, Gabriel and now Housler and Duke Johnson I think has potential to be an above average group.

Like you, I'm just a homer though...

Thank you for helping him understand. Bravo~!

I don't think we have improved our skill positions.

McCown is a step down from Hoyer.

Gordon is gone.

Cameron is gone.

We added Bowe [who many on this board said was washed-up before we signed him and are now saying he is an improvement.] Hartline was a good signing, but better than Gordon. I don't even know who the TE is, but he is not better than Cameron. Duke Johnson may help.

I don't see this plethora of incoming talent at the skill positions that you do.

+1
Also, even though I feel our D will be very good this year they can't do it alone. Our O has to be able to consistently pick up those 1st downs on 3rd and whatever; something we could not do last year and it cost us a few games.

McCown is a big step down from Good Hoyer... not so much when compared with Bad Hoyer, perhaps even better.

On Gordon if you are talking about potential, yes that is a down grade, but when compared with last years Gordon then anything is an ugrade he seemed to be more of a detriment than anything else last year.

add in Hartline and I would have to say our WR's are better than last year.

Cameron, again if we talk about 2013 Cameron, the hole he leaves is large, the 2014 version? MEH.,, with his injuries last year his void is mitigated.

So I would say we have a wash, .... but if we add the POTENTIAL... again POTENTIAL of Johnson, and the POTENTIAL growth of Crow and West then plus the FB ( whose name escapes me), POTENTIAL,I think RB is better than last year, POTENTIALLY.

THe big loss is Shanahan's Offense,,, Now I was not enamored with his game day strategies, and predictabilities ( is that a word?), and I think his people skills lent themselves to being divisive. I also did not care for Loaggins (sp), so there is a chance that Flip et al can actually be as good bottom line as last years "O" coaches when taken as a whole.

Add in a deeper and hopefully better OL and I think this offense may surprise a few folks, could see it being a middle of the pack offense and that would have good enough last year to make the playoffs,