Without a doubt, this offseason will be the most critical period for the Browns new front office as they head into their second season.

Free agency is behind us and Sashi opened the checkbook to get those free agent players he wanted..OG, C, WR. Sashi also took on QB Brock Osweiler's 16 mil contract to gain a 2018 2nd round pick of the Texans.

The one glaring negative that will stick with me for some time...after having a year to get Pryor signed, Sashi just could not get it done.

Is it that Sashi lacks the expertise to get a deal done? or that the Haslams and Sashi decided they didn't want Pryor?

Given the way the Haslams and Sashi spent money on other teams free agents, I'm not buying the excuse that "money" was the reason the Browns give for not getting Pryor signed.

...the fact is, when there was a player the Haslams and Sashi wanted to sign, they made it happen with their checkbook.

As Peter King noted in his article interviewing Depodesta on Monday, it bugs him that the Browns have lost so many good players, not re-signing their own.




Then, yesterday it was reported that the front office was looking at possibly drafting a WR, Mike Williams, Clemson.

I thought someone was making a joke...after allowing Pryor to leave, the front office is looking to possibly use the #12 pick on Mike Williams.

If the FO drafts a WR, it will be an example of what Peter King described above...wasting a draft pick to fill a hole that the Browns didn't need to have.

Sashi Browns greatest failures as GM, not signing Mitch Schwartz and Pryor.

In an article discussing the Browns many draft picks, ex-Cowboys HC, Jimmy Johnson warned the Browns front office...don't waste draft picks because you feel you can, with so many picks.

...is anyone in the Browns front office listening?

I think Pryor overvalued his stock and when he signed with the Skins it was a 1 year deal to try get big $$$ next year. He will be Cousins primary target where here in Cleveland he wasn't the primary with Coleman coming back. And am not holding my breath, but you never know what's going to happen with Gordon. Which would only take away more numbers from Pryor.

I believe Sashi Brown made a solid effort to get Pryor signed but Prior thought he could get more else where.

Regarding letting Alex Mack and Schwartz walk, well they weren't part of the regime that was started under Sashi and Hue Jackson. I think with Free agency they've done an admirable job in restocking the Oline.

Only time will tell as no one knows what type of year Pryor will have or Kenny Britt. At the close of the year let's discuss this as hindsight is 20/20.

you would have a lot more credibility if you would be more honest. you wonder if we did not sign Pryor because of a lack of expertise or lack of desire. for some reason you could not include the other very obvious option. tp wanted to have a show year with a high quality qb like cousins. he sees a better chance of racking up big stats with cousins than with Kessler. big stats, he hopes will lead to a four year 11 million per year contract a year from now. you may not agree with that possibility but to not at least consider it a possibility is foolish.

Really? These are the only two options available?

How come you didn't reference the Bitonio, Collins, and Taylor extensions? Sashi seemed to have the 'expertise' to get those done.

Both good and bad in 1+ year, but you only want to focus on the bad. That's called an agenda.

I run into this issue all the time when talking about the Browns with friends... Not re-signing Pryor means the front office is a failure. The other deals are irrelevant and an anomaly because they don't help prove how they really operate...

Same thing when people complain about a poor draft from the Browns a year ago. I say ok, fine, what could the Browns have done differently to have made it a good draft... I get crickets.

Jamar Taylor most improved cornerback of 2016

Browns sign Jamar Taylor to 3 year extension worth $15 million

Or Pryor didn't want the Browns?

You say the same crap over and over.

Mike Williams is going to be way better than Pryor.

We offered Pryor the most money. Nobody offerd more, so we had no need to up our offer just because he wanted more. Apparently nobody else thought he was worth what we offered, except for him and his agent. So much for a hometown discount. He wanted us to pay a hometown premium. Screw him.

Had he signed somewhere for more money, I might get your point, but he didn't, so you really have no point in your beef except you show to be trolling the board because you don't like the front office for whatever reason your mind conjures up.

It because the guy is agend driven. He just likes to [censored] people off with his blabber.

And I also notice he bumped this in to another thread continuation....lol.

What a joke.

Why wouldn't the Browns need to draft another receiver even if they had signed Pryor?

Drafting Williams who is a cheaper option for longer period for the Browns and potentially a much better WR than Pryor would be fine for me... I wants to sign Pryor and was sad we didn.t... It seems that he wants to have a huge pay day or bet on himself for one year... Browns wanted a long term deal... It didn't work out...

Only move I really didn't like was letting Mack walk...

I usually avoid these threads, but I popped in to see if there was anything new being said. Nope.

It's been the same crap for a few months now.

Just like the Garoppolo Thread

I agree.

The money Pryor wanted was ransom, not contract value. He could be here but chose not to honor his publicity negotiating. See ya. Not a FO fail IMO. Just flushing.

Mack didn't want to be here either. He took less money to go elsewhere. In both the cases of Pryor and Mack, I DON'T want a situation where we have to pay well over market value to get a guy to stay. Do you really want to have a player who's mindset is, "Well, I don't really want to be here, but I guess I'll stay just for the money."?

I think the only one the Front Office messed up on was Mitchell Schwartz. They gave the guy an offer, he explored other offers, and when he came back, they pulled the offer that they had given him.

Mitchell Schwartz turned down more money to play for less elsewhere too.

He bet on himself and lost, just as it may happen for Pryor he may have a similar season as last season just to find no one will offer him as much as he turned down.

That's not at all correct. Scwartz came back to sign the offer the Browns had made him and the Browns reneged on that offer. He came back before the FA signing period even opened to sign the deal.

Mac tries to slant everything in a bad light which I don't find fair at all. I believe overall they have done a good job and given fair offers to players that left, like Pryor.

But it seems you wish to try to paint them as perfect. They're not.

He did? Do you mean during the 2-day window where agents can negotiate and have a deal agreed upon but not "officially" sign or before that?

If it's before that, that's news to me. I thought Schwartz's situation was very similar to Pryor's...searched the market during the 2-day window and found he wasn't worth what he thought. Came back and asked for the contract the Browns offered before FA.

He's no better than mac ... just on the other side of things so his opinions are more popular ...

Actually ... he's worse than mac .. mac don't make things up ... i don't read direct posts from Vambo so all i see is when someone responds to him and quotes it ..... so i don't read a lot of what he posts ....... so I'm not sure what bad info he gave out this time ... but based on his history of what i read ... theres a good chance it had zero truth in it ..

On Wednesday morning, the first day of free agency, a source told cleveland.com that Schwartz planned to return to the Browns because their deal was the best and he wanted to remain in Cleveland.

But when Gilmore went back, the original deal was no longer there. The Browns thought Schwartz was gone when he didn't engage with the original offer, and moved on. They would've taken him for less, but not the $7 million. Kansas City's offer was the best one remaining.

"I'm not getting into a back and forth,'' said Brown. "Looking forward not driving in the rear-view mirror. We did have discussions with every single one of our guys. And we always will.''

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/03/browns_sashi_brown_mitchell_sc.html

So Mitchell Schwartz didn't turn down the Browns best offer but decided to bet on himself and lost no one else would offer him more and ended signing for less.

What part of that is made up?

It's quite easy actually. The NFL changed its rule to allow players agents a window to look at other possibilities before the FA signing period begins. There's nothing wrong or improper with it.

The Browns decided to try and penalize Schwartz for exercising that option. As such, the Browns pulled their offer. Schwartz didn't refuse to sign it. The Browns pulled it.

So he did sign the original offer when it was first made to him?

Waiting is now refusal? Yeah, it was a bad move on his part, but you don't need to make things up.

My understanding was that the offer was on the table until the start of the FA period at which point it would no longer be there as originally presented.

What is being made up, CHS?

Why don't we just put this (and Pryor) on the one that usually is the problem ... THE AGENTS!!!

The whole Schwartz 'refused the offer'. Geoff Schwartz has stated that the Browns pulled the offer when Mitch wanted to sign.

I don't know the timeline, but I "assume" the time limit had expired...

U mean LIE? ...

Cause that would be BS .... these players are GROWN MEN who hired THEIR agent ... your entire premise is BS ... but if u want to play that game .. at least be honest about it ... the player is in charge ... they HIRE the agents and they sure as all hell can FIRE them ...

Does anyone even know what the word AGENT means? ... it should be self explanatory ... good lord .. I'm gonna regret opening up that can of worms ... *L* ...

I'm a fan of personal accountability ... appearantly most on here aren't ....

Some of u never cease to amaze me ...

Schwartz falls on our FO ... saying anything else is just DENIAL ...

TP is just one of those things .... it happens ....

ASS-U-Ming almost always works out well ... good strategy .... ..

Every time i read that article about Mitch and it says the Browns "moved on" ... i wonder what it is we moved on to .... what was a GAPING HOLE last year and a HUGE QUESTION MARK at BEST this year .... WTF did we move onto? ... CRAPPY RT PLAY???? ... WOOOOHOOOO ...

HOPEFULLY, MAYBE we have someone to play it this year ... HOPEFULLY, MAYBE aren't good words in the NFL .... *LOL* ...

I looked at it like you are selling a used car. I offer you $900 for it. You tell me you're going to shop it around because you think you can get much more than my offer.

You shop it around and the best offer you can get is $700, so you come back to me saying you'll take the $900. I tell you, sorry, the $900 is off the table. Why should I pay you $900 when the best you could get otherwise is $700? If you take that as an insult and don't want to negotiate with me then fine, go get your $700. You should of sold it when I made my offer the first time.

I've always kinda seen it like that.

In terms of how the two situations went down, business-wise, I agree with you.

The Schwartz debacle is probably on the FO. They pulled their offer, which was a dumb move. Who knows what they were thinking.

Pryor was different. Pryor wanted a different deal, the FO (allegedly) didn't want to give him a 1-year deal. I would've preferred to have Pryor here on that contract, but I understand the rationale that they don't want to renegotiate with him each year until he can command top dollar.

Further, I also think Pryor, upon realizing the 1-year deal was the path he was going to take, didn't want to be in Cleveland anymore. If you're going to take on that risk ("bet on yourself"), and use the next year to further bolster your argument that you're a top WR talent, then you definitely want Cousins throwing you the ball vs whoever we end up putting out there each week. I think it makes perfect sense, and I don't fault the guy one bit.

Would it ease your sensibilities if I substitute "expectation" or perhaps "believe"?

IMO Pasztor wasn't crappy...he had a bad game against Miami, but played no-worse-than average for the year. He was still not as good as Schwartz though.

The descriptor of "Crappy" goes to Erving...then Alvin Bailey...Bailey being second only becasue he played less.

We don't "know" what happened with Schwartz...but we know that the FO isn't cheap and they DO value their own. The signings of Taylor, Collins, Bitonio, & Crow's tender & the offer to Pryor sure make me lean towards giving the FO the benefit of the doubt on Schwartz.

I really think the FO was bound and determined to NOT set a precedent for getting played by the FA and their agents...which in the Schwartz case turned out to be like biting off your nose to spite your face.

Are u the guy walking everywhere or the guy with a vehicle he doesn't want and no money ... small but important detail ... *LOL* ...

ref·use1
rəˈfyo͞oz/
verb
verb: refuse; 3rd person present: refuses; past tense: refused; past participle: refused; gerund or present participle: refusing

indicate or show that one is not willing to do something.
"I refused to answer"
indicate that one is not willing to accept or grant (something offered or requested).
"she refused a cigarette"
synonyms: decline, turn down, say no to; More

How did he refuse it if x days later, he tried to accept it?

I'm not sure where u disagree with me ... *L* ...

Only thing i don't agree with on your post is that it was PROBABLY the FO's fault on Mitch .. it was 100% on them ... *LOL* ..

I don't blame them for Mack, Benji or Gipson ... they didn't want to be here ... Mitch did ...

I agree on TP .. once he decided to take the 1 year GAMBLE on himself .. he'd of been a BAFOON to come back here .... and that is not this FO's fault ... well not yet anyhow .. *L* ..

Not sure .. let me think about it and I'll get back to U ...

*LOL* ...

If i ever have the pleasure of meeting u .. first few rounds are on me .. u have a great spirit and tude ... its the least i can do ...

Did he accept it the day it was offered or refuse it ?

He didn't accept it, but he didn't refuse it. He waited. Stop twisting words, it won't help. Your dictionary didn't help.

Advance warning...I get really talkative when I've had a few.

Splitting hairs there, CHS. Can we say he declined to sign the offer? Simply massaging words here so that everybody comes out a winner...

My bad, I was unclear.

The only part where I 'sorta' disagree is that I would've given Pryor that one year deal. Even if it was more than the Redskins offer, I would've given him that deal.

(I did say that I think Pryor chose to go to Washington to play with a better QB, but that's just me guessing)

Here's what I'm thinking from another perspective. Sashi said just a few weeks later that they aren't in any position to lose/let go of a WR like Gordon. To me, it makes more sense to "cave" to Pryor and overpay slightly on a 1-year deal than set yourself up to potentially put up with Gordon's shenanigans once again.


edit: Also, I only say 'probably' because we don't have 100% of the story, and a lot of info we do have is of the "he said she said" variety.

ref·use1 indicate that one is not willing to accept or grant (something offered

Not accepting is refusing you are the one twisting.

And if you say he had the right to REFUSE the offer to test the water why are the Browns not able to change their offer or go in a different direction?

But if Mitchell Schwartz not refused the offer they could not have pulled or changed it.

wait
wāt/Submit
verb
1.
stay where one is or delay action until a particular time or until something else happens.


we can play semantics all day. You're still wrong.

j/c:

All I recall is that Mitchell was allegedly offered the contract at the NFL combine when his agent was there. Whether he "refused", "waited", "maybe'd it", who knows. Bottom line is he didn't sign it and chose to hit FA. Pryor did that too. They both ended up getting less than what the Browns originally offered.

Yes we can while the Browns waited after Mitchell Schwartz refused their original offer they went in a different direction.

Nope you are wrong.

We really don't know the facts. I can easily say Schwartz used Sashi's offer to get better and sign elsewhere. When they found out Cleveland made an outstanding offer, they went back. Sashi realized he was an idiot making such an offer and pulled it back.

To me, Schwartz's agent was at fault not knowing his clients market value. Or, agent tried taking advantage of a rookie GM.

Unsure why Sashi must overpay every player in order to be seen credible. If he signed players everyone is ripping him, Browns have on their payroll a center and right tackle paid equal to a left tackle. Not only that both receive 2-3 million more than Joe Thomas. To be fair to Joe, Sashi renegotiates his contract too?

Sashi is in a tough situation staying true to fiscal responsibility and future cap while keeping talent for a team who hasn't had a winning season in 10 years.

Your more than likely right on this one Mr. Oooob cause your agreeing with me 100% on this baby .. *LOL* ...

Were a better football team with TP on it than w/o him .. no doubt ... IF he came back and gave us the opportunity to match the 1 year deal and we didn't ... then i would be BLAMING THE FO ...

U can find a report to back up whatever scenario u think happend .... IMO there's no way he came back here and gave us that chance ... this is not the worst place to be for a one year gamble on a reciever ... but it is in the bottom 5 if not 3 or 2 ... *LOL* ... so to me it would have made NO SENSE what so ever for him to come back and see if we wanted to match the 1 year offer ... hell ... even if we gave him 8 GAURANTEED and 10 with incentives vs the 6 and 8 he got ... he still would have been stupid to come here ... *LOL* ..

If i was his agent and he came to me and said "take this one year offer back to c-town and see if they'll match it" ... my response to him would have been ... "you'd be better off signing the 4 year deal with them than allowing them to match the 1 year deal from Wash" ....

Were pretty much spot on with each other here Mr. Ooooob ...

Wow, all this talk is a little crazy. The Browns are a business and as such you don't just give money away because I guy wants it! Let's be perfectly clear, Schwartz was offered a more than fair contract which he had every opportunity to sign. Instead, he wanted to test the market. When he found out his value was less than what the Browns had offered he came running back. Anyone on this board that can honestly think that Schwartz wanted to stay a Brown is a fool. The reason - the only reason he came back is because the Browns had the highest offer. This had absolutely nothing to do with loyalty or wanting to stay put - it was all about money and the FO called him on it. The same with Pryor, he had a multi year deal on the table for 8 million per and he thought he was of greater value. When he got no offers he eventually signed a 1-year deal for much less money for a "show me" season. The Browns have consistently been on the up and up on these contracts from what I've seen but these guys who over value themselves I'd just as soon not have on the team. No loyalty and even less commitment. Good ridden Schwartz - the only person you have to blame for your low pay is yourself. Nobody made that decision to look for better money but you and you failed. Heck, I would have pulled the offer too. He'd just have been a cancer in the locker room bitching about how the Browns underpaid him - BYE BYE!

This is just a theory on my part, but Schwartz's brother played for the Chiefs, and enjoyed his time there. I suspect that he told Mitchell that he had to check out playing for a winning team, in a great city, with the Chiefs.

I suspect that Mitchell went, checked it out, got an offer, and remained decided that he wanted to stay in Cleveland.

Then the FO ticked him off by playing games with their offer they had made him.

I don't think that Schwartz was looking to go to the highest bidder. I think that his brother influenced him to check out the Chiefs. I don't think he wanted to leave Cleveland. His fiancee was from Cleveland. They were planning their wedding. Then the Browns blew it.

Again, all just my theory.

You seem a bit confused.
You say the Browns are a business and shouldn't be throwing away money,which is true.On the other hand you don't recognize that every player is also a business and that he owes it to himself and his family to attempt to make the best deal possible.
MS exercised his collectively bargained right to seek offers from other teams.
I don't believe he even considered the Browns would throw a hissy fit and rescind the original offer.
But they did,now he's gone and maybe lessons were learned on both sides.

If he remained decided that he wanted to stay in Cleveland why didn't he sign the offer when he was first offered it?.

Why then did Schwartz ticked the FO off by playing games with his brother influence of greener pastures?

If his intent all along was to stay why did he play the WAIT and see game?

Why is it if the player refuses an offer for testing the waters it's negotiations but if said waters don't pan out and the Browns re-negotiate it's a hissy fit?

I have to side with Vam. on this one. When he walked away to test the waters, he knew the offer was not going to stand. He was hoping that they wanted him back bad enough to dismiss the snub. He was wrong.

So here we are, discussing last years news, yet this remains a current thread?



LMAO


And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on.

Well, now that you bring that thought into it I guess I'm the guy (FO) who "moved on" from that car and ended up driving a couple of pieces-of-crap trying to make one get from point A to point B. LOL

Future Headline: The Browns make their third straight playoff appearance!

~ Mac - "Sure, but remember how they let Schwartz walk..."

smh

Just clicking.

If the Browns pulled the offer after Mitchell tested the market, then IMO they were petty and childish. He was a good RT for us, so that's cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Mack wanted to bolt, Benjamin got overpaid so I don't blame the FO for those.

U may now unpuck yourself ....

Shame on the FO for offering the best contracts those players turn down!

Lol, I'd forgotten that.

Yep. Not sure how everyone get's suckered into feeding the troll. This is a garbage thread and topic used for one reason/agenda. smh

I know it's in the past but apparently this is still relevant...

I don't believe the Browns pulled the offer. I think Schwartz left it on the table. There is a difference.

I imagine it played out more like this....

MS: So what is my offer?
FO: Blah blah blah, here is it...
MS: Okay. (walks away)

FO (looking at each other now): What just happened? We offered a guy who has never been invited to the pro bowl to be one of the highest paid RT's in the league and he walked away? Is he going to sign? Now what?

...(time passes)...

FO: Well we can't wait on this guy, he's obviously not interested in our offer, this might be more difficult then we originally thought, let's regroup and move on.

...(more time passes)...

MS: Hey guys, we're ready to sign that contract now.

FO (standing around looking at themselves again): Well, Mitchell, when you left the offer on the table we decided to move on. We'd love to have you back next season so here is what we can offer you....

MS: Is this some kind of joke? Where's the original offer? You guys hosed me, I'm going to tell my brother and he's going to post on the internet how lame you are...

And it's fine that you look at it that way. But the NFL set this up. They set up a period of time before the FA signing period opens for agents to check the market. The rules were changed to allow for just that.

The Browns attempted to punish Schwartz for exercising the option that the NFL put in place for FA players.

It's like saying, "Yeah, we gave you that option but if you use it, you're going to pay for it."

Sounds about right - Bye Bye Schwartz

Or, agent thought if Sashi is willing to pay 9 million. Lets shop better teams getting something close. When other teams were only willing to pay 6 or 7, he advises his client to go back to Cleveland. Meanwhile, Sashi realized he was an idiot giving way more than any other pulled back the offer.

So punishing players for following a rule change made by the NFL is just fine with you? From my understanding he had the option of signing the contract until the opening of the FA signing period and was here to do that. The Browns played hard ball and lost.

Oh, I forgot about that great RT they signed after that. Wait, what?

Pit, you always seem to "forget" the REASON they made the offer they did was so that (MS) would not go to FA.
He choose to test FA, so guess what? No Deal End Of Story. No Big Bad Guys Here.

You seem to be ignoring the point. He did NOT go on the FA market at all. That never happened. And nobody said there was a bad guy. The FO just made a mistake.

I believe they learned something from it. This year we signed the G from Cincy. Now he's a very good G, but not the best G in the league. Yet they signed him to an offer that made him the highest paid G in the league. Fans widely love that move while at the same time make excuses for the Schwartz move.

Had they used that same logic on the Schwartz deal, we would have a very good RT now. We' don't. So it seems they have learned something. But it appears you haven't. lol

I don't recall do you have something saying it is rule. I thought it was an implied agreement between agents and GM. Sashi's offer would have made Schwartz the highest paid RT and more than Joe Thomas. If anything, Sashi would have been more in a bind if Schwartz signed. More than likely he would renegotiate Thomas's contract. I hardly think Schwartz was punished. Why than did Schwartz go look for better? His agent used Sashi's offer to drive up the price elsewhere. It is not that hard to see.

look in the mirror

Free agency officials kicks off at 4 p.m. ET on Wednesday. But the courtship process can begin well before that under league rules.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000641702/article/what-is-the-legal-tampering-period



More than Joe Thomas? I don't think so.

If that's true, then they just signed Kevin Zeitler to more than Joe Thomas makes since they paid Kevin Zeitler more than the Scwartz contract was worth. That's my point, you don't have a problem paying Kevin Zeitler top G money in the league but makes excuses for not signing Schwartz?

You're not making any sense here.

Could it be because Zeitler accepted their offer where as Schwartz refused if origially? It seems the Browns have been on the high side of every offer made to any Free Agent.

I couldn't help myself....that's one of my favorite movies ever. But to add to that, it was reported that even the Browns offered more money than the Ravens for Tony Jefferson. He just decided to go with a team with a better record from last year. ( I can't say better team, I just can't)

You don't have to say it, Memphis. I'm believing we won't be the doormat this season...

He was back in time to sign the offer BEFORE the FA signing period began. He exercised a legal system approved by the NFL. The Browns punished him for it and the team suffered for it too. They had no "other path to follow" when it came to the RT position.

Quit acting like they're saints. They aren't. They've made good moves and bad moves. You're just another mac only from the opposite direction.

Maybe the offer was one time offer you refuse it we have the right to modify it as market value plays out we could raise it or lower it depending on demand. Same as the player and agent has the right to shop around for best deal for them the Browns or any team has the right to modify a deal that works for them. MS punished the Browns for offering the best contract he would be offered, Browns felt no loyalty from MS and took the slap in the face by MS and headed in a different direction. MS and his agent bet on himself and lost. The bad moves made were made by MS and his agent, he was offered the best contract to stay. For a player "who WANTED TO PLAY HERE " he didn't show it!

The Browns so far have offered free agent they wanted the best contracts offered. They made a plan they wanted improve the team as they go with players who "WANT TO PLAY HERE" so far the players lost accepted less money to play elsewhere.

Negotiation go both ways it seems the Browns are saying we will offer fair contacts but won't be extorted by greedy agents.

Just how many games would the Browns have won with MS? You keep saying they would be a better team with him well how much better? playoffs 1 game , 10 games? SB?

Good God macbo, give it up.

*LOL* .... good one dub ... and 100% accurate ... but mac don't usually make stuff up ... so this may actually be an insult to mac ...

That point cannot be disputed. They were offered (seemingly) a good deal and it was declined by them.
What transpired after that is speculation but the end result is he signed for less elsewhere. Both sides lost by not signing the original deal (and yes, he was within his right to look elsewhere). Makes you wonder how forthright his agent was in the first place...

All mac does is make stuff up. He engineers his version of the truth then reverse engineers the reasons.

I've learned to find it entertaining.

I haven't read mac for years ... once every 50 posts or so I'll check in ... for the last two years .. its been the same post ... *LOL* ...

Guess i should not have ASSumed as to weather he makes stuff up or not as i don't read him so i don't know .. *L* ..

.

The only thing made up was Mitchell Schwartz agent telling him he was worth more than the Browns offer and he could get it from another team!

Seems like the posters who aren't trying to make excuses understand. Since you believe the FO is perfect, you never will. Time for me to stop wasting time on your BS.

j/c

Without more factual evidence (and we have very little) coming to light, further discussion is fruitless...

You made that up , I never stated they were perfect.

If you hate everything about the Browns how to you call yourself a fan. Time for me to stop wasting time on your BS.

jc...

In the Peter King/Paul Depodesta interview, King took the opportunity to bring up the subject of the front office's practice of not re-signing their own free agents. King told Depodesta that even he is bugged by this trend the Browns front office continues to use. Peter King, welcome to the group of fans who are having a difficult time understanding what the Browns' are trying to do, allowing some of their best to leave rather than re-signing them.

As Peter King correctly pointed out, the practice of not re-signing your own free agents creates "unnecessary" holes that must then be filled. King named the two ex-Browns who played for Atlanta in this years Super Bowl, Alex Mack and Taylor Gabriel...RT, Mitch Schwartz, who started 17 games for the Chiefs and most recently, Terrelle Pryor, the Browns top WR in 2016.

Here is how Depodesta answered Peter King's concerns...

“I’d say going back a year when we did have a handful of free agents and WE ALLOWED THEM ALL TO SIGN ELSEWHERE, that was a moment in time. That is not something that we want to do continuously."


Anyone care to interpret Depodesta's answer?


I will take a stab at it...Depo said, "WE ALLOWED THEM ALL TO SIGN ELSEWHERE"...

Put another way, imo, the front office made a pre-determined decision not to re-sign those players Peter King named. Depodesta is admitting that the Browns didn't intend to re-sign those players...they intentionally allowed them to leave.

I wish Peter King would have pressed Depodesta on the WHY Depo, Sashi and Haslam agreed on that strategy?

I hate when I do not have my facts in order. Your reply made me think. I rechecked. Schwartz wanted 9 million. Cleveland offered 7. I thought Sashi offered 9. That basically shot down my whole argument.

I do think you are a little harsh judging Sashi, but that is an opinion. I cannot fault an opinion with an opinion.

We screwed the pooch on that one, and we are the pooch

I'm thinking that by now our little bung hole should be healed enough to move on.

I agree. This stuff needs to go in to a tread titled "Last Years News".

In other old news, our FO cut Bernie Kosar.

What?! When did that happen????

A number of years after our front office let Jim Brown walk away to take on an acting career. Our FO has been crap since forever.

On December 1945 on a frozen field at Cleveland Municipal Stadium the Rams defeated the Washington Redskins 15-14 to win their first NFL Championship. However, the joy for Cleveland fans would be short lived as the Rams got approval to move to Los Angles less the a month later.

As the Rams headed for the coast, a new league called the All-American Football Conference would begin play. The league was dominated by the Cleveland Browns who would eventually join the NFL in 1950.

quote above by Vambo:

"...move to Los Angles less the a month later."

And the Cleveland Rams owner was named Dan Reeves.

And 42 years later another Dan Reeves broke our hearts.

Well, I am still pissed about that.

I am over that, but don't get me started on cutting Phil Dawson

I was thinking of him the other day.

Is he available? I hope he retires a Brown. Probably sick of all the sunshine and good weather. Come back home and kick for us for a year or two, Phil!

just clicking...

Just a bit of perspective in defense of Sashi on all of this "keep our own" business:


Sashi's responsibility and loyalty is to the Browns, not the Browns' players. So, when a guy like Schwartz or Pryor want to go off an play games - which is their right - he has to also make sure he has his #2 option lined up and getting locked in.

What he cannot do, and what he should forever get roasted for should it happen, is to spend so much time trying to keep one guy like Schwarz or Pryor that he ends up missing out on them AND whomever his #2 option was. He has to lock up a roster spot with a capable player. Preferably, that is the guy that was already on our team, but if you can get comparable production from another guy that IS ready and willing to sign as you would expect from your guy that is dawdling - you move. You take care of you first. If that aligns with the ideal of keeping your own guys, then that is fantastic, but if not... it is what it is.

Yeah.

Most of the FA's they let go elsewhere likely didn't fit in with the plans going forward and so instead of wasting those player's time, they helped them on their way?

Benjamin, Gabriel? Does anyone really expect us to keep a stable of under 6'00" WR's after a) the Browns were criticized for having such a thing in the first place and b) our new coach publicly preferred taller, bigger WRs?

Gipson? Good, but I don't think his injury history showed him to be a player they could confidently feel would be on the field long enough to build around.

Schwartz? In the end I think the FO probably could have shown a little more patience with that situation. But I also don't blame them from moving on so quickly. The assumption around here is that Schwartz and his agent politely thanked the Browns for their offer and stepped away for a moment to see what was out there. What you guys keep ignoring is all the hype just prior to where top RT's were rumored to be able to garner $10-12 mil/year. You in particular mac talk about Sashi and his ego, but would you deny the possibility and likelihood that Schwartz's group would be just as petulant and petty after being insulted by the Brown's offer that came in several millions less per year than what they thought they were going to get?

IMO it's just as likely that upon seeing the Brown's low-ball offer (compared to the hype) that Schwartz's camp, while not officially, reacted and said something that essentially ended the negotiations, that there was nothing else to talk about. If that was the best the Browns were going to do, and you really, truly believed you could get much more, why wouldn't you tell them you're done here and your taking your business elsewhere?

Good thing we didn't cut Phil Dawson. . .

Not re-signing Phil Dawson was one of the first acts that Jimmy Haslam/Joe Banner carried out as the new owner/CEO of the Browns.

The policy of "no loyalty" to your own was something the Browns fans did not expect from the new owner...but that policy continues today and Banner has been gone for years.

The practice of overpaying someone elses free agent while playing low-ball hardball with your own players facing free agency is another practice Haslam brought to the Browns.

Then people wonder why the Browns have been so bad under Haslam's rule.

prp...sorry, I forgot, you didn't like Phil Dawson.

Nope, you got me mixed up with someone else. I liked Dawson quite well.... I was laughing at everything else you posted.

1957: The Browns select Syracuse Fullback Jim Brown in the first round of the NFL Draft. Brown would go on to capture both the NFL Rookie of the Year, and MVP as the Browns shot back up to the top of the Eastern Conference. After a one-year absence the Browns return to the NFL championship game after completing a 9-2-1 season. However, the Browns would never even be in the Championship game losing 59-14 to the Lions in Detroit.


Then people wonder why the Browns have been so bad under Haslam's rule.

Let me ask you this at what point is it OK to let players go where does the "loyalty" end, at some point you have to use the guys you draft you can't keep them all!

You forgot, he doesn't answer questions.



Oh, Generalissimo Franco is still dead.

Then again, some people aren't looking for answers when they ask questions. They are just looking to belittle those who don't fall in line w/the majority thinking.

LOL. Then again, some people seem to forget that some people don't answwer quesions and repeat themself over and over.


I think by now you should know that I am not about "majority" opinion.
The majority is usually wrong 60% of the time since the majority of people are stupid..

I think that you have fallen in w/the wrong crowd, old friend.

No man, still the same old me.

vamb..."where does loyalty end"?...for this owner, for this front office?...

...when it comes time to negotiate a contract.

If you happen to be a player from another team, NO PROBLEM for the owner and front office to find the necessary money to get a deal done...even if it means overpaying someone else's free agent.

We are not talking about "keeping them all" either...it's about keeping some of your best players when it comes time to negotiate a second contract.

I know that. I'm just adding more sillyness to this thread since it is already full of it.

What's next are you going to tell me the Germans didn't bomb Pearl Harbor?

haha 0.0

It is a common practice among NFL front office personnel, to have a very small window for contract offers. That is why many players are signed after their first visit.

As a new GM, I believed Sashi was making a statement with Swartz that although it is probably expected, The Browns will not pay too much above market value. He continued that stance with Pryor.

An offer was made to both players that was above market value, IMO they were given bad advice from their agents.

I definitely understand why fans are upset that both players, who are needed, left. but being early on in his role, I am glad he stuck to his guns.

I hope either Coleman or Drango develop into solid right tackles. If so, we should be fine moving forward.

It seems quite obvious now, that this FO regime had a plan to trim the fat last year and to start building a solid foundation this year. There is no doubt last season was frustrating, but 90% of the seasons since '99 have been as well. This year we have the pick of the litter due to the fact that we only won one game instead of our average of 4-5 that continued to have us drafting in the 4-8 range.

I can only hope that we don't over think this draft and continue to take the BPA throughout the draft. I hope we don't trade back out of the first pick. If they get a solid offer, I wouldn't be too discouraged of trading back out of 12.

What I would love to see is, us trade up to get either Adams or Hooker.

d4...might be funny to you...not so funny to me..inexperienced front office and cheap owner when it comes to signing those who busted their butt for the Browns, then were kicked to curb like dawg crap.

...real funny..

So you have to let the FO decide who is the BEST player for the direction they are heading. Is there a team in the NFL which hasn't made mistakes it had taken the Steelers over 30 years before they found what worked for them.

mac don't make things up

So being offered an above market value contract is akin to being kicked to the curb like dog crap?

I believe i qualified it with ... I'M NOT SURE CAUSE I DON'T WASTE MY TIME READING HIM like u guys do ... all u guys do is moan and whine about everything he says YET ya'all KEEP FEEDING HIM ....

If i didn't qualify it previously ... consider this my qualification ...

Mac and your boy Vambo are a major waste of time IMO ... USELESS DRIVEL fills almost all there posts ...

03/28/2017 Signed exclusive rights free agent DL Jamie Meder.
03/27/2017 Signed unrestricted free agent OL Matt McCants.
03/21/2017 Signed K Brett Maher.
03/14/2017 Claimed WR James Wright via waivers from Cincinnati.
03/09/2017 Agreed to terms with unrestricted free agent WR Kenny Britt.
03/09/2017 Claimed OL Marcus Martin via waivers from San Francisco.
03/09/2017 Traded 2017 fourth round pick to Houston for 2018 second round pick, 2017 sixth round pick and QB Brock Osweiler.
03/09/2017 Agreed to terms with unrestricted free agent OL J.C. Tretter.
03/09/2017 Agreed to terms with unrestricted free agent OL Kevin Zeitler.
02/16/2017 Re-signed LS Charley Hughlett.
02/10/2017 Re-signed WR Rannell Hall.
02/08/2017 Hired David Lee as quarterbacks coach.
01/23/2017 Signed LB Jamie Collins Sr. to a four-year contract extension.
01/19/2017 Hired Clyde Simmons as defensive line coach.
01/19/2017 Hired DeWayne Walker as defensive backs coach.
01/19/2017 Hired Bob Wylie as offensive line coach.
01/19/2017 Hired Blake Williams as linebackers coach.
01/19/2017 Hired Jerod Kruse as assistant defensive backs coach.
01/08/2017 Hired Gregg Williams as defensive coordinator.
01/03/2017 Signed WR Jordan Leslie to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed DB Darius Hillary to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed TE J.P. Holtz to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed OL Zach Sterup to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed DB Trae Elston to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed DL Trevon Coley to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed DB Justin Currie to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed LB James Burgess to the reserve/futures list.
01/03/2017 Signed WR Josh Boyce to the reserve/futures list.

Not true. One I gladly reply to, the other very seldom as I have learned in my old age what is important and what is not.

I don't know whether or not that is accurate, but their agents badly misread Sashi...

75...the statement Sashi sent in Schwartz's case...the Browns FO likes to play games, like the bait and switch game.

That was/is great PR for the Browns owner and his Harvard Boyz front office...sent a message to the locker room, the Browns are "cheap" when it comes to re-signing their own players.

...btw, Jimmy and his boys also sent a message to the rest of the NFL, thanks to Schwartz's brother, who made sure that everyone knew what the Browns did..that little bait and switch thing on the contract, attempting to punish Schwartz for doing what is perfectly legal and within NFL rules...test the market before free agency begins.

Schwartz even contacted the Browns long before the deadline to notify them he would accept their offer.

SO, DID JIMMY AND SASHI HELP THE BROWNS OR HURT THE BROWNS...by refusing to sign Schwartz?

...after all, what is the goal of these franchise owners, DEE & JIMMY?
They claim in public that they are trying to build the Browns into winners, but the REALITY of their actions, such as the Schwartz fiasco, do nothing to help the franchise as the rest of the NFL looks at our owners and front office and wonders just how low their "football IQ" in Cleveland can go?

I do know this, the KC Chiefs' Andy Reid and Clark Hunt sure appreciate the gift Jimmy and his Harvard boys gave them. For the 5th year in a row, Schwartz started all 16 games at RT, helping his new team to reach the playoffs.

The Browns are heading into year 2, trying to find Schwartz's replacement. Jimmy and his boys signed a free agent OL from Seattle and drafted a RT in the third round, but neither of these potential replacements were able to beat out veteran "jack of all trades", Pazstor at RT.

BTW, the free agent that Jimmy and his boys signed to take Schwartz position at RT, turned out to nothing more than a part time OG for Browns. In late Sept, he did display some of his other talents though , when he was busted for OVI, failure to comply, drug abuse, drug paraphernalia, speed and unsafe vehicle.

SO...from a "realistic" point of view, I'm not so sure the idea of "sending a message" to Schwartz was such a great idea.

Now, if you are into "fantasy and make believe", you might try to make a case that Jimmy and Boys succeeded by playing games with Schwartz.

Most Browns fans I associate with believe the Schwartz fiasco was one of the dumbest moves this Browns management has made...but keep in mind, their point of view is based on "reality".

You all???

I haven't even posted in a while and even longer with Mac...but if I do its 90% probable that he just made something up...lol

Maybe the point was we made you the best offer you would receive as they did Pryor, just as you have the right to shop and see if there are better offers made to you we reserve to right to modify and/or change our offer as options come along /change.

So ..In other words, the Browns should still be starting Kosar, K. Mack, Byner, Warfield, Slaughter, Kelly, Golic, Green, Mathews, Minniefield, Rucker, Morin, Crockroft, Ozzie, Logan, and Jim Brown. After all, if you want to keep everyone who ever played a snap for the Browns.. surely these guys are more worthy than Pryor or Schwartz and did more to demand loyalty. Loyalty means a LIFETIME JOB. If you want to retire or not.

If we are going to beat a dead horse.. let's BEAT A DEAD HORSE.

You just beat him with a silly stick.

You know, I have stated on several posts about MS. Everyone over looks the REASON we did what we did. Nobody even thinks about it, they just holler foul and bad mouth the FO. What did the FO say to MS about the current contract offer? Whats that? You don't know? Well, I will tell you.

Sashi stated to MS's agent, Here's our offer, On The Condition
that MS DOES NOT TEST FA. WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN? They said thanks but no thanks. END OF STORY. FO NOT BAD GUY HERE

U can bury your head in the sand as deep as u like ... it won't change the FACT that the FO screwed the pooch on MS ...

U defending them on that one is JUST AS BAD AS MAC railing on them for all the other crap he's DEAD NUTS WRONG ON ...

U may wanna take your head out of the sand before i buy u that beer ... the sand will kill the taste ...

I don't think mac is a liar. He is hard-headed, stubborn, and has a one-track mind on certain ideas, but he is way above the other poster you mentioned in terms of character.

I think mac's character is beyond reproach.
I respect his opinions, they are very insightful (most of the time) and usually well thought out.

My issue with mac is that when he gets a thought stuck in his head, he proceeds to insert that thought into every thread over and over. And while I admire his conviction, I can't say that I have ever seen him acknowledge that those who disagree with him make some valid points of their own. Even if he still disagrees with the concepts as a whole.

I agree w/you, but how many other posters do the same thing [and do it way more often] while supporting the FO?

Those obnoxious posts get ignored by the majority of you because....let's face it.........you are Brown's fans and it doesn't bother you to hear good things about the Browns, even if it is false and/or biased information.

I think a lack of objectivity is a huge concern on this board.

jc..

ANYONE...who makes a claim or even hints that I'm not telling the truth or that I'm lying about something that I posted..prove it..bring the facts and evidence to back up your claim and prove it.

EO, Diam....

I think it played out as you suggested. I don't think the Browns were in position to make a stand like that, but in the end I think it was the right thing to do for future negotiations. The deal the Browns initially put forth was a better deal than any other team offered - seems to be a pattern now.

MS' agent cost MS a couple million dollars by completely misreading the RT market at that point in time. I'm not interested in placing blame, but I am interested in how the deal went down and how the two sides handled negotiations.

I understand why Sashi did what he did - even if it was to our detriment...I have no idea what MS' agent was thinking when he turned down a deal that ended up being significantly better than any other deal out there. Ultimately, both sides lost out.

That is exactly how I feel.
Sashi was sending a message in a year where winning would be second to developing a culture.

As I mentioned in my post, Many FO leaders give a very small window to accept the offer that has been given.

This is why most FA sign with the first team they visit.

I am new to this forum but it is quite clear who the irrational, never happy fans/ trolls are.

Welcome to the forum

Okay, This is the last time I say anything about it, I'm tired of typing about it

Diam, this has NOTHING to due with who screwed who. This has to do with Sashi Telling MS's agent, that they wanted to keep him off the market, hence the more than fair offer. The agent then declines. What do you think would happen? Offer no longer here. Why? Because they tested FA. End of story. Has nothing to do with anybody being screwed or the bad guy.

vamb...Dee, Jimmy, Sashi or Depodesta...one or more of these individuals is responsible for using contract negotiations "to send a message".

If you take the time to think about it, someone in the group named is more interested in the business side of negotiations than they are of the football side of negotiations. For someone, money has a higher priority than Browns football.

When it comes to the higher profile negotiations, someone from the Browns side seems to have an extreme emotional involvement in the negotiating process. Someone seems to take these contract negotiations in a very "personal" way and their emotional involvement does not help the negotiating process. Those responsible are hurting the team, making the goal of building the Browns into a winner more difficult.

Why intentionally create more holes to fill?

This idea of "sending a message" to the players about contract negotiations...what freaking message is the negotiating team trying to send?...that the Browns are cheap and would rather set the franchise back, creating another hole to fill, than pay a premium to sign their own players?

If the Browns were an ideal location that players wanted to go to, with a winning history, in the playoffs yearly and had a player friendly management...the Browns "someone" might have some leverage at contract time. But, playing hardball in contract negotiations with your own free agents, given the Browns present situation, guys like Mack, Schwartz and Pryor actually ended up in better situations, thanks to that "someone" on the Browns negotiating team believing they are sending a message to our own players, come contract time.

Everyone knows who the "someone" is, who becomes emotionally involved in contract negotiations. Ultimately, there is only one person who is responsible for the condition of the Browns franchise since 2012, Jimmy.

Until Jimmy fixes himself, it's going to make the job of fixing the Browns that much more difficult..trying to fill the holes Jimmy creates on a yearly basis.

JMO

What makes it difficult for anyone to do that is because when you pull a theory out of thin air and then go on to develop a diatribe against it there is no existing counterpoint to it. It's hard to refute, with proof, something that originated by coming out of your ass.

One indicator helpful in discovering that you made something up is that you often follow it by saying, "You can't make this stuff up."

I don't think Mac is a liar...I think he truly BELIEVES the FACTS he presents as facts which way too often simply not a true fact or not a relevant fact that is true but then he will use that fact and glom it as truth for his own rendition of following facts that just are not.

As for the character of others...lets just say you are not top of my list so I'm not going to get into your private beefs with other posters as a criteria that I must agree or classify similar to your beliefs.

I just wish to come here and talk about my Browns nothing more.

Maybe it's, "We just offered you more money than anyone else will, take it or leave it."

EO...here is your first chance...saying something is not true fact is the same as calling me a liar.

Post it...show where I posted something that was not true. You obviously have something your thinking about now...post it...prove it of stop attempting to say that I'm a liar in a different way.

BINGO !!!

We have a winner Ladies and Gentlemen ... Now it is time to buy your cards for the next game..

'

How about when you claimed the Browns were actively trying to trade Joe Thomas to Denver the last two years?.....At least I'm pretty sure that was you.

Mac, I have to say this... I don't think you lie.. Not at all. What I think you do is "Believe" something different then most of us.

You arrive at certain conclusions that few others see. That doesn't make you a liar.

That could come under the old adage that you are a genius and you hit targets that nobody else can see.

Or you are just a conspiracy nut who reads too much into things that aren't even remotely real.

Either way, I don't feel you lie. But I just disagree with lots of things you come up with and how you arrive at those conclusions.

dub...sending that message, does it hurt the team...or help the team?

It's not like the Browns are in cap hell..it's not like we can't afford to pay own players according the pay scale the Browns use for other free agents, from other teams.

The message sent is, the Browns are cheap when it comes to signing their own...the Browns front office (Jimo) actually believes he is punishing guys like Schwartz and Pryor by playing games during negotiations.

Pryor picked a better situation for himself and his career after the Browns thought he would take their offer because he wanted to play in Cleveland.

Same for Schwartz...

Now the Browns are talking about using a first round pick on a 6-4, 225 WR..or a 2nd round pick on someone else...this after drafting 4 wrs and te last year.

Re-signing Pryor..was it worth what the Browns offered plus the cost of spending a 1st or 2nd round pick to replace him?

This is not how to build a winning team...

mo

32...what did the Browns win by losing Pryor and Schwartz for example?

Mac,

I've found some quotes....









There are tons more...

Is it also obvious who the FO ass kissers are? ...

This shocks me from U ... i hardly ever agree with U but u usually don't just blindly stick up for the FO even when they clearly made a mistake ....

I'm glad your going to quit defending the FO and the mistake they made ....

GOOD JOB ....

You are being much less than kind...

But more than honest.

Making offers for more money than any other team is willing to offer is NOT being cheap.

Same with Pryor. The Browns offered him more money than any other team and Pryor picked a better situation for himself and his career... You just admitted it was Pryor's decision based on a better situation rather than the Browns playing cheap on him. Did you just experience sudden and striking realization?!



I'd like to see where the Browns have talked anything of the sort.

We've accorded him anonymity to allow for more bluntness and honesty. He's not cruel or mean (mostly) and doesn't abuse that protection. As always, he's informative.
This year, the scout, who has been in the NFL for decades, believes the draft is among the more top-heavy he's been around. The number of impact players is small, because, in his words, "this is a weak quarterback and skill-position draft."

The scout also feels that there are no true first-round quarterbacks in this draft. But because teams are so desperate they will reach, and that need to grasp at a QB will be the main story emerging from this draft.
It's why this scout, and so many in football that I interview, still believes the Patriots will trade backup quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo despite a report from Ian Rapoport and Mike Garafolo of NFL Network that the Texans and Browns likely won't be able to convince the Pats to part with him. Still, our personnel man is convinced at least one team will get so desperate they'll offer the Patriots a deal they can't refuse.
Everything you're about to read comes directly from our source. (Any pithy insights I have are in parentheses.) I've found him to be reliable, truthful and often highly accurate with his information. Still, his words aren't fact; they are based on what he's hearing.

The scout wasn't asked to predict every pick of every team (in some cases he does). I gave him the team and said talk. He talked…

1. Browns: Myles Garrett (Texas A&M defensive end) is the obvious choice here. But one thing I constantly hear is that the Browns want to trade down and accumulate picks. I also hear that the front office and (coach) Hue Jackson are clashing a bit over the direction they want to go. Hue wants a quarterback from the draft and they don't.

12. Browns: They might trade up with the Bills to get Trubisky. I don't think so, but it's possible. They are unpredictable, at least to me. (Me: The Browns are moving up to take a quarterback? What could possibly go wrong?)

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27027...-nfl-draft-buzz

full article in the above link.

I swear if we take a QB #1 overall, I'll be sick. I find hard to believe Hue wants one from this draft class in the first round...

better be Garrett or another once in a life time player. (I think he is).

anyway came across this and had to share cuz I thought it was interesting that Hue is "clashing slightly" with the FO...If true the FO is right no Qb at #1

Memp...so, you found quotes...

...and that means....WHAT?

"Supporters" would be a more preferable choice of wording...

Posting things that you pass off as facts.....repeatedly, I might add. We have no idea what goes on, for the most past, but because some news outlet writes up a story, you pass it along as gospel and twist it into some situation that may not be there. I think that's what most people are frustrated with when it comes to your posts. You literally said, in a quote I posted of yours, that the Browns didn't want Joe Thomas. You claimed that to be a factual thing the past two years, yet here he remains.

I remember you and I had a brief back-n-forth when it came to all the rumors about Joe Thomas being traded in 2015. You claimed, as fact, that the Browns were shopping him and didn't want him. Then after the trade period ended, and nothing of substance happened, there was some Joe Thomas interview that you posted on a different subject entirely. Inadvertently, you proved your 'facts' as not being true when he was quoted as saying the Broncos called us about the trade and he was told he was going nowhere. (or something to that affect)

So that's where people get frustrated, maybe 'irked' is a better word to use. You read something and manufacture into some dire situation created only by you, and then repeat ad nauseam. This is a message board and do what you please within the rules, but don't be shocked when you get as many negative responses as you do when you post like you do. Most people would call your posts agenda posting....and I would agree. There are some posters that do that, and recently, I've grouped you into that unfortunate brotherhood. Because it is blatantly clear you don't like them....at all. And that's perfectly fine, but I just think many of your posts are unfounded, and quite frankly, ridiculous because they are short of facts and filled with made of controversies that rival soap operas more than anything else. It's what agenda posters do. Hate the current regime all you want, hell, I don't care. Just come out and say it is my recommendation. Admittedly, I lean towards liking what the FO is doing than hating it but nothing has been perfect. Hating the FO/coach doesn't make you an agenda poster, but passing off things like you have as fact (that aren't) just because you hate them fits that agenda mold.

Another example, you are calling the Browns cheap....really? How much money has Haslem spent in this FA period, or offered larger contracts to Pryor and Schwartz before taking smaller deals with other teams...or how about all the contract dollars (horrible or not, but many are horrible) thrown to Kruger, Bryant, Whitner, Bowe, T. Williams, Dansby, the Joe Haden extension, the Jamar Taylor extension, Jamie Collins extension, the Joel Bitonio extension, etc. How about the two facility upgrades the Haslem's have put into Berea in less than five years?

Saying the Browns are cheap is not true. Feel free to say they've made poor decisions drafting or poor decisions in FA (most would agree) or poor decisions hiring/firing three regimes in 4 years or something like that, but to say they're cheap is not factual, and you passing that idea off as fact is just another example.

It means you challenged to find quotes of you passing off things as fact that weren't, and he found quotes of you passing off things as fact that weren't.

It's pretty cut and dry.

HAHA....that was funny. I will say as others have mentioned,there are some folks guilty of this with the opposite viewpoint as well

True, but none of them have the guts mac has to ask for a critique.

Mike Williams was mentioned along with Western Michigan WR Corey Davis

Florida State RB Dalvin Cook, Clemson WR Mike Williams surface on list of Browns' pre-draft visitors - Cleveland Browns - Ohio

link

More pressing needs for the Browns can be found at several positions, including wide receiver. And Clemson receiver Mike Williams will visit the Browns sometime this week, a league source said Monday.

Williams, a projected first-round selection, told NFL Network last week he had pre-draft visits scheduled with the Browns, Baltimore Ravens and Tennessee Titans.


ESPN reported Watson will visit the Browns on Tuesday. NFL Network reported Western Michigan receiver Corey Davis will visit the Browns on Tuesday. (projected to be a 1st or 2nd round pick)

memp...simply posting quotes you claim are mine with any link and absolutely no context to what I might be commenting on...that stuff is worthless and proves absolutely nothing.

But I will do the homework for you...The Browns were discussing trade talk with Joe Thomas going to Denver for draft picks...read

Browns, Broncos discuss Joe Thomas trade but no deal by deadline

Jeff Legwold
ESPN Senior Writer
Nov 3, 2015
link

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- In the end, the Cleveland Browns were not going to part with eight-time Pro Bowl selection Joe Thomas without an offer that made it worthwhile to do so, and the Denver Broncos, Super Bowl aspirations or not, were not going to put themselves in a draft or salary cap bind to make the deal.

The two teams had discussions leading up to, and just before, Tuesday's trade deadline about the Browns left tackle, but neither team felt good enough about the offers on the table to close the deal.

Multiple sources confirmed Tuesday afternoon, just after the deadline had passed without a deal, that the Browns had asked for as much as two first-round picks from the Broncos at one point and that early Tuesday afternoon, Mountain time, the two sides were closing in on a package that included Thomas and a Browns fourth-round pick in exchange for the Broncos' first- and second-round picks in the 2016 draft but that the Browns also wanted to include the Broncos' 2016 third-round pick.

At that point no deal was made, and the 7-0 Broncos will continue to rotate Ryan Harris and Tyler Polumbus at left tackle while Thomas will continue to be one of the Browns' foundation players.

Thomas has never missed a game in his career -- 136 consecutive regular-season starts that span 8,443 consecutive snaps played -- and he has been named to the Pro Bowl in each of his eight previous seasons.

Thomas had also recently said he didn't want to be traded.

"I'm not a quitter,'' Thomas told reporters earlier this week. "I'm not a guy that gives up on my goals, and my goal from day one was to be part of the turnaround here and that hasn't changed.

"The reality of it is we're right now a 2-6 team and the trade deadline is coming up. If you're a team that doesn't have a winning record I imagine it happens all the time where teams will call up your team and find out if you're available for a trade. It's happened in the past with me in my career. But it's out of my control. I want to be here. I want to finish my career here.''

Browns general manager Ray Farmer said Tuesday the Browns had not shopped any player.

"We didn't actively try to go out and move anybody,'' Farmer said. "There's not a single team that I called and said, 'Hey I'm shopping so and so.' There was no shopping from my perspective. But I definitely listened. I think that's part of my job.''

Broncos executive vice president of football operations/general manager John Elway, who made a deal for San Francisco 49ers tight end Vernon Davis on Monday, outlined his willingness to make more deals after that trade as well as outlined his framework for walking away from a potential deal.

"I'm always open,'' Elway said Monday after he announced the trade for Davis. "We're always listening.

Elway also explained his parameters for closing a deal as well.

"I think that we're always trying to get better,'' Elway said. "If we have any opportunities to get better and we think that the compensation is fair, then we're going to do everything that we can to do that. I think that we're not going to mortgage the future to do it, but if we can add to our football team now and feel like it makes us better, we're going to look at all opportunities like that. I know that everyone looks at it as we're trying to win it now and we're all in for now. ... We're trying to win from now on.''

After the deal for Davis, Elway said the Broncos have six picks remaining in the 2016 draft, pending any compensatory picks the team gets for losses in free agency this past offseason (Julius Thomas, Terrance Knighton, Rahim Moore and Orlando Franklin).

So, to deal three more 2016 picks would have left the Broncos with just three picks in the draft, something Elway has previously said he wanted to avoid, saying "you have to keep stacking those draft classes if you're going to remain good in the long haul.''

The Broncos would have had to make some salary cap adjustments to add Thomas and still keep enough cap space for players who will be moved to injured reserve over the remainder of the season as well as replacements they sign. With Ty Sambrailo headed to injured reserve, the Broncos will have $12.1 million worth of salary cap charges from players on injured reserve, including $10.6 million from Ryan Clady.

The Broncos had about $5 million worth of cap space after adding Davis, and the pro-rated cap charge for the rest of 2016 for Thomas would have been more than $5 million. To get Thomas on the roster and still have enough room to make future moves, the Broncos would have had to rework some current contracts or potentially release players.

Thomas also has three more years, beyond this season, remaining on his contract. He has salary cap figures of $9.5 million in 2016, $10 million in 2017 and $10 million in 2018. His acquisition likely would have affected Clady's future as well.

Clady, who has had three major surgeries in recent years, including this year's ACL repair, is scheduled to count $10.1 million against the salary cap in 2016 and $10.6 million in 2017.

But according to those with knowledge of the trade talks, the Broncos were confident they could work out the salary cap issues necessary to make a deal for Thomas if the terms could be worked out.

ESPN's' Pat McManamon, Adam Schefter and Dianna Russini contributed to this report.

Not only were the Browns discussing trading Joe to the Broncos in 2015, but according to this article from Joe Thomas' agent, dated 3/20/2017, trade talks between the Browns and Broncos date back to "2013"...read.

Agent for Joe Thomas discusses possible trade to Broncos

March 20, 2017 6:13 pm
link

Could the Denver Broncos trade for Cleveland Browns All-Pro left tackle Joe Thomas?

Denver shored up their offensive line this offseason by signing guard Ron Leary and right tackle Menelik Watson, but they still need someone to protect their quarterback’s blindside. Donald Stephenson will likely get a chance to compete for the job, but the Broncos would be wise to look for an upgrade.

That’s where Cleveland and Thomas could come into play.

The Browns love trading for draft picks, and Denver owns 10 selections in this year’s NFL draft. Could the two teams work out a deal that would send Thomas to the Broncos?

His agent wouldn’t be opposed to a trade, but Thomas seems to be content in Cleveland.

“Joe’s such a good person that he’s never gonna complain about being on the Browns,” Peter Schaffer, the tackle’s agent, recently said on Mile High Sports Radio (via Mile High Report). “He’s an incredibly optimistic guy. As they rebuild the team, he gets more and more excited about the direction that team’s going.”

But if a trade were to happen, Denver would make sense.

“He did me tell that if there’s any place he’d like to be, he does love the Rocky Mountains,” Schaffer said. “Today I talked with people in just about every city that has an NFL team and nobody’s got the weather that we’ve got out here.”

The Broncos and Browns have had discussions about a potential trade for Thomas dating all the way back to the 2013 season. They’ve never been able to finalize a trade, but the two teams have talked about it.

One week ago, Jeff Risdon of Browns Wire said the possibility of Thomas being traded is “less likely than John Elway playing QB for Denver next year.”

Broncos fans can dream, though. The Rockies are indeed beautiful.

oobs...I suggest you (and memp) take the time to do some reading.

I did the homework for you, finding the articles that put into context the quotes memp came up with.

Literally nothing in that article actually says the two teams talked about trading Joe.

For real? Do you really want to go down the route of questioning whether or not those quotes are yours? It literally took me 3 minutes to find those on the search engine simply putting in "mac" and "Thomas", and if you don't remember, my original post alluded to there being many, many more.

I think the context of those posts was pretty self explanatory.

Not to "ass kissers"!

Mac,

The Browns offered both Schwartz and Pryor more money than anyone in the league. Repeat.. more money than anyone. Both Schwartz and Pryor wanted more. In Schwartz's case, he was offered more money to keep him from going on the open market, but he tested the waters anyway and found the Browns were offering more money than anyone, and came back .. only to find out the offer was made to keep him from doing what he did. Now the Browns knew that no one considered him to be as valuable as the Browns did. OMG .. the Browns were dead on in their valuation. Actually high. So they lowered their offer and Schwartz was insulted. I won't argue that the Browns may have been better with Schwartz, than without him. I say may have been because of all of the OL injuries last year. I am of the opinion that Schwartz would not have made a difference, because the whole line went south last year. Even at that, I feel that both the Browns and Schwartz made mistakes here... Repeat.. Both made mistakes.

In Pryor's case.. I feel the Browns are better off without Pryor. Pryor wanted a multi year contract in the range of one of the top 5 receivers in the league. Pryor is 29 years old, has limited route trees, is still learning the position, and the Browns offered more money than anyone in the league. Once again, Pryor, like Schwartz the year before, wanted more. Pryor had problems, age, inexperience, learning the position, and an overvaluation of his worth. No one would pay him what he wanted. If Pryor were still 26, maybe he would have gotten his money, but no one was going to pay a 29 year, with one full season as a receiver, top 5 money. I feel that even if Pryor has a Pro Bowl year in 2017, he will not get the contract offers he wants. Why? Because he will be another year older.

Where I do think the Browns may not be better without Schwartz and Pryor, I do not think they are worse either.

Just My Honest Opinion...

So here we are bickering over last years news.

That's why I don't like these "catch all threads". After a while too much gets lost in the bickering. Maybe somebody needs to start a "Cleveland Browns" thread and everything can get thrown in to 1 thread?

Or maybe the "2017 season" thread and everything that happens this season concerning the Browns should get put there?


Most of the stuff in here needs to be in the draft forum or the smack shack. It's been that way for a few months now.

I don't agree with everything you said.

But you used the term "route tree" and that's good enough!

#VersWouldBeProud

My ass kissers response was in reply to what was appearantly a complimentary use of adjectives in your opinion ... here's the KIND WORDS i replied to ...



U critiqued my choice of an "adjective" but not to his ... HUH .... so i must ASS-U-me you think being described as IRRATIONAL, NEVER HAPPY TROLLS is a positive thing and being called an ass kisser is much worse ...

I replied IN KIND ... i just followed his lead ...

ALSO there are many other words/phrases i could have used ...

- "mathematically challenged" would be a fine description ....

- "brain dead" could fit well there ... how much different than irrational is that really ... splitting hairs IMO ...

- folks who have there heads so far up the FO's butt they need the FO to unzip so they can breath ....

That ones my personal favorite ... *LOL* ...

I'm guilty of throwing the first stone much of the time ... not in this case ... u want to have a little fun and talk a bit of good natured smack ... i have no problem responding in kind ....

Lighten up dude ... its a football message board ... laugh and enjoy ... its much more fun that way ...

The message sent on this board when your involved is that your 110 percent certifiable. Your nuts, your off the rails,you make no sense, you follow only your own agenda. You march to the beat of a drummer that you and only you can hear. You have lost it bro,and I hate to watch the train wreck.

Sorry mac, the Browns have over 30 players coming in for a visit. Does that mean to you that they're "talking about" drafting all of them? Have you even heard a peep from the team that they'd like to draft any of them?

If all the team has to do is have a player in for a visit to constitute them "talking about" drafting them, then they're "talking about" drafting about 33 guys.

Why the focus on Williams?

Is it because it fits your agenda of making holes and having to fill them and they should have overpaid to keep Pryor and now they're "talking about" drafting Williams to try to fix their mistake?

This is the kind of thing you do. It's not lying. It's making a mountain out of a mole hill and then hate F'ing it like a two-dollar-whore who once stole your wallet until you've spent your fury posting as you fall asleep in your recliner, knocking over your beer. Then you wake up groggy the next morning and post it all again and again and again in every thread, regardless of the subject, because you have an uncontrollable, burning need to have everyone read your opinion as if it had merit. Often it doesn't.

One thing for certain, mac is the only one who has an agenda and all of the guys who defend the FO on every single thread are just objective, logical, rational, fair, and good posters.

lol I love/hate this thread

I think my annoyance with mac is he comes off as if he thinks he is all knowing. Most of the people that support the FO come off as knowing what they don't know, but being willing to give the FO the benefit of the doubt. (That or something is so ridiculous I just skim through it and shake my head without posting) Some of that is no doubt projection on my part. I think some of it is just psychology/societal norms. Showing positive emotion is generally more acceptable than showing negative ones.

That might be the best summary of the issue that I've ever read on this board.

EO...here is your first chance.

That is ok Mac...will choose not to play the game - and believing something is true is what does not make you a "LIAR" big difference. As stated the few times I post against your thoughts there is probably a factual infraction there...no biggy - I make mistakes as well.
Later big guy.

EO..understand this..I'm not in the habit of calling people liars or any other names. For the most part I let the facts, via articles and references, do my talking.

Those who want to resort to name calling, go for it, because IMO, it reflects more on the name caller's character than it does mine.

Have a great day...mac

I actually believe if you're looking for PC you came to the wrong place and are addressing the wrong poster. It's simply not going to happen.

I'd suggest you use the adjectives you feel are proper and come to the realization that others will do the same. lol

I could care less about being politically correct, Pit. I was simply twisting the dog's tail as they say. However, the lack of respect (at times) for other posters is bothersome. Critique the post of course, but keep the personal out of it...

I try to keep my responses of a more civil tone myself. Different posters have differing personalities and to me it just goes with the territory.

It's only personal if you're not friendly. Think Don Rickles (RIP). It's often just some good-natured ribbing.

Quite true Double-D, but while "ribbing" is certainly acceptable, posts of a provocative or in-your-face nature serve only to invite a response of a similar tone...

And 'round and 'round it goes.

Bottom line.
I understand why people feel the way they do.
Watching this debacle of a franchise since the return has been very difficult. but we are around one calendar year of this regime. I know it is hard to separate their mistakes from previous regimes but nobody or regime is perfect.
NE is close, but they too have had their share of mistakes. They are able to overcome them die to the fact that they have BB & TB.

I just choose to give the FO a chance before they are run out of town. Maybe that makes me an ass kisser, I don't think so but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Fear not my friends 2017 will bring us another year of frustration and 2 brand new ways never seen of how games are lost.

Peace.

I believe there are actually three camps currently posting in regards to our FO.

Really only one, mac, who I believe is firmly against the FO.

The second one is those who will excuse the FO for anything and everything.

And the third are those who evaluate each move the FO makes and evaluates those moves on an independent basis.

I'm in the third category which I believe many are.

You see, last year was the first season that most of these FO guys ever held their respective positions. As such, mistakes were to be expected IMO. But as experience is gained, I expected to see improvements.

I believe that is exactly what I'm seeing at this point. They signed Jamie Collins to a four year deal. They saw the poor draft at the OL positions and as such, looked to the FA market to bolster the OL.

Logical moves IMO. I believe there's reasons to give this regime more time. Where I draw the line seems to be where you are. I don't have faith in this FO because not enough time has passed to build that. However, I do believe they need to be given a chance.

Without some continuity you'll never have the chance to stop the constant roster turnover to build a system. Yet in the same breath, you don't simply cling to something that obviously isn't working simply for the sake of continuity. So it is a balancing act.

But so far, I see reasons to stick with this regime in order to get to a point where we know the difference. I'm far more encouraged going into this season than last. If that trend continues, we may have just what we need to build our Browns.

This draft will be a huge factor in their "grade" over their first two years. I still get a little queasy when I think about their (FO & Coach) ability to evaluate QBs. I mean passing on Wentz for RG3 & Kessler? Really? Feels like I just ate a greasy cat burger. Now we're hanging our hats on them to get it right in one of the weakest QB classes in while. Lord help us all.

While I didn't spell it out directly as you have, that's one of the big reasons that I distinguished the difference in "giving them a chance" and "having faith in them". I'm not sure of your thought process on this, but my fear is they will reach in a poor QB draft class.

I also believe the jury is still far from being in on last years draft class. Players grow and mature so I believe we'll have a much better feel for last years draft this season.

But if they reach and draft a QB early, their future with the Browns will surely rest with that selection.

My thought process goes something like this: I like Trubisky as the top QB, but I want Garrett at #1. If they take Trubisky at #1, I'll consider it a big reach, but I'll understand why they did it because I'll be assuming they consider him the best overall, and can't take the chance that he'll be there at #12, or even #5.

If they take any other QB in the first, I will absolutely hate it, and think they've blown the pick altogether. In other words, no way in hell would I support taking Watson, Kizer or Mahomes higher than the second round. If for some reason they can't get Trubisky, I'd be okay with either Watson or Mahomes in the second, but of the two, I'd rather have Mahomes. Granted, that's just my thinking, and I have no idea what they're thinking, I just know that I wouldn't take Watson or Mahomes in the first, or Kizer in the first two.

I have a feeling they will take one of the four in the first two rounds, so that may take Webb, Peterman and Kaaya out of play, unless there's some sort of crazy run where a bunch of teams reach ridiculously. I don't think that will happen, but you never know.

mac,

The statement we are calling you on is where you said the Browns were trying to trade Joe Thomas. The article(s) that you posted actually say the opposite, that it was the Broncos that came to the Browns. The Browns did not actively try to move any players (paraphrasing from Farmer).

You posting those articles only proves the point against you.

oobs..come on, man...

The fact that the Browns and Broncos were not able to complete the deal does not mean they didn't try.

As was pointed out by Joe's agent, the Browns and Broncos had been talking about a possible trade deal for JT since 2013...the year Sashi Brown was hired by Haslam.

How can you possibly say the Browns did not try to trade JT? Elway was not willing to give up 2 first round draft picks, thank goodness.

The Browns did not try to trade away Joe Thomas, the Broncos tried to trade for Joe Thomas.

Normally, nobody would care about this; but the distinction is important for this "discussion" you insist on having where you say that the FO does not care about retaining it's own talent (and also for the discussion that you present your opinions as fact).

If you call me up and say you want to buy my car and I say, Fine, I'll take $100K for it.. and you say that's way too much... and I say OK, well that's the deal... and you say no thanks, I didn't try to sell my car.. but everything is for sale/trade if somebody is willing to significantly overpay.

Oobs...if the follow phone conversation took place, would you say the Browns tried to trade JT?

John Elway, the Broncos GM calls the Ray Farmer, Browns GM and says...hey Ray, the Broncos are interested in LT Joe Thomas..what would it take to make that happen?

Ray tells John, it would take at least two 1st round picks (2016, 2017) in exchange for JT.

John says... Ray, the Broncos can't do that!...how about our 2016 1st round pick?

Ray tells John...that is not enough!..how about the Broncos 2016 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks?

John says...Ray, we can't do that either!

Ray says...John, how about your 2016 1st round pick and that LBer Shaq Barrett?

John tells Ray...I'll think about it but if you don't hear back from me before the trade dead line, you'll know we couldn't do that either.


QUESTION: would you say the Browns tried to trade Joe Thomas if such a conversation took place?

ALSO: I present my opinion..and you take them as fact. Many times I back my opinion up with an article or reference to help make my point.

...and Ray says: "I'd better clear this with Mac first"...

Don't take my post above as criticism, mac, for it is not. Simply trying inject a bit of humor...

I won't write what I feel like stating about this thread. Instead I'll say this.

Mac, you've been put in place as the GM of the Browns. You've publicly stated the highest priority you have as GM is the retention of your best players. First call you get is from the 49ers. They are desperate for a LT and offer every pick in this year's draft. THAT'S 4 Picks in the top 109. Plus a bunch more. 6 picks in the top 149.. plus some.

Let's assume you either stick to your guns or play hard ball and they offer you their top 6 picks this year and a 2nd and a 3rd rounder from next year.

What do you do?

If you don't trade Joe Thomas your an idiot.
If you trade him your a hypocrite.

Not only are you talking about FARMER for chrissakes. You're trying to say that talking to other teams when they inquire about a trade is bad. I think the idea that you don't pick up the phone - or simply so "No" when asked about what it would take to trade a player ... is one of the most bizarre opinions I have ever heard. It's a business. Every player is for sale. Even Brady would be traded in his prime if a team offered enough.... it might be every pick for multiple years, but there is a price.

32...it did put a smile on face..I got it.

While I tried to base the make believe phone conversation close to the facts as reported by the media...I have to smile at the thought of some saying the Browns did not try to trade JT.

Sifting through the Browns headlines this morning, one asks the question: Should Joe Thomas Be Used To Trade for Jimmy Garoppolo?

My first thought, the Browns front office is still trying to trade Joe Thomas. I took the question seriously and started thinking about it from a football point of view, convincing myself that it would not make any sense to trade JT for JG, then use Cam Erving or some rookie to protect JG's blind side.

Reality is, JT is likely on the trading block, once again.

lol you are funny take care and Happy Easter mac!

The phone conversation you set up above (as I also remember it from those same articles) tells me that the Browns did NOT try to trade away Joe Thomas.

If they had been trying to trade JT, they would've been the ones calling the Broncos. Maybe it's splitting hairs, but you asked and I answered.

Are you saying that, because the Browns didn't immediately hang up the phone when the Broncos said 'Joe' and 'Thomas' after each other, that they were actively trying to trade him? That makes no sense.

Further (if previously mentioned articles are to be believed), the price that the Browns were asking for was astronomical. A #1, additional high pick(s), and a very good LB'er is more than many are willing to pay for Garrapolo, who (if available), would be our best bet at getting a franchise QB this offseason.

"Hi, Sashi? Am I pronouncing it right? It's John Elway, two time Super Bowl winner and Browns killer with the Denver Broncos. I'm wondering if you'd be willing to talk trade for Joe Thom--"

Click.

"Hello? Hello? I think the somnabitch hung up."

Made me laugh.

I'll admit that that conversation would be gratifying (for reasons that you alluded to in your post), I would be VERY worried if our main FO guy was taking that type of approach.

I know, but cartoonishly funny.

90% of what you read in the media is either factually wrong, incomplete, or only presents one side of the story. The reader doesn't always know that and it's human nature to immediately believe what you read. You have to be intelligent enough to realize this. Not to mention just about anyone off the street can create an article these days.

Close to the facts? What facts where those? Your make believe phone conversation is a prime example of what you do....try and pass off your opinion as fact.

I'm sure (insert organization) has called the Browns about the #1 pick. Can I make up a phone conversation too to illustrate the Browns hate Myles Garrett?

memp...can't admit it?...

...the Browns have had trade talks with the Broncos concerning JT?...

...dating all the way back to 2013, and I posted a source... link

...and you still want to argue.

In your article there isn't even a quote from the agent say inghe had significant trade talks with Denver? I read a bunch of "colds"


Here is one from the writer...."His agent wouldn’t be opposed to a trade, but Thomas seems to be content in Cleveland."



This quote is not from the agent, but the writer. I don't doubt the Broncos contacted the Browns.....that doesn't mean the Browns want to trade him. You pass that off as fact....remember the Hue Jackson quote about the Joe Thomas rumors?? Shall I post that?

Shame on you for posting that article insinuating the Browns want to trade Thomas.

WOW, that didn't confirm anything other than his agent woudln't be opposed.... Geez

True. It was not a quote from the agent...

Would u feel better if I welcomed him to the board first ... *L* ...

He took some shots ... hes a big boy ... he knew what he was potentially opening himself up for .... with his choice of adjectives one could almost say he was asking for it ... i did the nice thing and obliged him ...



If u figure it out my ma's gonna wanna have a chat with u ....



I'll admit I'm laughing and a lot more jovial than I was when the game day forums were up .... *LOL* ... although our play did give me plenty of laughs this year ...

With a week and half remaining until draft day, 2017, the pressure is building on the Browns front office/draft team...to get it right!

Below is an interesting article


AS RUMORS SWIRL, THE BROWNS' PICK AT NO. 1 HAS NFL AND OTHER TEAMS CONCERNED

Mike FreemanNFL National Lead Writer
April 14, 2017
link

"I feel sorry for them."

That's how the conversation started with a longtime NFL team executive this week. Sympathy in the NFL is not a common currency. Sympathy is seen as a weakness. Sympathy is for suckers. Sympathy is a currency for losers.

He was talking about the Cleveland Browns.

They have been so awful, so frustratingly putrid, that we have reached a point where this No. 1 pick for the Browns isn't just one of the most important in franchise history. It's one of the most important in the history of the NFL.

There's a feeling among owners and league office personnel that they can't have a team stink so badly and be the butt of so many jokes, and not have an effect on the entire NFL.

I've heard half-joking references from front office executives that the league should take over the Browns temporarily and have the team run by a committee of Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft and union head DeMaurice Smith. Though it was said mostly in jest, I think some of these execs are serious.

The No. 1 pick is always important, no matter which team owns it. It can spark a turnaround or leave a team stuck in the mud.

But when it comes to the Browns, there are some in the league who feel Cleveland has to get this right; the NFL can't have one of its teams be a decadeslong laughingstock.

An NFL official posed this question to me: Can a league be truly the gold standard, as the NFL thinks of itself, when one of its teams is a dead, diseased appendage? Read that last part again—a dead, diseased appendage.

The historical importance of this draft is not lost on the Browns. That may be why, according to various team sources, the divide between the coaches and front office is fairly extensive. It's not unusual for coaches and front offices to disagree, but the gap in Cleveland this year is fairly significant.

One scout told me that coach Hue Jackson wants a quarterback at No. 1 and the front office wants Texas A&M defensive end Myles Garrett. But ESPN's Adam Schefter has tweeted that it appears Jackson is leaning toward Garrett. He also reported that the team hasn't made up its mind on whom to pick.

On Wednesday night, I was told the Browns are strongly considering trading out of the first spot and taking quarterback Mitchell Trubisky later in the round.

Smoke screens abound, sure, and what's happening depends on the day and to whom you speak. But there is more smoke than a forest fire when it comes to the Browns.

The Cleveland front office, I can say with certainty, feels a great deal of pressure to get this one right. And not just the normal amount of pressure a team feels with having the top pick, either. The weight of Browns flubbed drafts in the past weigh on this regime. Consider the last two times Cleveland had the No. 1 pick: It selected quarterback Tim Couch in 1999 and defensive end Courtney Brown in 2000. Neither had sustained success in Cleveland.

Many franchises, across the NFL, and all of sports, have had stretches of horrid play and drafts. The Raiders went through horrible stretches. The Buccaneerswere once so awful they were called the Yuccaneers. The Bears haven't been great. Neither have the Jets.

But the Browns enjoy a special place in the chronicles of football ineptitude. The Jets won a Super Bowl, even if it was in 1969. The Buccaneers also have a Lombardi Trophy. The Raiders have a history matched by few and recently have transformed their franchise. The Bears have a Super Bowl and had arguably the best defense of all time in 1985.

The Browns have...they have...hold on a minute...thinking...something will come to me.

The Browns have history—pre-Super Bowl history. They had the greatest player of all time in Jim Brown, but no team, maybe in all of sports, has had their kind of bad luck, particularly in the draft. This is a team that selected Johnny Manziel, one of the great draft busts ever.

The year before the Manziel selection may have been worse. ESPN ranked the team's 2013 draft—led by LSU defensive end Barkevious Mingo at No. 6—as the 19th-worst of all time. I'd rank it higher.

One of the most stunning draft statistics comes via ProFootballTalk.com, which tracks players and the teams offering fifth-year options (meant to keep valued rookies). Of all the first round selections from the 2014 draft, only two are no longer in football: Browns picks Manziel and Justin Gilbert.

The point is clear: There are plenty of ways to illustrate the Browns' ineptitude in the draft. But this year, their sorry history in April has drawn the attention of other teams and the league office.

There's a sense throughout the league that this is a turning point in the franchise's history.

This draft goes well, the thinking goes, and it can all turn around quickly. If it goes poorly, the Browns will continue to be an anchor on the league.

"I feel sorry for them."

If they blow this, we all will.



Mike Freeman covers the NFL for Bleacher Report. Follow him on Twitter: @mikefreemanNFL.

Taylor Gabriel was clearly a guy that could have been kept. No question. Same with Schwartz.

Gabriel wasn't offered anything (at least I don't think so) so in hindsight, that was a mistake.

Schwartz was offered a contract and he chose to look elsewhere. Sounds to me like the Browns didn't want him to do that. They pulled the offer, so they had control over that.

With Mack, we offered a very lucrative contract, but anyone with a brain knew that Mack wanted out. I'm not sure what we could have offered him to make him stay. Not something this regime could control.. That was set up by Farmer.

Pryor took a one year show me deal after turning down a lucrative offer from the Browns. Not something I think the Browns should be ashamed of at all.

So when you really break it down, the only one that the Browns didn't attempt to keep was Gabriel.

That's it.

I really wish you'd recognize that. Picking on the current FO is perfectly fine with me. But at least pick on them for something real.. Not these half baked stories.

BB - watch and learn ... I'll explain ... last post was step 1 .. he set the direction with insults ... I responded in kind ...

Now he's set a new course ... watch me respond in kind ....



Agree 100% ... last year was BEYOND BRUTAL ... even if we win our first game earlier in the season ... for me at least it would have made the season a lot less stressful .... i really wanted 1 win ... i knew we were going to stink ... my prediction was 2 maybe 3 wins with 4 as our cieling ..

I also agree about no FO or regime being perfect ... witch makes it harder for me to understand why some just can't admit the FO made a mistake on MS .... its really really simple ...

- we made MS an INITIAL offer and it ended up being the best one he got from anyone ..
- MS goes and test the market ... we told him offer would be pulled if he did ...
NO MISTAKES YET ...
- he finds out the market he wanted isn't there ...
- he comes back to find the offer had been pulled ...
NO MISTAKES YET ... we have to pull the INITIAL OFFER like we said we would ...

We tell him the doors closed ... u don't even have a serious discussion with the guy ...

BIG MISTAKE .... the only way this isn't a HUGE MISTAKE is IF u have another RT on the ROSTER ready to step in ..... oooops ....

How was our RT play last year .... u feeling good about RT this year or are u holding your breath .... i know witch camp I'm in ... *L* ... and this isn't hindsight being 20/20 ... a bunch of us KNEW NOT EVEN TRYING WAS STUPID THEN .... and our worst fear were founded and may carry over into this year ... we still don't know if we filled the hole ...

I've said it before in this thread ... its OK ... as u said .. EVERYONE makes mistakes ..

I don't blame these guys for Mack, Gipson or Benji .... IMO those guys are on the old regime ... these guys had a slim to none shot at signing any of them ... and slim maybe exxagerating those odds .... MS on the other hand .. he's at least worth a DISCUSSION after he tested the market ...



No ... it don't make u an ass kisser anymore than me saying that this FO made a HUGE MISTAKE on MS makes me irrational or a troll .....

I do not like this FO ... i think they will FAIL .. i am also fair .. they deserve time to make there own bed .. three years from now ... we'll know a lot more ... I HOPE I'M WRONG ... so far my INITIAL thoughts ...

- LOVE THE PLAN ... said it during the year ... love how they approached it ... and the negativity we saw during the year has been replaced with UNBRIDLED OPTIMISM the likes of this board has never seen .... u being new here,you'll just have to trust me ... *LOL* ...

The execution of the plan will be the key .... its all about TALENT EVALUATION/AQUISITION .... if they do a good job with all the picks and cash we have ... that optimism will stay and good times are ahead ... if not it's the same ole same ole ...

- two major mistakes so far ...

MS and I don't want to mention the other one right now cause it will change the direction of the discussion ... again, you'll just need to trust me on that one ... *L* ...

STAY TUNED ....

BB was that better .... ... *L* ...

I liked Gabriel, and I would have liked to have retained him, but when your new HC who it is said prefers his WR's to be over the 6'00" mark inherits a roster who's first 4 (maybe even 5?) WR's are all 5'09" and below... the writing has to be on the wall for them. If you're a player hoping to be the exception to the "rule", then you have to show the ability to justify being the exception. I just don't think he had shown at that point in his career enough to be that exception for Hue, especially when he's trying to build a team from the ground up in a specific image.

Shocker .... incorrect info given out by DaMan ... glad i was sitting down ...

Gabriel was CUT ...

Cue the sarcastic apology ... *LOL* ...

So our image doesn't include young lighting quick, fast WR's that can score from any where on the field ... GOOD TO KNOW we don't want that ....

He certainly showed the ability last year ...

We had him for all of OTA's i believe but definetly all of TC ... the fact that HUE AND CO COULDN'T SEE HIS TALENT scares the ever living crap out of me cause his QUICKS/SPEED jump off the screen at u .... when he gets the ball in his hands ... u go to the edge of your seat ...

75 did this let the cat out of the bag on the other mistake I think the FO made ... *L* ...

jc...

JMO, but I believe this is a rather easy draft for the Browns.

#1. Draft the best available...unless someone is willing to offer the Mother of All Draft Trades.

2. Don't draft a QB at #12 if it is not the QB you wanted. There is going to be outstanding talent setting at #12 and the Browns have many needs. Draft the best talent...

3. The #33 pick is another opportunity to draft another potential starter.

4. The #52 and #65 picks should provide a shot at two more highly rated players...2 more potential starters.

It does get more difficult the deeper you get into the draft, but the Browns first 5 picks could yield 5 new starters, potentially.

Hopefully, the front office will be prepared for most of the potential situations so they are not caught off guard. This front office has been together for a full year now and if they have done their homework, this draft should a fun event for Browns front office as well as for the Browns fans.

Treat every pick as if it was a 1st round pick..you never know what round the next Hall of Fame player might be drafted in.

Dang...I thought we were going to win 16 games!

Well ... you've always been a WEE BIT more optomistic than me ....

I'm using my iPad so quoted no text is a pain, but pertaining to Gabriel, we drafted four receivers and had Pryor. It was clear that Hawkins vs Gabriel was the question. Hue went Hawkins, a player he knew from Cincy.

From what I remember, Gabriel didn't have a great camp. He was dropping the ball. In this case, I don't really blame the team, other than maybe we should have just cut Jordan Payton. But Payton missed OTAs for school & you can't blame him for that (and being behind).

Plus Gabriel used to just fall down when the ball got in his hands (from what I remember). Nothing electrifying about it (IMHO)

The Boys drafted 5 WRs, moved one to TE leaving 4 WRs that the Browns had to find room for on the roster. There was no competition between those drafted by Sashi and Depo..all 4 drafted WRs were locks to make the roster.

I believe the choice came down between keeping Hawkins or Gabriel..Gabriel was entering the last year of his contract, he was cut.

Well, Hue's preference for taller WR's was mentioned a few times last off season... Glad i was the one to get you up to speed on current events lol I promise I won't let it go to my head

As to MS, the reason you guys don't get more agreement that not re-signing him was this massive, Trump sized, bigly, 'UGE, mistake

is because there have been way too many unsubstantiated claims )about how that went down that have been used as fact to smear the FO as inept as a whole.

If the FO says "Here's our offer, it's very good... but it's also intended to keep you from exploring FA. if you do, we'll pull the offer". Well, how does MS become a victim when he explores FA and the offer is no longer there... like they said?

OR

If the FO says "Here's our offer, it's very good" and MS and his agent have bought in to the hype and are so sure that he can get north of $10mil/year... what if their reply was "That offer is an insult, we're not wasting our time, we're outta here"?

See, the problem I have with the MS mistake crowd is that everyone of you guys is presuming the FO acted in bad faith because they didn't re-extend the offer. There's any number of reasons why it wasn't extended with fault going to either party.

Personally, I think the FO possibly could have been a little more patient with that deal. I don't blame MS for looking around, but I also don't blame the FO for having the attitude of having crap to do. They extend a generous and fair offer. If you take it, we're glad to have you, you belonged here all along. If you don't take it, good luck to you. We've now got to work on the next problem.

I will agree with the assertion if anyone wants to make it that there was some degree of player mismanagement year. I think it has less to do with Sashi being a cry baby, and more to do with a new FO on a condensed timeline trying to evaluate who they have, who they need, who's coming up in the Draft...
IIRC Whitner and Dansby had felt a certain way about not being told sooner their services were no longer needed.

That's just my take though.

I think what some people forget with him (Gabriel) is he had a so-so year last year. Then after the draft, with all these new WR's, what happened? He got hurt couldn't stay on the field and who's supposed to be cut and make room for him? I can see why we let him go. He was hurt and he's short and we just drafted all these other WR's. So yeah hind sight is 20-20 but I can't blame them. Even if they saw the flashes, what good is it if he can't stay on the field. Besides we just drafted these other WR's, so who you gonna keep?

I think your observation over a lack of insight into what happened is spot on. I think we all agree the team was better off with MS staying.

And while I also agree with the idea of the FO being more patient ... we also have to realize this was a new FO and structure. Anytime you get a new regime in any company - president, board members etc - they start off by setting a tone. I would imagine that the FO may have felt the need to be seen to fair but tough. Fair because they put the best offer to our own player - just like they did with Pryor - but firm by not then getting sucked into a Dutch auction or sucker punched and used to drive up a contract with another team.

personally if that's the worst mistake they make in the first 3 years of their running of the team - I'd say it was a very forgivable offense.

My own opinion is that the decision had more to do with Hue's loyalty toward Hawk. With all the drafted WRs, the writing was on the wall for one of them. I believe he should've kept Gabriel and cut Hawkins, but... well, you know. Gabriel did nothing but show ability from the moment he stepped on to the field as an UDFA in 2014. Cutting him was a mistake, IMHO. Hue's decisions like this one, bringing in RGIII, and drafting Kessler in the 3rd round really make me wonder about the dude. I want him to be a great coach for us, I pray he's not FOS.

People also forget that Hawk and Gabriel have two different skill sets. They don't really play the same position.

Not to mention anyone was going to succeed on that Atlanta offense.

This falls under the category of piling on for piling on's sake. The FO has done plenty wrong. I don't think this is one of them.

Not sure I get where they have different skill sets, or play different positions. In a traditional system where there are two clear #1 & #2 WRs, they would be slots. And I don't blame the FO, I don't "blame" Hue, I just don't happen to agree with the decision to keep Hawk over Gabriel, and think it was a favoritism move. And while certainly not a critical mistake ala Schwartz, I do believe it was a mistake. But again, JMHO. Obviously Hue didn't see it that way, but Hawk is 31 and Gabriel is 26. Hawk had something like 600 yards production the past two years with us, Gabriel had closer to 850 his last two years with us. All with crappy QBs. The decision doesn't even seem close to me. But we'll see how much production Hawk has for this team moving forward, or if he's even here in September. To be clear though, I'm not piling on. It is what it is.

You know I agree. Depends on which side you look on.
I know Diam is disappointed that I tend to hold the FO blameless but the way I see it, with MS or Gab, the way it came down there's really no blame on the FO. Could they have tried harder with MS or could they have said Gab is really a speed demon? Sure, anything is possible, but it didn't happen that way. They kept Hawk IMO because he's a VET and they have all these young Wr's now. Up to that point you can't blame them. MS was a please don't leave to test FA and his agent didn't listen so you can't blame them on that one there also. I'm sure they make mistakes, we all do. I just don't see any right now and thats ok.

*LOL* ... I'll make sure it don't go to your head .... *L*

As for the rest ... not sure we disagree on much ... EXCEPT u ENDED the story to soon ... did u notice how i crafted my response with the NOT A MISTAKE parts right up until they SHUT THE DOOR ON HIM w/o so much as a discussion when he came back .... there's NO JUSTIFICATION for that UNLESS U HAVE THE SOLUTION ....

And again ... we may or may not have a decent RT on our team ... will this be two years of HORRIBLE RT play cause our FO didn't want to have a discussion after they pulled the initial offer and he came back ....

It was a mistake ... not the end of the world ... I'm not asking for anyone to be fired over it .. like i said ... it happens to even the very best ... but it was a MISTAKE ... not sure why anyone can't see that ...

So now its time for me to help u .... next time ... please finish the story .... *LOL* ..

I'm done with this and Gabriel .... your opinions and my opinion have been discussed, dissected and analyzed beyond recognition ... nothing new will be said or learned ... and as usual ... As this plays out i will be PROVEN RIGHT ....

OH .... one last point before i go ...

President ... u said Gabriel fell a lot .... well ... ironically enough he "fell" so little he earned a second round tender from his current team .... same tender the guy on our team that "falls" on his own got .... *LOL* ...

Not sure why I thought that was interesting .... but i did ... *L* ..

Now THIS is a statement on the subject that is quite rational... much more rational than a lot of others that have been made. While everyone will have their own opinions on the impact of that decision, stating it like this makes it much easier to agree on the premise and maybe, just maybe concede a point.(the DT equivalent of seeing a unicorn lol)

A mistake Hue probably had a big hand in. He had Hawk in Cincy. I think he wanted someone in the room who knew his route trees and terminology.

Everyone seems to forget that Gabriel looked like crap in preseason. Yes, Payton did nothing but they expected that when they drafted someone from UCLA. The issue is probably more with drafting Payton than keeping him, if there is one.

What did Greenbay win letting center JC Tretter walk?

What did Cincinnati Bengals win letting guard Kevin Zeitle walk?

Wouldn't those two teams be better by re-signing their own?

Maybe they need a more experienced GM?

Back to talking about old news.



In breaking news, Generalaissimo Franco is still dead.

peen/others...how about we talk about the task facing the front office in 10 days a bit more. I started the subject toward the end of the last page and some may have missed it.

Let's hear some more opinions and thoughts concerning the job facing our front office in 10 days.



JMO, but I believe this is a rather easy draft for the Browns.

#1. Draft the best available...unless someone is willing to offer the Mother of All Draft Trades.

2. Don't draft a QB at #12 if it is not the QB you wanted. There is going to be outstanding talent setting at #12 and the Browns have many needs. Draft the best talent...

3. The #33 pick is another opportunity to draft another potential starter.

4. The #52 and #65 picks should provide a shot at two more highly rated players...2 more potential starters.

It does get more difficult the deeper you get into the draft, but the Browns first 5 picks could yield 5 new starters, potentially.

Hopefully, the front office will be prepared for most of the potential situations so they are not caught off guard. This front office has been together for a full year now and if they have done their homework, this draft should a fun event for Browns front office as well as for the Browns fans.

Treat every pick as if it was a 1st round pick..you never know what round the next Hall of Fame player might be drafted in.

Still?

MY WORDS EXACTLY WERE:

"Taylor Gabriel was clearly a guy that could have been kept. No question."

I never once said how he was gone... you just assumed I meant he left on his own. I know he was cut... You can find your head where the sun don't shine.

You won't see me apologize for your inability to read

Well, I think it's pretty clear in hindsight, Gabriel wasn't really given much of an opportunity to show his abilities here.

Hey, he got into a great situation and I'm happy for him..

Plenty of draft talk going on in the draft forum.

That's why the "The Front Office Thread" is BS intended for one reason alone - to bash the FO whenever you want to.

Everything about this team - from players, to coaching, performance on the field, in the draft, contract negotiations, scouting .... it is ALL falls under the umbrella of "The Front Office"..... literally 90% of all the different threads on DawgTalkers 'could' be put in this one.

But that would make no sense - if we are talking about Pryor... then the #1 overall pick .... and then Garoppolo ... then Cousins .... then last years draft .... then - whatever - .... it is not convenient to have them all mashed together in one thread. The purpose of individual threads is to stay on point and talk about one subject.

But Mac, your intention appears to be to group everything together.... so that anytime you want it seems appropriate to bring up unrelated items where you bash the FO. Whether it's imaginary phone calls with Elway or rehashing Schwartz for the 50th+ time.

There have been some great posts on this thread but they get lost and drowned out by the bickering. jmo.

He showed off a lot of abilities while he was here.

His ability to drop the ball.

His ability to get hurt constantly.

Yeah,, Too bad he didn't show up here the way he showed up down there. Either way, things happen like this.. Can't worry about it.

j/c...
Sorry all I know is football..and like no other sport it is so so much about the TEAM not individuals. There is no greater Left Tackle than Joe Thomas over the last 10 years and yet we have done diddly as a team.

I thought it was a mistake not keeping our original offer to Schwartz open but we probably made that very clear when we made that offer. We don't know exactly what transpired and how but I blame neither. He's gone...we will survive. RT is not a position that takes forever to get manned.

Gabriel...I laugh at the discussion here. The kid was said to be fantastic every preseason and then when games started he was rather disappointing. So we kept Hawkins instead of him.
Anyone who actually is SURPRISED that we kept drafted rookie WRs is just posing some agenda...of course we are going to keep them their first year.

Pryor...is not as similar as the Schwartz situation. Pryor established himself as a Potential playmaker WR. We made a very solid offer. He tested the Market and when he found our offer to be the best...demanded that we UP THE ANTE...pfft.

See ya, Frankly my position with football is NO TEAM EVER WON A CHAMPIONSHIP Built around a WR.

Anyways over all I like what these guys are doing! We are on our way to being a playoff team!
jmho

Goodness knows the Lions and Millen sure tried...

Browns sign RB George Atkinson III and DB Marcus Burley

Posted 1 hour ago

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/arti...83-4b1e3459b04f

Atkinson and Burley both spent 2016 in Cleveland

The Cleveland Browns signed exclusive rights free agent RB George Atkinson III and restricted free agent DB Marcus Burley.

Atkinson appeared in all 16 games with the Browns last season after joining the team via waivers from the Raiders during final roster cuts. He registered his first career rushing attempts during the 2016 season finale and finished with seven carries for 34 yards with one touchdown. For the season, he added six special-teams tackles and eight kickoff returns for 137 yards. Atkinson was originally signed by the Raiders as an undrafted free agent in 2014 and has appeared in 21 career games.

Burley appeared in 12 games with the Browns last season after joining the team via waivers from the Seahawks during final roster cuts. He totaled five tackles, one pass defensed and two special-teams tackles. Burley was originally signed by Seattle as an undrafted free agent in 2013. He has appeared in 38 career games and totaled 43 tackles, two interceptions, two sacks and eight passes defensed.

888...let me get this straight...I attempt to change the direction of the thread away from the bickering and repetition and YOUR UPSET !!!

The front office is responsible for obtaining the talent/players that the coaching staff needs in an effort to build the Browns into a winning team. There are two basic ways that all 32 teams use...free agency and the draft.

...there is no way to avoid those subjects and the fact that they are discussed in this front office thread.



So, let me attempt focus on the 2017 draft once again...this should be an easy draft for the front office if they focus on the most talented available..what say you 888?

jc...

JMO, but I believe this is a rather easy draft for the Browns.

#1. Draft the best available...unless someone is willing to offer the Mother of All Draft Trades.

2. Don't draft a QB at #12 if it is not the QB you wanted. There is going to be outstanding talent setting at #12 and the Browns have many needs. Draft the best talent...

3. The #33 pick is another opportunity to draft another potential starter.

4. The #52 and #65 picks should provide a shot at two more highly rated players...2 more potential starters.

It does get more difficult the deeper you get into the draft, but the Browns first 5 picks could yield 5 new starters, potentially.

Hopefully, the front office will be prepared for most of the potential situations so they are not caught off guard. This front office has been together for a full year now and if they have done their homework, this draft should a fun event for Browns front office as well as for the Browns fans.

Treat every pick as if it was a 1st round pick..you never know what round the next Hall of Fame player might be drafted in.

If you want to talk draft stuff under the guise of "FO" then I think it's bogus. If you want to discuss Schwartz (again) under the guise of "FO" then I think it's bogus. If you want to talk about Pryor under the "FO" umbrella I think it's bogus.

If you want to talk about those things - have a thread about each topic. Don't blend them all together. That way when we are talking about one issue we don't have to get regurgitate the MS chain events again, and again and again and again. . . at the moment any time you want to set the stage for piling on the FO it feels like you have like a canned set of examples that get applied to every situation and issue. Everything goes in circles.

If you keep the MS talk to the MS thread then eventually it drops off the board and every one moves on. It might get brought up from time to time but it's not every flipping week.

You might see Pryor and Schwartz as being handled the same by the FO. I think the only similarity is that the Browns made both players the best multi year contract ANY team in the NFL offered them. The fact that neither is on the Browns hurts the team - but that is for different reasons.

Anyway - I'm not the board police. Post away as you want. I'm giving you my opinion ... I think the FO catch all thread is bogus.

George Atkinson III, at 6-1, 220, with speed..I hope Hue can work his magic and help develop Atkinson into a starter.

I have more hope for Darius Jackson than Atkinson

I actually worry that we have too many "good" RBs. Guys with potential.

When you have a guy like Crow who needs carries to get going. A guy like Duke who's great in space.

There are only so many carries to go around.

Just put him on KR duties and show him videos of Josh Cribbs.

You can't teach that.

Yeah, he had unbelievable vision. GA3 just needs to learn how to convert his speed and his mass into impact force. He's 10 lbs heavier than Cribbs and much faster. You can't teach vision, but you can teach someone to break arm tackles and side glances.

What can we expect to hear from the Browns front office as the draft approaches? Bud vs. Doug

Bud Shaw, cleveland.com
Follow on Twitter
on April 18, 2017 at 5:00 AM, updated April 18, 2017 at 5:03 AM

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Sashi Brown and Andrew Berry are expected to meet the media Wednesday.

What should we expect to hear? Nothing particularly revealing for sure, given the draft is approaching and NFL teams pride themselves on making the CIA look transparent.

But that doesn't mean these kinds of press conferences can't be predictable. That's why my nomination for the most likely used phrase is -- as always seems to be the case in Berea -- "it's a process."

The Browns stripped the roster to its bones in 2016, a year that was spent in "asset accumulation."

If that's another common term used this week it had better be to announce the end of asset accumulation and the beginning of drafting top talent that makes a difference.

The Browns have 14 picks. They had 11 last year. They don't need 25 first-year or second-year players on the 2017 roster, so hopefully another term we'll hear during the actual draft itself is "trade up."

Hue Jackson never believed the Browns were going to finish 1-15. The emotional press conference he held when the record dropped to 0-12 was proof of it.

Early on, Hue told Browns fans his program was all about winning the Super Bowl and that opponents better have their fun at the Browns expense while they could.

Brown said before the season he would be disappointed if the Browns only won four games.

So let's rule two things out this week. The word "Super Bowl" and any estimated number of wins.

Hear us out, then tell us who got closer to what we can expect to hear when the front office addresses the media and fan base this week.



You can vote for one of three choices at this link

Jeff Schudel: Cleveland Browns should wait out Patriots for Garoppolo


By Jeff Schudel, The News-Herald & The Morning Journal
POSTED: 04/08/17, 5:41 PM EDT | UPDATED: 1 WEEK, 2 DAYS AGO

About two weeks have passed since the last rumor of the Browns trading for Patriots backup Jimmy Garoppolo circulated. That’s like going 14 days without learning about a Kim Kardashian drama.

I have consistently maintained the Browns should not overpay for Garoppolo by sending a bundle of draft picks to New England. Likewise, I have said I won’t believe the Patriots aren’t trading him until the trade deadline passes in November.

The closer the draft gets, it seems to me, the lower the ransom it would take to acquire Garoppolo. Why? Because the last thing the Patriots really want is to be stuck with him in 2017 and let him walk in free agency next year.

Garoppolo will command a salary similar to the $72 million, four-year deal the Texans gave Brock Osweiler last winter. The Patriots would have to either do that or make Garoppolo their franchise player.

Tom Brady will earn $14 million in salary, another $7 million as part of a pro-rated signing bonus and a $1 million roster bonus in 2018 and 2019 for a total cap hit of $22 million each year.

The Patriots would be looking at a salary cap hit of around $40 million on just their quarterbacks for the next two years if they keep Brady and Garoppolo. That isn’t going to happen, so the longer the Browns wait to make a trade if they are truly interested, the less they might have to pay the Patriots to get him.

One more wrinkle if the Browns are in love with Garoppolo; they could retain their draft picks and sign him as a free agent next year.

You could say, “But what if he doesn’t want to play for the Browns?” Then a trade before the draft would really be silly because the only way the Browns could justify it would be if Garoppolo agreed to a long-term deal first. They are not going to send multiple draft picks to New England to rent him for one year.

The Browns would still have to fork over the huge contract to Garoppolo, which I maintain is risky gambling on someone with two NFL starts. That is why I believe drafting a quarterback is still the best way to go.
link



I do agree with the writer that the Browns front office should not pay a kings ransom to the Patriots for Garoppolo. Maybe the #12 pick and one of our 5th round picks #177 or #183 would be the most that the Browns could afford without digging too deeply into the Browns rebuilding mission.

Sashi and Depo must wait Belichick out knowing that the worst case for the Browns would be getting Garrett at #1 and a QB that might not be Trubisky at #12 or later in the draft.

The Browns front office can not make a deal for Garoppolo without a long term contract signed first. Garoppolo and his agent can make unrealistic demands if they are not happy with the team seeking to trade. Indirectly, Garoppolo does have some say in where he goes.

The Browns would have to make Garoppolo a very rich man to get him to agree to a trade to Cleveland. Also, there may be other teams interested in Garoppolo..Chicago, San Francisco, Buffalo.

Weighing all the factors and options, it might be best for the Browns front office to draft the best available QB.

If a deal for Garoppolo is in the works, we should hear something soon.

jmo

Like some time in the next nine or ten days?

just an FYI I'm pretty sure he was on our team last year...2nd half??? He is here as camp fodder and he did some KO Returns for us.
jmho

Yes, he was...

JMO....I don't like the term camp fodder. We signed him and he is a kid trying to make the team.

Good for him and good luck. I know you wouldn't like it if someone called your son camp fodder.

He gets a shot. Nothing wrong with that.

Good point. I've used that term before, I won't anymore.

he was on our team last year. not sure what week we picked him up tho.

I'll confer with you next time I post..
Another guy I have to ask how to post...Political Correct police can go some where.

No, you can post any way you want. I was just making a comment about how I feel. It wasn't meant to scold you or anything like that.

Ok...just telling it like it is. We need 30+
in camp then what we will keep on the roster. Lots of reps for all to take. He can make the team but only via special teams.
At least I didn't call him a Scrubeenie...lol

... or a warm body. lol

ANDREW BERRY & SASHI BROWN PRE-DRAFT PRESS CON.(26:50)


[video:google]http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/media-center/index.html[/video]

was going to paste it...coming away from that presser...
THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND WE ARE TAKING GARRETT #1.

And there shouldn't be.

I agree. I never really doubted it, but with all the chatter, it was making me a bit nervous.

I am pretty comfortable with the FO and where we are. All can change after the draft, but I feel good. We were rushed last year. It was like, "Hello, nice to meet you, lets go pick players".

This year everybody has had time to get on the same page, get to know the players and staff.

I like the idea of sticking to the script and playing the hand the Browns were dealt..a shot at the best talent on the board.

The franchise made sacrifices last year, trading down to accumulate draft picks and enduring the worst season in Browns history. IMO, now it is time to reap some of the benefits with a shot at the top talent in this draft.

I like the idea of the front office being proactive when necessary, if there is a specific player they value.

jmho, mac

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2017/04/19...d-andrew-berry/



What We Learned Wednesday From Sashi Brown And Andrew Berry
April 19, 2017 11:00 PM By Daryl Ruiter | 92.3 The Fan



BEREA (92.3 The Fan) – Despite holding the top pick in the NFL Draft Sashi Brown and Andrew Berry didn’t want to show their hand Wednesday.

Mission accomplished.

The Browns’ executive vice president of football operations and vice president of player personnel revealed very little about their 2017 draft intentions during a nearly 30 minute press conference, however it wasn’t completely devoid of useful information.

Here’s what we learned:

– The Browns have an idea who they will take with the No. 1 pick but aren’t telling anyone outside of their inner circle. They also will not negotiate or reveal the pick until it is time for them to call Philadelphia to have the card filled out and handed to the commissioner after they go on the clock next Thursday.

– The view that Myles Garrett took plays off or didn’t give 100 percent in games and will affect his draft stock is more media driven than reality, at least inside their draft room. “I think that sometimes those concerns are a little bit overstated,” Berry said. “The reality is in college football the number of snaps that these defensive linemen have to play on a down-in, down-out basis is usually greater than when they are going to have to play at the professional level. Every prospects is going to have his weaknesses. There is no such thing as a perfect player.” The Browns clearly like Garrett and it is presumed that is who they will select No. 1. Nothing that was said on Wednesday leads anyone to believe otherwise.



– The Browns are done prioritizing the stockpiling of picks for the future over picking players. Brown’s phone is ringing with offers for the No. 1 pick but he seems content to keep it and take the player they want rather than dancing down the board and out of the top 10 for a second straight year. “That would surprise me if we traded down that way this year,” Brown said. He later added when pressed on their anticipated approach next week, “The need to continue to acquiring high-value picks is less intense this year.” Last year Brown orchestrated a total of 5 trades before or during the 2016 draft that netted the Browns an additional 6 picks between 2016-18.

– Brown and Berry realize the magnitude of this draft. It is not hyperbole to say that it will define their tenure and will make or break the franchise for years to come. “This league is too competitive to waste opportunities,” Brown said. “This is an important draft for us. We can get some players that can transform our franchise, and the way we are positioned, it is to some degree the volume of players that can help us. We want to get those right.” This franchise desperately needs elite-level talent. With the Nos. 1, 12, 33, 52 and 65 available, there is no excuse for the Browns not to find that talent next Thursday and Friday night to help extricate them from the football hell they’ve lived in for the better part of 18 years.

– Having more than a year to prepare for a draft should help immensely after only getting just over 100 days to prepare in 2016. Brown revealed that the Browns “have already started on our 2018 draft at some of the pro days” the team attended this spring. “We will feel better about this year just because we have had more time to prepare and work with our entire scouting staff and coaching staff throughout the year,” Brown said.

– Trading up the board hasn’t been ruled out, but doesn’t seem as likely despite the massive arsenal of draft picks they have to play with. Brown restated his philosophy that he prefers to add picks rather than trade them away, however he’s not opposed to it this year considering the volume of assets at their disposal. “We don’t want to get into a habit of turning 2 picks into 1,” Brown said. “We just don’t think that is a good way to do business over time…It does not mean that if there is a player there we might not go take a shot. We think we are positioned to be able to do that without impacting our draft much.”

– The likelihood that Jimmy Garoppolo will become a Brown is diminishing by the hour. Brown said that he doesn’t have New England on speed dial and he doesn’t anticipate trading for a veteran quarterback before or during the draft, even if they have the ammunition to pull such a trade off. Certainly there is a chance that this is the ultimate bluff by Brown, but it appears that the Patriots in fact were not bluffing when they leaked to Adam Schefter last month that they would not make Garoppolo available.

– Although Berry and Brown were complimentary of Mentor, Ohio native and North Carolina quarterback Mitchell Trubisky, even going as far as to say “We were impressed by him,” try not to read too much into that. Brown made it clear he was not interested in discussing his thoughts on specific players, including Garrett, in an attempt to avoid showing his cards.

– The Browns are tired of the narrative that they don’t know what they are doing, aren’t on the same page or are dysfunctional but they’re not wasting time worrying about outside perception. “It is just part of the territory. We don’t get flustered by it,” Brown said about reports they were divided internally about who to select No. 1. Contrary to what some in the national media will lead you to believe, debate doesn’t equal division and those conversations are something Brown not only encourages but believes in. “Even if we all agree on a particular player or a decision, we constantly are pushing each other to think about what we are not thinking about,” Brown said. “Our job really isn’t to agree; our job is to get decisions right.”


Daryl Ruiter | 92.3 The Fan

To me, this allows for the possibility of trading out of #1. Not saying it's going to happen, but not "signing" MG prior to the draft may be revealing...

Also I believe the Commissioner has asked us to do so as they have made the draft into a big production now.
Its like having a special Mystery Show and then Actors do a Spoiler Alert...lol

Draft day...at number one there won't be a "NEW" offer to pop up that was not discussed already with our guys. I'm sure we are lookin at 3 First rounders for us to turn our heads and nobody is willing to come close.

jmho

A distinct possibility, eo. Adds "drama"...

It would be funny if every team made their selection in 1 minute or less. Draft over in 30-35 minutes.

But really, these posts are about the draft. Why aren't they being posted in the draft forum?

An instead of the drama, we would get more player interviews, more talking heads time...and many more commercial breaks. No thanks...

5 things to know from the Browns pre-NFL Draft press conference
Posted 17 hours ago

Patrick Maks - Staff Writer This guy is a paid writer for the Browns official website. Not sure there's anything in this article painting anything rosy. Just pretty much quotes from the press conference. There is the idea that this guy, or someone in the ORG, choose the "5 things to know" out of all that was said. Read at your own risk.

1. Sashi Brown, the Browns’ executive vice president of football operations, made it clear on Wednesday that Cleveland is comfortable with who it might take with the No. 1 overall pick. Just don’t expect him to reveal anything just yet. “Stay tuned next Thursday,” Brown said with a laugh after being asked if they’d reached a consensus with eight days until draft night.
Brown also stressed that nothing is off the table in regards to potential first-round moves but would be surprised if the Browns traded down like they did in 2016. “We have received calls,” he said. “We haven’t resigned ourselves one way or the other. We feel really good about picking at No. 1.”

2. Speaking of the first overall pick....
Myles Garrett, the Texas A&M defensive end who is considered by most draft analysts to be the best player in the draft, is still linked by most to the Browns at that spot. And over the past few months, Brown, Berry, head coach Hue Jackson and others have gotten to know Garrett.
“We spent a lot of time with him, No. 1. We learned a lot about what makes him tick, what motivates him, how he spends his down time, how he spends his time with his teammates,” Brown said.
particularly if it’s us, would be proud to have him.”

3. Best player available or addressing critical roster needs? Vice president of player personnel Andrew Berry, who guides the team’s pro and college scouting departments, said there’s no right answer. “All of that comes into consideration – overall talent, positional value and need on the current roster. It really just depends on the circumstance,” he said.
“It depends on where you are picking in the round and what other opportunities may be available later in the draft, depending on how deep a particular position is. Really, it just depends on the individual situation. I know that is probably not as satisfying as an answer as you hoped for, but it is the truth.”

4. As the Browns search for a long-term answer at quarterback, they’ve met with a handful of the top signal-callers, including North Carolina’s Mitchell Trubisky, Clemson’s Deshaun Watson, Notre Dame’s DeShone Kizer and Texas Tech’s Patrick Mahomes. “All of them are really mature young men,” Brown said, “and I think would handle themselves well.”
Asked further about Trubisky, a Mentor native who grew up rooting for the Browns, Brown described the former Tar Heel as “a positive young man, bright, very competitive” who brings a "lunchbox, blue-collar mentality to the position.”
“We were impressed by him,” he added.

5. The Browns are open to trading up from No. 12 but are not philosophically inclined to do so. Brown outlined that dynamic in broad strokes, saying Cleveland values draft picks because "no matter how prepared you are there is always a lot of uncertainty in the draft."
"Every team misses. We are not going to be different in that regard, “ Brown said. "We like young talent. We've said the draft is going to be the pipeline. We don’t want to get into a habit of turning two picks into one, so to speak. We just don’t think that's a good way to do business over time.
"We have studied this around the league, and it's just our inclination. It doesn't mean that if there's a player there we might not go take a shot. We think we're positioned to be able to do that without impacting our draft much.”

Browns site

Because, as someone has said, this being a FO thread, any and every discussion get lumped in here because some part of it relates to the FO. Great comments, which would have been outstanding in threads on the actual subject matter, get posted in here and buried.

It's the equivalent of starting a thread titled "Browns" which would contain anything Browns related thus eliminating the need for more than one thread. That's kinda happened with this.

It's worse than duplicate threads.

I think that it's a case of not wanting to blow a deal, if another team absolutely loses its mind.

Let's say that the Niners want to trade up from 2 to 1 ...... and are willing to give a fortune in draft picks in return. I think that we would, at least, have to listen. Once you've signed a guy, that possibility goes away.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/AllbrightNFL/status/855643512007794689

I have no real evidence or anything like that, but I never believed any of the reports about "tension". Mainly because I believe they were derived from non only than LaCanfora, the goofball.

jc..

Cleveland Browns have Terry Talkin' how front office has changed outlook -- Terry Pluto

Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer
April 23, 2017 at 6:05 AM, updated April 23, 2017 at 6:08 AM
link


CLEVELAND, Ohio -- "We are on the eve of a really momentous draft class for us."

Those words were spoken by Sashi Brown when the Cleveland Browns vice president discussed next week's 2017 NFL Draft.

The Browns have five of the first 65 picks, including No. 1 and 12 in the first round.

The Browns are an easy target with their Ivy League front office and the dismal showing on the field.

But the fact is any team -- especially a bad one -- would love to be heading into this draft with 11 of Cleveland's picks.

As Brown also mentioned, "it's a double draft."

He means the Browns have two picks in the first round, two picks in the second round.

They can always mess up the picks, and this front office had a rocky start in 2016.

1. You can argue they made a mistake by trading down from No. 2 to No. 15.
What made it look worse is it appears Carson Wentz (No. 2 pick) will be a very solid quarterback with the Philadelphia Eagles. Perhaps better than that.

2. Compounding it was first-round pick Corey Coleman had a rotten rookie year. The receiver from Baylor couldn't stay healthy. He had a hamstring injury in training camp. He missed six games with a broken hand in the regular season.

3. In the second game of the season, Coleman caught five passes. Two were for touchdowns. He was the NFL Rookie of the Week. Then he suffered a broken hand in practice. He missed the next six games.

4. The rest of the year was pretty sad. He caught only 26 passes over the last eight games, one for a touchdown. He longest catch in that span was for 21 yards. He was struggling with the cold weather and learning an NFL playbook. At Baylor, they kept things very basic for the offense. He looked lost at times.

5. If Coleman becomes a productive receiver in 2017, the draft starts to look a little better. That's especially true because second-rounder Emmanuel Ogbah led the team with 5.5 sacks. Only four other rookies had more. He is talented.

6. Not sure what kind of career Cody Keesler will have in the NFL, but he is at least a backup quarterback.

7. I'm not going to sort through all 14 picks. It is discouraging that Ogbah looked like the only selection who could one day be a Pro Bowl player. But it's also true many players need 2-3 years to give a true indication of how they'll perform in the NFL.

8. Despite several mistakes in the 2016 draft, the trades made before that draft played a major role in setting up the 2017 draft. The biggest moves produced picks No. 12 and 52, creating the "double draft" with multiple picks in the first and second rounds.

CHANGING DIRECTION

1. The front office did learn more than a few things from the 2016 draft, followed by the 1-15 regular season. They absolutely disdained free agency in 2016. They spent little, and didn't buy much that helped the team.

2. After watching the Browns lead the NFL by allowing 66 sacks and three quarterback concussions, they spent big to help the offensive line -- a combined $76 million ($34 million guaranteed) for guard Kevin Zeitler and center J.C. Tretter.

3. They signed veteran wide receiver Kenny Britt to a $32 million deal ($18 million guaranteed).

4. A mid-season trade with New England helped position the Browns to sign Jamie Collins to a $50 million deal ($26 million guaranteed).

5. Perhaps some of these high-priced free agents will get hurt or bust out. Perhaps not breaking the bank for Terrelle Pryor will haunt them.

6. The Browns have made it clear they won't spend like this in most free agent periods. But they realized they had to spend now or another complete embarrassment on the field loomed.

7. They also signed Jamar Taylor and Joel Bitonio to contract extensions.

8. I get a lot of contract information from Over The Cap, an excellent site. They say the Browns spent more money in free agency in 2017 ($59 million) than any other year. Yet, the Browns still lead the entire NFL in salary cap room ($61 million). That was also set up by some moves made in 2016.

BIGGEST TEST COMING

1. The Browns recently have had multiple first-round picks and trashed them. In 2014, those selections were Justin Gilbert and Johnny Manziel. In 2012, the picks were Trent Richardson and Brandon Weeden. Now get this, only Weeden is on an NFL roster. He is a backup quarterback in Houston.

2. But the only way for the Browns ever to dig out of this dismal ditch of being the NFL's worst franchise is through the draft. One of the best ways to have good drafts is with multiple picks, especially in the first three rounds.

3. They have 11 picks in this draft. As Brown said, "We are positioned very differently from 2015, so the need to continue to acquire high-value picks is less intense."

4. In other words, Brown was saying the team doesn't need to keep trading down to add picks. He sounds very ready to make Myles Garrett the first pick in the draft.

5. The Browns also have their own first-round pick in 2018, along with three second-rounders next year as some other trades kick in.

6. I don't know if they will draft the guys. I do know this is the right way to go into a draft.

We should have offered more than Pryor's highest bidder did. Who was that again?

This Pryor thing is out of control as is the Schwartz thing.

Bottom line, Pryor tried to take advantage of the club for personal gain. The Browns offered the best contract and he turned it down. He is not and was not a #1 WR. He fell into that position by default because of weak talent and Gordon being suspended. 2. Pryor will be a #2 WR at best in Washington. Crowder is slated to be the #1 WR with Jordan Reed TE being Cousins #2 go to guy. 3. Pryor's main issue that will certainly raise it's ugly head in Washington with his inability to run crisp clean routes. It's true that he will have a better QB throwing to him but those throws will be anticipation throws that Pryor will have to have gained separation and be at the spot.

WR is the second hardest position to learn in the NFL because of the importance of the timing and separation factors. Pryor's limited experience highlights his faults. Now I agree that he has an upside and believe the Browns offered him an overly fair contract but he and his agent way over valued his skills and his deficiencies will be exposed playing in a more up tempo timing passing game.

Now Mack, Schwartz, Pryor and many others are gone - deal with it. Crowell may be the next to go - it's part of the game. I still say they are looking for a trade partner offering a 2nd rounder for Hayden. The FO has a team to run and that involves hard decisions sometimes. If Gordon gets reinstated with Coleman, Britt and a upside rookie the Browns will have a far better receiving corp than last year. If they are considering drafting a WR early it's to replace Gordon not Pryor, he was replaced by Britt.

One final point on the FO and the coaches since that's management inclusive. If the Browns decide to use either the #1 or #12 pick in any manner either through trade, draft, of combination of moving up to select a QB, that player must start by game 5 and be successful of you can expect a whole new management team in 2018. You cannot be coming off a 1-15 season with a defense (especially run defense) that is near the poorest in the league with still some offensive holes (RT, RB, and WR) and be loaded with picks over the next 2-years and waste those picks on unproven reaches at the QB position when you can get 3-4 starters on the worst team in the NFL. The Browns first 4 picks must be day 1 starters and if they are not capable of that then they need to pass and go to the next best available. Heck I'm not even sold on Garrett and there were some articles this weekend (even from former players) questioning his effort. If the rumors are true that the Browns are even considering Trub at #1 instead of Garrett then the talk about Garrett might be on the Browns mind too.

Taking Trub #1 though would seal a new management team in 2018 IMHO. If they really are hedging on Garrett then it's time to trade down and get another 1st rounder next year and another 2nd this year in addition to the trading teams 1st this year to fill even more areas that need attention. This years draft is loaded with blue chip defensive players and lord knows the Browns need help on defense. 2018 is shaping up to be a banner year for QB's so they have the opportunity to position themselves for 2018 and is way more important than way over reaching in 2017. With 2 first round picks in their pocket next year and 3 second round picks, the Browns will have all the ammo they need to get the player they want to lead this team without over reaching. A mistake this year will screw any opportunities for next year because those many holes will still be there.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/warren...2017-nfl-draft/

Never liked Sapp. This quote from the article is a jewel.

"Sapp says Garrett is the favorite to be the top pick solely because of his work at the NFL combine."

Yeah, nobody had him in the first round before the combine.

Sapp was actually talking about measurables, and the article inaccurately summarized that to mean the combine. Sapp was talking about his size and speed numbers.

jc...

Listening to mike and mike, ESPN's Adam Schefter just reported that he was talking with the Browns yesterday, attempting to get some indication as to the Browns draft preferences in the first round.

...would the Browns and Hue Jackson agree on taking Miles Garrett at #1?

Adam Schefter was told by someone with the Browns...the choice of who the Browns pick in the first round?...that choice "is out of Hue's hands".

I do wonder how long Hue remains the HC in Cleveland if he doesn't have more of a say in who is drafted.

We know it was reported that Hue wanted more of a football presence in the front office..I wonder is that request continues to be a subject of discussion after the draft.

After the first round picks are made, we know everyone for the Browns will be all smiles for the photo op... but I wonder how the coaching staff will feel about the picks Sashi and Depodesta make...?

Now Mac , Mac , Mac ; Everyone ( but you ) knows that Dee is in charge of the Draft !

You worry too much..

Maybe I'm the only one, but I look at this as a good thing. How many regimes have we had where the HC/or former HC dipped their toes in and determined draft picks?

Davis
Mangini
Holmgren trumping Heckert
Pettine wanting Gilbert.
Crennel given the choice between two players

I have no doubt Hue Jackson has been involved in the process and offered his input, but it should be "out of his hands". His job is to coach the players, not select them.

Rely on Andrew Berry and the scouts. Use your advanced analytics tools to help make more informed decisions.

Likely more optimistic than last year...

I want to agree with you here, Memphis, but it is hard to get past the assertion that it is indeed out of Hue's hands. Minimally, Hue must have had significant input into the decision(s)...

I think Hue definitely has input. I just don't think he has control of the selection. Nor should he, in my opinion.

Agreed that final say is not in the coach's hands, nor should it be. I think we are on the same page for the most part...

I wanted to comment about how the FO has handled the draft with a full term under their belts. Obviously the results are yet to be seen and even then there will no doubt be some who love and some who hate the strategy. And even then it will take 3 years to know whether they got it right. . . . . Thats not my point.

I think the FO deserves kudos for hiding their intentions. Would anybody truly claim they know the plan ? How sure is Garret the pick ? Are they staying g at 12 ? Trading up ? Down ? Which qb do they truly love ? If it's not QB and assu.ing we take MG ... What's the target at 12??

I think that uncertainty lends strength to any negotiations if they do trade.

Jmo

Certainly deepens the mystery and adds to the drama. This is a great draft and one of the more "complex" that I have seen...

"We KNOW"??? you said that like 2 times as if it is actual fact...again I don't think you LIED...cause you ACTUALLY believe this. But is it true?

Cause I sure as heck DON'T KNOW this as a fact! According to you there is this big time rift and its a time bomb ticking...

Did the Browns get out maneuvered in the first round in their attempt to fill the QB needs in this draft?

I did not watch the draft, but watching the Sashi/Hue video and Q/A after the first round left me wondering if the draft team was prepared for the way the draft went down?

Buzz off.

Yup..time to tank the season.

That might be one way of looking at it. Especially if you have a viewpoint predetermined to hate whatever they do.

Others might say they played the cards they had and got 3 impactful upgrades while adding another 1st round pick next year when there is a deeper/better QB class expected.

The bottom line is - the Browns could hardly compete with the Bears for Trubisky. Dropping only one spot and guaranteed to get the player 49ers wanted .... I think the guy the Browns would have taken if he fell was Mahomes. But .... it's all speculation.

Wait...wait...wait...

You haven't even watched the draft and the first thing you do this morning is come out bashing the FO?

Priceless.

I don't believe that to be the case. Sure, Trub was a surprise at @2, but Hooker, Howard, Allen were still on the board at #12 and we passed, so I expect that Plan B was put into effect. Would we have taken Trub at #12... no way to know. I'm expecting more moves today; this FO can never be accused of sitting on their thumbs. A very good first day...

I think people need to realize this: the QB's coming out of the draft, at least the projected first rounders, just wasn't what the FO was looking for.

And the draft isn't even over yet, for all we know, they might like a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round.

But they revamped our o line, got a stud TE in the draft. Looks like Cody or Brock, and that's fine.

I don't believe the FO is finished yet, Swish.

Yea for all we know they might move up to grab Kizer and make him sit til next year

I'dd one more thing regarding this response. You said out maneuvered....I disagree with this assessment. However there was a point in the press conference where a question was asked about the trade down and the resulting pick. I can't find the transcript but Sashi mentioned biting nails, hoping one of their guys would be available, yet conceding that the move took on some risk. After the question, it seemed to me that, although Peppers was on the short list of guys they hoped would be there, he wasn't the top guy on the list. Maybe not even the second guy. So from that perspective perhaps the trade didn't net the perfect scenario for them, if my gut reaction is correct.

Outmaneuvered? No.
Took a risk that didn't pan out 100% the way they wanted? Yes, perhaps.

And about them not being prepared, I didn't see that whatsoever. They came across very methodical in their decision making. Now maybe the decision making will end up being poor, but they looked like the ducks were in rows.

Not only was i not surprised with Mitch at two, i expected it ... different team .. but i expected it .. *LOL* ... i also said MANY MANY times that Chicago could draft a QB at 3 cause Glennon essentially has a one year contract ... there is either ZERO or very little GAURANTEED money if they cut him after 17 ...

I think we had a plan and stuck to it at 12 ... Mitch or trade back if possible ... unless our target was one of the RB's or WR's that went before 12 ... cause the D talent that fell there was INCREDIBLE ...

At least macs hatred started a decent convo for a change ... IMO anyhow ..

We learned they didn't want your boy at 12 ... we have no clue what they thought of my boy or Mahomes ...

Umm it's pretty obvious they didn't value Mitch that high.

Mahomes, sure. We don't know. But if they felt Mitch was the guy they would've taken him.

Based on what? 49ers stole from the Bears while dropping one spot. . . . What was the price for the Browns to trade up to #2 and get Trubisky? We don't know and based on the Bears trade it would NOT have been a good choice.

Personally I think they would have taken Mahomes if he was there at #12.

I feel last nigh went as good as it could.

I believe the Bears move to #2 took some pressure off the FO.
I was frustrated when they traded down, but when I saw the talent on the board at #25 I was thrilled.

I like Peppers and the trade looks good to me.

What will day 2 bring?
We shall see.

Based on where he was picked.

We have the ammo to move up to #2. So if the FO was convinced that trub was the guy, we would've pulled the trigger.

If he was valued enough to be taken at 2, then he was valued enough to be taken at #1. The FO didn't view him that valuable.

I'm not arguing about mahomes as I just agreed with diam about that. KC probably took who we wanted.

But it's pretty obvious trubisky wasnt their guy.

I can see the logic that if he was worth the #2 then he could have been taken #1 overall.

I'm glad we have Garrett, Njoku and Peppers rather than say Trubisky and Hooker. But then I am in the minority of peeps that won't be upset to see Kessler start the season if that happens.

I wouldn't be upset with Webb or Dobson selected later.

I've seen talk about tanking for QB next year .... that isn't happening. jmho - but there's 5 or more wins with simply an improved D. Add a better O'Line and remove the injuries at QB and we're going to win some games. . . Kessler improving and staying healthy, I think we could win more than 5 games.

memp..where did I "bash" the front office?

I asked a question, attempting to get other opinions on the subject.

If the front office bought into the hype that this was a weak QB class and believed these QBs would not go high in the draft...they just got schooled.

I do believe the ideal draft for the Browns would have been picking MG at #1...then either trading up from #12 to take a QB..either Trubisky or Mahomes.

It may be that the Bears believed the Browns might attempt to trade up from #12 to #2, so the Bears made the deal with SF to move up one spot, from #3 to #2, assuring them the pick they wanted, Trubisky.

The Browns were in a position to offer the 49ers more in trade, moving from #12 to #2, so either the Browns didn't believe Trubisky was worth that much or they did not believe the Bears would or 49ers were going to take a QB.

It may be that the Browns were not willing to give up the number of valuable draft picks it would have taken to move from #12 to #2...and would rather fall back on plan B, taking the 2nd ranked QB on their board, Mahomes at #12.

If the Browns believed they were safe to wait on their plan B...someone misjudged the draft and did not consider that the Chiefs would make a trade with the Bills to select Mahomes.

Going into this draft, if the Browns believed they were setting good to land Garrett and either Trubisky or Mahomes...they found out just how much good QB prospects are in demand and they usually don't just drop into your lap.

So, year one with this front office...the Browns are staring at the best QB in the 2016 draft and didn't even rank him (Wentz) any higher than somewhere in the #20s. I read that the Browns actually ranked Jared Goff as the top QB in the 2016 draft. Instead, the Browns drafted Cody Kessler two round before he was slated to be drafted.

Now, in year two of attempting to fill the Browns QB needs and it looks as though the Browns did not count on the Bears moving to #2 to draft Trubisky and also did not count on the Chiefs moving up to draft Mahomes.

I would say that the Browns judgement when it comes to drafting a QB, needs some work.

There were a few reports that the browns were pissed when Mahomes was picks, I think he was their plan at 12, i still think they should have stayed put and just picked either hooker or howard. I like Jabril, but i think he could have been there at 33

You don't fool anyone here.

memp...tell us, how do you believe the front office is doing when it comes to address the franchise QB needs via the draft?

They've stockpiled a ton of high-value picks in next year's Draft which will be a LOT deeper in higher quality QB's.

Also, if anyone really listened to what the FO has said, this has been the plan. Build the team, then plug in the QB.

prp...you saying that the Browns were not interested in drafting a QB at #12?...or possibly trading up to get either Trubisky or Mahomes?

I realize there is always a plan C for the Browns...wait till next year!

But, the clock is ticking and I'm not sold on this front office's ability to judge the draft or the QB talent, based on their first two attempts in 2016 and 2017.

lead...if they thought they were going to come out of this draft with a QB at #12, I can understand their disappointment.

Obviously they had specific QBs in mind and Deshaun Watson was not one of them.

The Browns are not the only team involved in any trade. The Browns supposedly contacted every team in the top 10 to see what it would cost to move up. They knew what the cost would be for them to move to pick 2, IF THE 49ers WANTED TO DROP TO 12. We do not know that they did. Perhaps they only wanted to drop a couple slots. They have been praised for getting a trade where they were able to gain additional picks AND STILL GET THE PLAYER THEY WANTED.

As to the Chiefs trade up, there was a lot of speculation that the Bills wanted Mahommes. I would think that the Browns knew this as well and were willing to risk the Bills taking him. Not only that, but the Chiefs gave up 2 FIRST ROUND PICKS to move up. If the Browns were willing to have a wait and see attitude on the Bills taking Mahoomes, they were certainly not willing to pay 2 first round picks to outbid the Chiefs.

We do not know what trades were offered, what trades were turned down, or the reasons for the trades being accepted, one over another, but to question the Browns "judgement" when there are multiple teams involved and not knowing the value assigned to the players in question, or the goals assigned to the draft picks by the Browns is irresponsible.

About as well as could be expected, they aren't forcing something that wasn't there.

If we do go QB now, they might actually get to sit awhile rather than being rushed onto the field.

I firmly believe that a QB in round 1 was never part of the plan for this year. I think that they have their plan and have stuck to it: build the team, then get a QB to plug in.





Well, good... they don't require your buy-in. They only require the owner's and they seem to have it, which means that they have given Haslam their plan and he is on-board with it.

And, seriously? You didn't even watch the Draft last night, but you have the balls to add "and 2017" to that statement? That's lame.

As for 2016 - they had 100 days to assemble a front office and scouting team and do the Combine, Pro Days, Free Agency, and get ready for the Draft.... I'm pretty sure that their plan was to stockpile picks and get "guys" to fill roles. No, it wasn't flashy, but I think they laid an acceptable, if unspectacular, foundation.

prp..that is lame!

I don't have to watch the damn draft to understand what happened.

Tell me what I have wrong...

I believe the Browns wanted Garrett at #1 and a QB at #12 or a possible trade up from #12 if they felt it was necessary to get either of the top QBs on their board.

Didn't happen because there were other teams that were more aggressive in their pursuit of Trubisky and Mahomes.

So now we head in to year 3 with the same draft team, hoping to draft a franchise QB...the clock is ticking.

If they thought a QB was better than Garrett, he would have been the selection. Was there a QB you thought should have been taken over him? Or a QB we should have traded up for with the 12th selection? Was Watson worthy of the 12th? IMO, no he wasn't.

I think the Browns may have actually wanted Mahomes at 12 and were a bit stunned when KC moved up to 10 and took him. Just speculation that has been tossed around.

I can't believe I'm going to say this but to a certain extent I agree with mac that this was mismanaged. I agree that they were stunned with the KC/Mahomes thing. The mismanaged part is if they really wanted him that's why they have the draft capital but they didn't use it. They then compounded the issue by not standing pat and taking BPA.

I don't think yesterday could have gone any worse for the Browns.

All of you guys act as if I'm the only person asking these questions concerning the front office.

I might be the only on this message board, but I'm not alone as many others are asking questions about what the front office is doing concerning the QB position.

Also, it is not just me commenting..the Browns own front office is commenting on the plan for QB.

Here is a story with time stamp of April 28, 2017 at 1:51 AM..read.


Browns might still pursue Jimmy Garoppolo; 'we won't rest until we solidify the position' says Sashi Brown

By Mary Kay Cabot, cleveland.com
Follow on Twitter
on April 28, 2017 at 1:29 AM, updated April 28, 2017 at 1:51 AM
link

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns didn't land Mitch Trubisky or Jimmy Garoppolo on the first day of the draft, but it's not over yet for the latter.

Browns head of football operations Sashi acknowledged that the Browns will leave no stone unturned in trying to find a franchise QB, and he didn't rule out trading for a veteran.

What's more, he's now got even more ammunition to pull it off. The Browns acquired an extra first-round pick in 2018 in a trade down from 12 to 25 with the Texans, and now have two first-rounders in 2018 -- and three second-rounders. The Texans, meanwhile, selected Deshaun Watson at No. 12, marking the second time in two years the Browns may have traded away from a potential franchise quarterback.

Last year, it was Carson Wentz, whom they traded away from at No. 2.

But now, they're sitting on a gold mine from the Wentz trade that keeps on giving, and they've either tried to swing a deal with the Patriots already, or they will.

"We won't rest until we solidify that position,'' Brown said. "It's not solidified right now, so we know we need the guys here to work their tails off and Hue (Jackson) is going to develop them as much as possible and push them to be their best and we also know that until we get it solidified, we're going to continue looking for players all over the league and in college.

"That may be in next year's draft, it may be in free agency, it may be via trade. So But again, Brock (Osweiler), Cody (Kessler), and Kevin (Hogan) are here working hard and we're going to support them as best we can.''

Does Brown leave Berea on Thursday night looking for a veteran QB?

"Every day until we solidify the position we leave this building thinking about what opportunities might be out there, so absolutely,'' he said.

It's a dramatic departure from last week, when he was asked if he'll trade for a veteran QB and he said, "no.''

Now, he's acknowledging that a veteran signal-caller is a distinct possibility -- either this year or next.

He did, however, shoot down the NFL Network report that the Browns were trying to trade for Redskins QB Kirk Cousins during the first round, attributing it to "bad reporting.''

The Bears traded up from No. 3 to No. 2 to take Trubisky, the Chiefs traded up to 10 with the Bills to draft Patrick Mahomes and the Texans traded up with the Browns to draft Deshaun Watson. In the case of the first two teams, they likely knew they had to jump in front of the Browns.

"We just thought that the better opportunity for us was to trade back. Hue and I, we've spent some time with all of the quarterbacks that were taken this evening. We did like all of them at certain places. For us, in terms of our plan and building the roster, we felt like it was just better to move back. That shouldn't be a take against Deshaun, a great young man. We'll root for him to have a great career."

Can the Browns still find a starting quarterback in this draft? Some left on the board are Notre Dame's DeShone Kizer, Cal's Davis Webb, Tennessee's Josh Dobbs and Pittsburgh's Nate Peterman.

"You never know, but we'll see what happens,'' said Brown. "I wouldn't want to telegraph too much.''

Jackson admitted that the Browns tried to land their man on Thursday. He wasn't specific, but it's no secret they liked Trubisky and hoped they could draft him either at 12 or by trading up. They also liked Mahomes but the Chiefs jumped their route.

"We didn't know who would be the first quarterback off,'' said Brown. "We didn't know if the quarterbacks might fall out of the top 10 and maybe there at 12.''

When will they get their first-round QB? Next year's draft is supposedly full of premier prospects, including USC's Sam Darnold, UCLA's Josh Rosen and Wyoming's Josh Allen.

"Soon,'' said Jackson. "When it's time for us to get one. Obviously, it didn't happen today, but it's not like we didn't try. I guarantee you that. But I think that time's coming, and it will be here. We're going to continue as Sashi said, to do anything and everything we can to get this position better as we continue to move forward.''

Patriots sources continue to tell reporters that they're not parting with Garoppolo, who's set to be a free agent after next season.

The Browns have also had some interest in Cincinnati's AJ McCarron, who wants to be traded, but it's unknown if they'll make a play for him.

Related: The Browns select Myles Garrett No. 1 overall.

Woah! Mary Kay wrote a QB article???

I'll further add that I think this draft will drive a wedge between Hue and the FO.

This was one draft they couldn't screw up. My opinion is they already have.

I'm curious why you think this is? Specifically, the wedge part. Was there a selection or decision you think went against what Hue preferred?

I only say this because in the press conference Hue seemed rather brief with his responses than Sashi. Sashi seemed to elaborate more and cam across as more excited. So, I could see if some think this way from watching the presser. I'm just not sure where pick selection would necessarily deviate from what Hue wanted. In fact, we're told Garrett was the guy he REALLY wanted.

Sure. They are considering a veteran QB. The article does not say TODAY. It says 2017 or 2018. It even says there are other options in the draft. Yep, that's true, and I expect them to explore them. I would love to see them explore the possibilities of Webb, Dobbs, or Peterman. No one said they wouldn't. I do not see Mary Kay calling for the FO's heads.
I do see NFL,com giving the Browns kudos on their picks and an overall score of "A" on their day 1 draft.

JMHO...but if the Browns wanted to land Kizer, keeping the #33 pick would have insured that that happens.

If the Browns try to wait until they pick at #52, he could be gone. If they believe Hue could make something of Kizer, they need to be aggressive in their approach.

If I were the Browns, I would draft a QB in every draft, hoping that a pick surprises, like Dak Prescott did. Give Hue something to work with..someone to develop. Just make sure he has a NFL arm.

From the article above, this sounds like the Browns front office thought either Trubisky or Mahomes would be available at #12.

Another Browns lesson learned the hard way...it never stops. Last year, the Browns had Jared Goff as their top QB and didn't believe Wentz would be a top 20 QB in the NFL.

The misjudgments concerning the QB position must stop. I don't know who the best judge of QB talent is, but the Browns need to find someone who can judge QB talent just to help find a franchise QB via the draft.

I'm not calling for anyone to be fired...just hire the best you can find to help our front office out.

You made that statement off the back of the first round of this draft - and not one of them has played a down in the NFL. Not one was universally considered a top 10 pick.

What's so incredibly ironic is that when other teams REACH for unproven talent - you try to use it as a way to suggest the Browns FO failed. Sorry but every position you take is loaded on assumptions and unfair comparisons/evaluations using similar situations.

I am not sold that the Browns wanted to reach for a QB in round 1.
I am not sold they will take one on day 2 or 3.

Those claiming the FO got schooled because Mahomes was taken prior to the #12 pick must have some great inside info that ranks up there with T. McShay. The Browns kept everything very tight to the vest and I would be shocked if we ever find out who they were targeting.

Many side with the MKC school of thinking that we need a FQB right now. I will say this, Wentz would not have won us any more than 2 games last year. I doubt he would have been healthy for all 16 behind the OL. The Browns should be improved next season, both offensively and defensively.

After improving the overall talent of a 3 win 2015 team. the FO seems to be putting everything else in place before drafting a FQB. I liked Watson, but how do we know he is that much better than Kessler or Brock?
We don't. But after this upcoming season we will have a much more honest view at what this team has and needs.

GO BROWNS!!!!

I guarantee you the Peppers pick was a coaching deal (aka Williams). There is no way that any analytical model is going to like his production in coverage. Williams wants him to be an in the box SS, and the coaching won........same with Garret.

The only pick that Hue/FO might have differed on is Njoku I guess.

I wouldn't use the word "guarantee", but I'd definitely say heavily influential.

No, I think you are over stressing on this.

There was probably little to no chance they could have taken Garret and then traded up for Trubisky. That most likely would have cost us too much. the 12th pick this year, maybe a 1st next season or a second next year.. Who knows.

We had more ammunition to get Mahomes.. would have been costly, but not as bad as trying for the 2nd pick. So I'd say, no, they didn't want him either.

Asd for Watson, no way if they wanted him that they'd have let the Texans trade happen. no way.

So of the three QB's picked, I think the only one they might have wanted would have been Trubisky. And as it turns out, that was out of reach.

The other two were reachable, one we had in the bag (watson) (maybe) because if the Texans wanted him bad enough, maybe they go to the Saints to get the 11th pick.

And Mahomes, would have been costly but still doable.

So, No, I don't think they wanted any of the QB's that went yesterday.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/RaidersAnalysis/status/857987247026479104

So? You don't pass on solidifying other defensive and offensive positions and trade down. Then turn right around and trade back up into the first rd. Idiotic way of drafting IMO. But whatever.

The trade back up had two purposes.. 1.) To lock in Njoko into a 5th year option and 2.) Make sure they got him before the Steelers could pick him.

I think the conversation around Watson for us was really brief, I don't think he was ever the option.. I think realistically they knew they couldn't get MG and Trub..I think it was Mahomes all along..he was seen as the most upside, and they knew that none of them helped them day one anyways..I'm glad they didn't reach

This i agree with, They need a real Football guy in the FO that has experience evaluating talent...let him work WITH the analytical duo and find talent that checks the boxes. There is a thing as too smart when it comes to picking football players

They have one. His name is Andrew Berry.