One thing I thought of last night: Any word on Higgins? Is there a chance we could bring him back ... maybe there isnt a market for him

It's not yet time for him.

Once the draft is over, and teams assess their WR depth, there will be a market for him. WR is one of the stronger positions in this draft, but teams will have a place for a guy like Higgins, who can make the tough catch, and who runs good routes. Maybe we'll look to re-sign him here once the dust settles, and the Browns brain trust re-evaluate their post-draft rosters.

Yeah that makes sense. Looking at it from his perspective: if I’m going to be a #3 WR and receive a 2 year deal, I’d rather stay in CLE if the money is equal.

Of course, maybe a WR needy team like Green Bay will make him a better offer

To a point on the other thread...I am sure Callahan has input, maybe even a little more than a average position coach, but they don't pull any triggers.

This year isn't normal, but even when it is I don't think position coaches are even in the draft room. There is no point in doing so. Any input they might have happens during the evaluation process.

j/c




The pick we got for Schwartz was involved in the deal that netted us Chubb.

Thank god KJ turned lemons into lemonade ...

Getting a 4th round pick in the next years draft was definitely a great return for Mitch ...

Here are the details of the trade:




The reality of the situation was that Schwartz was worth more than a 4th round Compensatory pick. No matter how it's spun.

We also had at least two 4th round picks and probably three that year ...

We received a 4th round pick for Gipson also ... the pick we got for Gipson was 8 spots ahead of the one we got for Schwartz ...

I also think the menZas used a 3rd rnd compensatory pick in the Collins trade ...

So KJ cleans there mess up letting Mitch walk By turning it into Nick and they spent a better pick for Jamie ... huh ... and that about sums up the difference between the two ...

I’m out now ... not what this threads about and I’m sick of this crap .. i can’t even make a joke anymore w/o the sashiettres getting there panties in a wad ...

I promise that I won't get annoyed with you, Diam, but I will get even....eventually. ,

And it's funny how you're the only who keeps bringing it up.

I take it you haven't been reading the board lately.

Actually, Memphis started this conversation. Just like he--or you--always do.

Stop with the nonsense. I showed where all our comp picks came from since 1995 after someone else mentioned liking the approach.

You ran with the "what was their record?" crap. Then your boy brought up Schwartz out of left field.

You always bring up the Sashi years like they were so smart. It's your agenda. Then, you tried and act like losing those guys didn't have an effect on the record.

Btw...........losing Schwartz wasn't out of left field. It was how we obtained one of those coveted comp picks.

Just let it go, man. It's over.

Again, and more slowly this time....

1. Someone posted that they liked the comp pick strategy some teams employ.
2. I showed that we ranked 31 out of 32 teams in comp picks since 1995 and had a total of 12.
3. I mentioned 8 of the comp picks came in 2016 and 2017 under the same regime.
4. I mentioned the other 4 picks came in 2012.
5. You ran with "what was their record" like it had relevance to the comp pick history or approach from the Browns or other teams.

I can read just fine. I have a Masters in English. I have written works that are published.

You may think that acquiring a ton of comp picks is "smart." I disagree. Thus, I pointed to our record when the "smart" guys let all those good player leave.

And btw...........the last sentence is a quote from you:



One more time...................I will gladly let this stupid ass regime war thing go, but you keep bringing it up. But, if you want to continue, then I should be able to respond.

I firmly believe acquiring those Comp picks in place of losing guys like Alex Mack, Schwartz, and Gipson were not "smart" moves. You can disagree. That's fine. But, I am not crazy for thinking otherwise.

This. Vers and diam are the ones always bringing up Sashi and then blame everyone else for talking about him.

Memphis brought up Sashi. I have established that.

If only this was true. People can clearly go back to the closed thread and see this for themselves. I'll leave them to do just that.

Actually, here was my post.



It was in response to this:



https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.php/topics/1746435/9

For once we agree. You are the one who brought it up. You have done it in multiple threads.

I will try one more time and then move on............if you and the others let it go.........so will I. But, if you continue to proclaim how much smarter that group was than others........I will challenge that assertion.

One more time........acquiring Comp picks due to losing guys like Mack, Scwartz, and Gipson is not my idea of "smart."

Guess I will bite ... did you say that letting good players go for comp picks was a smart strategy? If you did I missed it. I thought you just posted facts.

* I will add - letting starters go for comp picks is not a good idea in my opinion. I don't think that was the case with all those comp picks - but that's a different convo.

Let me guess. I did not post facts. Because I could have sworn that we did go 1 an 31 after acquiring those comp picks. I could have sworn that we let Schwartz, Mack, Gipson, Benji, and others go in order to get those comp picks.

We could have been cool if both sides just stated their opinions. But a couple of posters chose to take another route.

Please! The record was almost certainly affected by letting some of those players move on in FA.

I didn't say you did or didn't post facts. Thanks

What I said was I didn't see where Memphis said letting starters go for comp picks was smart. You DID insinuate that was Memphis's messaging. Thanks

Exactly.

See - here - I agree, if we let Mack and Schwartz and Gipson go in order to get Comp picks it was really dumb. But I don't actually see anywhere that a case was made that it was smart to let good players go in order to gain comp picks.

If I missed it - cut and paste it. No need for the drama.

So why did you make a post insinuating that I implied you didn't post facts? Not sure why you are so unhinged tonight. You've been mostly sticking to great football takes recently.

See, that's the thing for me. I don't think anyone is saying it was smart to get comp picks for Mack, Gipson, or Schwartz.

Why that assumption is made I don't know. Perhaps you can shed light.

I don't think it's a good idea, but I do think it's a good idea to take advantage of comp picks if necessary when you can.

I think we all knew that Mack was leaving in 2 years when we transitioned him and retained him with the contract Jacksonville offered him. I don't blame "that regime" for not retaining Mack. But I can see where some would want to.

Since you brought it up, however, I think during the beginning stages of the rebuild, "that regime" did a very nice job trading and signing players that wouldn't count against the compensatory picks to gain additional assets...since that was the plan all along.

If you think Dorsey did a good job, then it paid off. So really there isn't any argument to be had.

Yes. To mend my point, these players weren't let go with the sole intention to acquire compensatory picks. At least Mack and Schwartz were not.

Gaining compensatory picks for them instead of nothing at all was probably smart, however.

Okay guys.................as long as we agree that letting better players go for Comp picks is not a good idea.........then there is nothing to argue about.

However, if one wants to insinuate that obtaining Comp picks is a good idea w/out providing additional information to give proper context, I will speak up again.

Have a nice night, fellas.

Amend.

Yes. Thank you.

Situations change based on talent on team and cap/upcoming finances.

And no question losing Schwartz was a mistake. That was just stupid. I wish someone would get Berry's take on the situation. I bet he'd say it was a mistake. I don't think we had a chance for Alex Mack. And I believe he couldn't be franchised. Losing Gipson sucked, but probably was the best of the three.

This comp pick stuff seems a little silly to me and I highly doubt the Browns ever had any thought process where they said to themselves; "Oh, let him go so we can get a comp pick." I also remember that Schwartz took a lessor deal from KCC than what the Browns offered just to get away. Mack wanted a long term deal that the Browns were unwilling to offer. In both cases I believe the Browns let their contracts expire rather than bargain in good faith prior to the expiration (according to the players) that gave them an out and they took it. That unfortunately is the payback when you are constantly fielding a losing team.

Now to Vernon and a comp pick for him. Everyone has their own opinion. This is what I see: Vernon is oft injured and has not been close to living up to the contract he currently is being paid. 6 games missed, 26 tackles and 3 1/2 sacks for 15.5 million is not getting what you paid for. With bonuses, Vernon is scheduled to be paid 17-million in 2020. The Browns are obviously lookin to upgrade at the position or there wouldn't be the feelers out there. If they upgrade, I highly doubt Vernon stays on the team. Thinking that it's a smart business move to keep Vernon and his 17-million contract to get a comp pick for him is just plain crazy. What your saying is that the comp pick is more valuable than the 17-million.

The value of third-round contracts drops to $3.3 million, but takes an even bigger hit in guaranteed value, with the average contract worth just $756,000 in guaranteed money. Once a player falls past the third round, most draft picks will sign a 4-year deal in the $2.4-2.9 million range. A Vernon comp pick could be anywhere from a late 3rd to a 7th round pick. Compensatory free agents are determined by a proprietary formula, developed by the NFL Management Council, which considers a player’s salary, playing time and postseason honors.

So the value of that player if we get for the comp pick at the end of the 3rd round is most likely less than 3-million over 4-years (12-million or less) and the thought here is to spend 17-million on a former starter now in a backup role to get a 12-million dollar guy with a 12.5% chance or less of becoming a starter. That makes good business sense?

No, I did not. And I'm pretty sure most wouldn't insinuate that just to start something.

I've said several times not retaining Schwartz was a bad move. But I think there are teams who are able to leverage compensatory picks to their advantage that allows good players to leave their team who they may think are (1) overvalued in the market or (2) in the team's opinion overvalued at the position they play when team building. Often times available cap is a consideration as well. Those monsters contracts given to players in FA that a team won't pay helps them in the compensatory pick game.

J/c

With regards to comp picks or keeping players, it ultimately comes down to value like every other situation in roster management. Letting guys go isn't necessarily a problem. Letting guys go without adequate replacements is an issue. However, with a salary cap, you can't just keep everyone. Unfortunately, we've done a rather awful job of drafting and developing depth. We've also done a horrible job of winning which also increases the difficulty of convincing players to stay.

I have no idea why someone would point out that we ranked so poorly in comp picks under every regime but one and ranked 31st in the league in comp picks if they weren't advocating for comp picks. The math doesn't add up on that one.

PIT - thought this was all put to bed. But I see you want to try to rattle cages or poke the hornets nest? No-one is saying it's a good idea to let good players walk in order to get comp picks. Happy Easter, hope your day is good.

It always seems everyone wants to "put things to bed" when certain people get the last word but not others. When it's others, they're accused of being the people wishing to stir the hornets nest.

Once again, I stand by what I said. Maybe employ that same strategy on the other side next time.

Happy Easter.

Lots of good teams let good players walk... because they have someone ready to fill in their spot.

Bad teams are forced to overpay for FAs and STILL end up with holes.

Good post.

On a side note, if we cut Vernon, I don't believe we would get a comp pick. As with you, I don't think whatever comp pick we might get once he becomes a free agent is worth the 17 mil we pay him this year.

I would rather spend it on a guy like Clowney or trade for Yannick Ngakoue. Or, move up the Garrett talks and throw that 17 MIL at him in lump. It's already a part of our cap for this season. That is a pretty solid signing bonus that would allow us to sign him for just a little less. He is getting his security a year ealier and in return we get a bit of a discount because we are increasing our risk.

The franchise tag on DE's is $18 mil a year. Ngakoue was tagged for that and he isn't happy. He wants a long term deal. I am just not sure we can fit him in and still swing signing guys like baker and Chubb down the road.

I'll leave that up to Berry and Depo to figure out the best move to make there. They are chess players, and smart. They will bounce things around enough to figure out the best move, both now and moving forward.

It would probably be wise to re-up Garrett soon ... do it before we might have to get Baker done and while we have more room ... throw a lot at him initially (plus he’ll be a tad cheaper coming off suspension)

Or we could get a comp pick

It's really the way I lean. $17mil is a pretty good chunk of change we can funnel Garretts way. He gains early security, we can get him at a reduced rate.

Then again, maybe we extend Hunt 2 years with a nice bonus. Two years still gives him leverage to get another big contract and two years frees us from him if we need or want to sign Chubb to another contract.

On a side note….I worry about Backs. Bumping them out before free agency is risky business. In this case I would on Hunt for 2 years. Next year draft a back fairly early as insurance if Chubb gets goofy money and we elect to not match.

It's amazing how points-of-view get twisted on here to prove or protect an agenda. I made a comment about wanting to see the Browns plastered all over the comp pick list - as I regularly see with teams who are always better than us.

I wasn't insinuating a darn thing, but that comment DID come on the heels of why I was good with keeping Vernon through his last contract year (and because he's a very good player when healthy), taking a one-year flyer on Clowney (if that's even possible), and my agreement with tendering Hunt as we did. All of those moves make sense for THIS year and NEXT off-season in regards to comp picks...one year commitments on good players. (We can always re-sign those guys as well - or try to.).

Of course I would expect that we would have viable replacements - just like the teams do who are plastered all over the comp pick list. To insinuate otherwise is silliness. And...we would have a COMP PICK to help replace the guys we did not re-sign...younger...cheaper guys. We'd have to actually draft well with those comp picks - which is an entire other debate. The point of my comment about draft picks is THIS: If perennial playoff teams are plastered all over the comp pick list, then they are doing something right in managing their ROSTER.

When Memphis did the research on the Browns and comp picks, I was not completely surprised...but WAS amazed at our lack of comp picks STR. Here's the kicker: When I read the two years that we DID have some comp picks, I DID NOT EVEN THINK OF - OR CARE - WHO WAS IN THE FRONT OFFICE AT THAT TIME or how we got those picks. Twisting those posts into some sort of Sashi- issue/praise is the epitome of agenda-protecting paranoia. (BTW, in about two more off-seasons I will have completely forgotten which players were drafted by GMs from Dorsey backwards as well.)

Good teams somehow manage to get comp picks without gutting a position - purposely or inadvertently. I'd like to see us get to a point in roster-management where we too are on that list - and as a perennial playoff team.

The funny thing in all of this is that the 2016 comp picks had nothing to do with anything Sashi and that FO did in 2016. It was as a result of the 2015 activity of players leaving/signed calculation while Ray Farmer was the GM. Under Sashi and Co, they were able to use all those comp picks in 2016 and 2017, but their personnel activity was only as a result of players leaving in 2016 for the 2017 comp picks.

Just like the 2012 comp picks were a result of the prior years' activity.

I guess the math really is hard for some.

Personally, I’m preparing for us not re-signing Chubb. I think we have him for his rookie deal, then we tag him, then he’s gone

Why ? Strictly a financial decision ? I see him as a core player that you would finagle something ..

I just look at it from the RB standpoint. No doubt he’s a top 5 RB in the league ... but it’s risky to pay that position 20 million per year (Gurley, Bell, etc). I think our FO will prioritize other positions while maximizing Chubb in his next three years

I am too. Unless there is a chance to re-sign Chubb now, but I don't think we are allowed to, but someone correct me if that is the case.

RB is not a premium position. If Chubb keeps progressing alongside other players we have on the team-- Mayfield, Garrett, Ward-- and all are worthy of long term contracts, I think Chubb is behind all of them in terms of priority, IMO.

Now, things may change. Mayfield has another sub par year, Garrett swings (and lands) another helmet, Ward is injured again.... These all decrease the value of the aforementioned players. However, if they all perform to the extent we hope/think they can, then yes, I believe Chubb is #4 on the list.

I see what you guys are saying .. I just am such a Chubb fan ! I think Ward getting hurt again is a sure thing .

Same here, waterdawg.

Chubb is one of my favorites players on the team.

Agreed w/you both. He’s probably my favorite player. If I’m using my heart he’d be the guy I’d want to keep

I am not going to say what you say doesn't make sense.

Chubb is better than your average back, but if your Oline is pretty good, you can play a average back and get good results.

Unlike many positions, I think you can always get a pretty good back, both in free agency and the draft.

Or they can negotiate an extension after next year. One of the wonderful things about Chubb is that he's grounded; the idea of playing his career with one team is more likely to appeal to him than for someone who's in it for the fame and money. Pay him fairly, I believe he would stay.

Yeah, thats 100% the truth ... Chubb is the most grounded player we have. That’s why we all love him.

What’s a fair price though? His production is going to be incredible and he’s going to be 26 years old or whatever.

He’s going to warrant highest RB numbers IMO

I'm sure someone will come along to say I'm FOS, but I think Chubb is top a 2-3 RB. Rules don't apply; pay him and reap the benefits for the balance of his contract, however long. He won't let us down.

The market, as always, will determine what's fair. We can't pay what he would get in FA, and keep Myles, Baker if he pans out, and other players we'll need to pay to keep. If we can find a happy ground with Chubb to extend 2-3 years, I think he would do so. (It might serve as a precedent for others who follow.)

I agree with that, and being grounded is a positive that is worth something. Pay him as the model player your roster will benefit from having. Not every player can be highest paid, and some terms that pay him well near the top of NFL salaries, some incentives, sensible stuff make him a very solid keeper IMO.

But that is my opinion. It is OK to be wildly successful, payed well, and win games. Lots of 'em. A "career in one place" is rarer today, but I am sure it still appeals to grounded individuals like Chubb. At least, I hope it does.

We finally agree on something.

But, of course, you turned right around and "liked" the next post that was all about twisting things and protecting an agenda.

I am laughing even louder at this:

This was a good one, too. The poster quoted something from the previous post and then went on to say how others won't let things go.

Wow.........here is another example of how things get twisted on here to protect an agenda.

Wait! What?

Didn't the same poster say this?



But yeah, it's others who are twisting things to protect their agenda.

I agree. It's a business.

We can live in a fairy tale world and think Chubb wants to play in Cleveland for life.

Just think "Show me the Money". That is where he is going to go. People change jobs for a $1 per hour raise. Why? To help the family.

While Chubbs scale may be greater than the cook changing jobs, the motivation is the same. You are always going to opt for more money. Well, unless you are stupid. Especially at his age and his profession. Nick stands no chance to make the same money outside of football. MD's don't make what he can make.

My counsel would be to follow the money trail as long as teams were willing to pay.


Bottom line word.



Oh, I am up at this hour because we had some really killer storms move through. I mean really bad.

They have moved through and a few cups of wine have me feeling I need to get another 2-3 hours of sleep. Later

I agree w/you ... it’s a business and he’ll go where $ prevails as he should

And about the storms ... I just read about the tornados in Tennessee Valley ... hope you’re safe and no damage

Still here. No damage that I can tell.

Thanks.

Correct. Diam wouldn't let it go. You can see based on his reference of "hero" when it was never brought up in prior posts.

I answered the question. We did in fact get a draft pick from the departure of Schwartz. We traded that pick for a 2nd, Osweiler, and a 17 million dollar debt. He brought it up, not me, not memphis or whomever you wish to falsely accuse whose name isn't diam. It's pretty clear.

The fact that you and him continue to bring it up "unprovoked" is rather nauseating. The fact you and him continue to argue against things that were never said is even more nauseating. But I'm going to assume this isn't the last time either of you will do so.

I'm NOT pointing fingers at anyone here, but none of us need be subjected to falsehoods, deliberate or otherwise. This is not the White House Press Room...

j/c:

The fury that ensues when posters see a "like" to other people's posts will be something I'll never get tired of seeing.

Hope that you and yours are all OK. I can agree with the money chase, but I do think we can take care of him, maybe without Zeke money Some large numbers just seem to guarantee a cut or trade moment. His output will be part of his leverage. Hope we can use him better than Fred did.

Go, Browns.

I think it's actually impossible to use him any worse than Fred did. Unless he were to be flat out benched.

And I will side with the think-with-the-heart people. If we ever let Chubb go for financial reasons, I would feel dead inside.

I think his value is going to be high - especially if he shares a portion of the load with Hunt ... if you think of some of the elite backs who have burned out with being the work horse of a teams offense and then fell off a cliff in about year 5 or 6 ... I don't see that happening with Chubb.

Whoever said they think Chubb is a top 3 RB in the NFL - I agree 100%.

He got used A LOT last year. Hunt wasn't even on the scene until midway through the season. Took him a couple games to really get up to speed.

With some guys, you know they're just saying it... but with Chubb I do believe that he doesn't much care about the rushing title. I'm also pretty sure I saw him start to wear down by the end of the year. I hope KS can create a 1-2 punch with him and Hunt that keeps both fresh.

Great!

j/c...

Not a free agent signing, but didn't think it needed a new thread.

I love Christian McCaffrey. Teams shouldn’t pay running backs.

Not a 4 year extension like that......


I'm waiting for RB's to make their own off-shoot union and negotiate new rules. Being a first rounder, stuck in a 4 year contract with a fifth year option, then they have the franchise tag and all that. That and they can't negotiate an extension till after the third year.

It becomes a bit of a mess for them compared to the other positions.



They need their own CBA in regard to contracts because the NFLPA is not looking out for them

So we were having the discussion earlier .. I guessed it would be about that to pay Chubb. I just don’t see it as a wise move ... as much as I love Chubb

Analytics says not to pay some of the best players in the game .... interesting ....

If they’re a running back? Yes.

Don't pay RB's! Draft, rinse, repeat.

Interesting concept ...

He is right Diam ... this is not the League today that we grew up to.

But the thing with McCaffrey is the % of their offense that he is responsible for, both rushing and receiving and he is probably their best receiver, so I can see why they wanted to sign him to a lucrative long term Contract.

Like I said earlier.........you are twisting things. Diam talked about it on the locked thread and you were the one who would not let it go and brought it to this thread.

And you had the gall to actually say this:



Of course, the board police let that one go.

We got hit hard, too. Lost power at 5:45. Didn't get it back until a bit after 3:30. Some of our shutters blew off and some new landscaping I put in during the last two weeks took a bad hit.

Agreed. If there were a running back to pay it would be Christian McCaffrey because he does so much. The downside is that once his production drops at running back you are basically paying top of the market for a slot receiver.

I am not saying who is right or wrong.

I will say that while a theory might be perceived to be "right" in the present, that theory or belief doesn't always stand the test of time.

There was a time when people believed black QBs were not smart enough to play the position. They believed they lacked the necessary leadership skills. Those thoughts were regarded as "right" at the time, but have proven to be historically false and ignorant.

My personal opinion is that it isn't wise to let good players walk. I also don't think the cap concerns are anywhere near as important as they used to be and too many folks stress over the cap. I am not asking for them to change their opinion or saying I am "right," but it's my belief and felt the need to say so.

I agree with this. But paying the right players is also important. Running backs get hurt easily and then become distressed assets. The Rams currently have -$6,216,488 in cap space and are paying Todd Gurley $17,250,000 to not play for their team (and Brandin Cooks $21,800,000).

The fact of the matter is that we can't sign Nick Chubb to an extension until after 2020. I would just let him play out his contract and then franchise him until the wheels fall off or someone is willing to trade for him.

Good post.

I can see that happening, which would keep him a Brown for another four years, assuming that you can only franchise tag for two constructive years, unless the new CBA made changes to that rule.

Never mind ... *L*

Don't mislead. YOU are twisting things. He asked a question in one of the final couple posts. This thread is an extension of that thread. It's actually the same thread and same topic.

There was nothing to let go. He asked a question which I answered and then it was twisted into Sashi blah blah blah as you and the others typically do. I mean it's all documented here for all to see.

It is documented for all to see. Now go pound salt. You offer nothing positive to this board.

I don't know if it changed in the new CBA or not but you can tag a player as many times as you want in a row. It just becomes very expensive after two times using it because you have to pay 120% on the previous year's salary.

Okay, but wouldn't McCaffrey's new contract effect the franchise tag above what it has been?

Yup. The franchise tag is the average of the top five salaries at a position. His contract is going to change it quite significantly because it will bump Kenyon Drake's $8,483,000 out of the top five. We won't have to worry until after 2021. By then running backs probably will be even more devalued and we might get Chubb for even cheaper because guys like Ezekiel Elliott, Le'Veon Bell, and David Johnson will have been cut already. The only running back I can see getting a monster contract in the next couple of years is Saquon Barkley.

I doubt Zeke gets cut. He is their offense.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...yer-of-the-year

https://www.latimes.com/sports/rams/stor...and-cutting-him

Is there a point in there somewhere?

Todd Gurley was the Rams whole offense. He got hurt and they pretty easily replaced him with an out of shape C.J. Anderson. Then the Rams cut him one year into his huge extension.

If you're a running back it doesn't matter if your a team's "whole offense" you are expendable.

Todd Gurley was not the entire Rams' offense. They had a great passing game w/the likes of Woods, Cupp, Cooks, etc. They had a great OL before they blew it up.

Gurley was a very good back, but here is the caveat. The long-standing knee issue became more and more of a problem.

Zeke does not have that injury history. He is not playing w/WRs and a TE as good as the Rams. He is their offense and is very dependable in all three facets of the position.

He does not have the injury concerns that Gurley did. He ain't going anywhere. I get that some analysts degrade Zeke and pump-up dudes like Gurley, but Zeke is far more dependable and he isn't going anywhere. We could put a wager on it if you like?

In 2019 Dak Prescott nearly threw for 5000 yards, 30 TDs, and 11 INTs. He had the fourth best QBR in the league.

I disagree with your assessment of the Cowboys offense versus the Rams offense. I think the talent levels are similar but the Rams have had much better coaching.

Elliott does not have the injury concerns that Gurley has/had but that doesn't mean much to me at this point. He has had over 300 three out of four years in his career (and would have had over 300 in 2017 if he wasn't suspended). I was talking about Elliott and his contract situation after the 2021 season with regards to the how much franchise tag would cost. My bet is that Elliott will not be under the same contract or with the Cowboys going into the 2022 league year.

I didn’t know about Dak’s numbers last year. They are impressive.

With all the talk about signing a Clowney, negotiating a new deal with Chubb, Mayfield and Garrett's contract coming up, I did the research on the rookie contracts and what they do to the Browns cap.

The Rookie Salary Cap

Okay, now here is where things can get a little tricky. Each team has what is called a "Year One Rookie Compensation Pool." This fancy term refers to a set amount of money that each team must disperse to its rookies. It can be distributed however the team wants, but it must go to rookies.
There is a handy chart from overthecap.com that provides projections for each team's numbers this season.

The chart includes "Total Cap Estimate." This is because the rookie wage scale also places limits on the amount of money that can be spent on the total value of rookie contracts, including incentives, bonuses, etc...
Using one example from the chart, the Cleveland Browns are projected to have $5,820,766 in the Year One Compensation Pool and $31,111,340 for a Total Cap Estimate.

This means that Cleveland would be able to disperse $5,820,766 among their draft picks during this season, but the total amount of money the Browns can spend on these draft picks over four seasons is $31,111,340.

As part of the rookie wage scale, every rookie drafted signs a four-year contract. The value of these contracts obviously varies, but the length does not. The rookie wage scale allows for teams to add a fifth year to the contracts of first-round selections (option year) if they so choose. There are restrictions on this stipulation, however. Let's use Myles Garrett of the Cleveland Browns as our example this time around. Cleveland has to decide on whether or not it is going to keep Garrett after the third year of his contract, but before the start of his fourth season.
If the Browns drag their feet during that time and do not decide on an extension, Garrett can join everyone else from his draft class in free agency after his fourth season.

Should the extension be given, the player's salary depends on their draft position. Teams have until around May 3rd to make that decision.

Garrett, and any other player selected in the top 10, would receive a salary that is the average of the salaries of the top 10 players in the league at his position.

Players selected between picks 11 and 32 would receive a salary that is the average of the third to 25th highest-paid players in the NFL at their respective positions.

If Garrett was going into his option year in 2020, his salary would be 14.36 million for the year. Nojoku would get a salary of 8.815 million in 2020. Since both players are entering year 4 of their contracts, claiming the 5th year option for 2021 will be much more expensive (especially if the Browns sign Clowney to a 18-20 million dollar deal). Both players must be informed of the teams intention to exercise the 5th year option by May 3rd.

As far as Chubb goes in reference to either using a Franchise Tag or Transition Tender on him for 2022 after his rookie deal expires. In 2020 money, Chubb would get $10.278 million under a Franchise Tag and $8.483 under a Transition Tender. However, with McCaffrey signing his 17 million per deal, the cost for Chubb just went up big time.

I don't think it is as cut and dried as don't pay, but I do understand the thinking.

As I have said before, if you have a solid enough line, just about any back is going to give you good results. Carlos Hyde is a good example. He had a career year last year at age 28 or 29.

I am not advocating we don't ink Nick. I am just saying I understand if we don't if the cost goes towards the roof.

The problem backs have is there is a high supply of guys who can get it done. I don't think it worth paying somebody $5-6 mil a year above that you can pay someone else to pick up maybe 15 extra yards a game on average.

I do admit that Nick was special to watch at UGA, and it has carried over to the Browns.

He will be their entire offense if Dak doesn't stop being stupid and ignoring social distancing.

I know what Dak's numbers were. I'm one of the few guys who defends him on here.

You can disagree w/my assessment of the two offenses, but I'll stick to what I said and leave it at that. Nothing wrong w/differences of opinion.

DAK has great stats...my son who is a big time Cowboy fan...but as soon as the Browns start winning I think he's going to come to the light...lol

He feels DAK cannot lead the team in the playoffs. Good Stats or not. He feels that DAK goes on these bad streaks, not often to bring the stats down greatly but at the worst moments in important games.

jmho...well mostly his (my son)

What would dak’s #’s be if it weren’t for Zeke? ... replace Zeke with a CJ Anderson (who did good but wasn’t near as good as Gurley and that HURT THEM) and lets see what happens to Dak’s #’s when the focus of the D shifts ...

I’m not really arguing ... like Peen said I don’t think its near as cut and dry as u wanna make it out to be ...

Caff will be an interesting case study .... IF he stays healthy this will be a GREAT CONTRACT for the Panthers ....

Who are the backs other than Gurley that have signed big contract over the last two years ... throw those into the case study ... only one that comes to mind for me is Bell ... anyone else

I wonder, when was the last time a team that won the Super Bowl had a RB as the focal point of their offense?

Devonta Freeman and David Johnson

*L* .... there not worth what they were paid for cause there not very good ... *L* ...both one season flash in the pans ...

".but as soon as the Browns start winning I think he's going to come to the light."

I think by the time the Browns start winning,we all will have headed toward the light.

I've been hearing that same tired line for years now . Heard it 10 yrs ago. 8 7 6 5 years ago.
I do recall posters on here claiming Cody Kessler
Was a better QB than Dak. Hilarious

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2810...teams-six-spots

Dak Prescott's numbers would be be very similar if Tony Pollard were playing instead of Ezekiel Elliott.

C.J. Anderson averaged 7.0 yards per carry in the games he played in the regular season and 4.1 yards per carry in the playoffs. Todd Gurley averaged 4.9 yards per carry in the regular season and 5.3 in the playoffs.



It depends on what you mean by "big"?

I don’t agree dak’s #’s would be very similar with Tony Pollard as his RB ...

Picking out one stat to determine a players value Is exactly why i came up with my saying ..

How many passes did CJ catch ... ...

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out ... RB’s don’t have the overall value they used too but i think the real good ones will still demand a pretty penny and they will get paid ...

C.J. Anderson did not catch many passes but that's the point. The team just replaced Gurley in other ways.

I think not very smart teams will pay them still. I don't think our current front office will pay a running back a significant salary. Luckily for Nick Chubb by the time his contract is up we will have an entirely new front office with complete opposite ideals.

I don’t agree with that either ...I think win, lose or draw this group gets at least 4 years ....

They replaced Gurley in other ways ... *LOL* ... please elaborate ... It is nice to know it took more than one player to replace him ... how much did they cost ... ...

I do too. I don't talk much about other teams players, but he is a guy I touted when he came out. I wanted to draft him if we could. He played great at Mississippi St. In Big 10 terms, it like a QB playing well at Indiana.

Dak had great college stats and he has carried it over to the NFL. He has very good stats....stats that count. He may not be a top 5 QB, but he is a top 10 QB.

You can win with the guy. He throws for percentage. Doesn't throw a ton of picks. Gets his Td passes, and can run without getting bruised up. To me he is very comparable to Steve McNair. Same type of body and game, just a good QB who would start for all but a few teams.

j/c:

Interesting....

Nice chart. Looks like he is up there with Henry and Zeke, at least as a percentage....I'll have to look again if that was a percentage of carries or number of carries.


No doubt McCaffery is a special player. There isn't a team in the league who wouldn't take that guy. He would push anybody for the starting reps and would clearly take reps away from anybody in the league.

Good is good. You don't bench that.



Looks like numbers to me

That actually doesn’t surprise me. I’ve watched Carolina games a lot because I’ve had CMC in fantasy ... and he is used in the box and at the goal line an awful lot

I think this is a good point.

On the graph, it says Number of Rushes between the tackles or something like that.

Percentage of rushes would probably be a better stat.

Christian getting paid this offseason is like the stars aligning for him. That man absolutely cashed out at the BEST TIME IMAGINABLE for him and his family. I have marveled at how he has been able to stay so healthy.

He had 9 TD's in 2 seasons coming into last year. Then boom 15.

Now entering his 4th season at what, 200lbs?

He is the definition of the new age running back and a big time weapon. He is also a running back on a huge deal with a bad team without a QB. Gross

Good points, he represents the new hybrid type RB .. I always think that Metcalf was playing in the wrong decade

FWIW

CHRISTIAN MCCAFFREY
RB, CAROLINA PANTHERS

Christian McCaffrey's four-year extension is worth $30.1 million fully guaranteed at signing.

Another $8.1 million becomes guaranteed next March, meaning for all intents and purposes CMC is guaranteed $38.2 million. This is the long way of saying he has indeed become the highest-paid running back in football. Any regular reader of this website or football Twitter knows running backs are not the best allocation of resources for modern football teams, but CMC's youth and unique skill-set coupled with the Panthers' minor outlay at quarterback makes it far from egregious.

SOURCE: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com
Apr 16, 2020, 11:08 PM ET

They spelled "intense purposes" wrong.

??????????

It's spelled just fine.

It was a joke. Sorry.

I still don't get it.

Oh well.

j/c:

'Colin Cowherd: No NFL Team Wants Cam Newton as Their Starting Quarterback'

Colin Cowherd: “According to a story, Cam Newton may have to accept a backup role to remain in the NFL. And a story today said the Redskins are interesting in Jameis Winston, NOT Cam. Bears? NOT Cam. Raiders? NOT Cam. Colts? NOT Cam. Chargers? NOT Cam. I’ve often compared Cam to Russell Westbrook but he’s now becoming Carmelo Anthony. No self-awareness, refuses to adapt to the new three-point league, semi-committed, writing off that great reputation in college, and has aged poorly. Cam is distracted and is only ‘kind of’ committed. What’s the market for Cam? He’s inaccurate – 59% completion percentage, and take away one great year and his passer rating is around 85. He’s .500 since his MVP season, and he’s an average quarterback who had one great year. He’s not even great at running around anymore. Tom Brady was old and expensive, Cam is young and cheap and there are NO takers. There is no market for Cam.”

-----------------------

A bit more of the article, with video (that I didn't watch):

https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/conten...ng-quarterback/

Why does Colin Cowherd have any credibility on any subject?

He's right on this one.

CC strikes again. I have total disbelief that there is no interest here on the part of anyone. Some in the NFL may be waiting for the market to break him down. Nobody?

I should just stop reading when I come across Cowherd and read anywhere else.

He’s right until someone signs Cam Newton. And then he’ll change his tune or ignore he ever said it.

He's right on his assessment of Cam Newton - not whether any team will sign him.

I disagree with his assessment.

Total fraud.

He's intelligent and eloquent but full of BS. Much of his show is like a high brow Skip Bayless. At this point I'd rather listen to Skip and I really hate Skip.

I disagree with your assessment of his assessment.

I don't like Cowherd, but I like Skip well enough.

I utterly despise Cowherd, but his assessment of Newton is spot on in my opinion.

His best attribute was his running ability and that is limited now. He has never been a great passer (God awful throwing mechanics) and with the shoulder injury, worse now.

Questionable leadership skills. I understand why no team is knocking down the door to sign him.

I will say that CC lacks any credibility as a sports journalist. But I think he would fit in quite well as a poster on Dawgtalkers.

Unfortunately .. you are right

Absolutely agree. Cowherd would fit in great on this board. lol.

He'd be despised by many, but he'd fit in around here

So what you are saying is there are a bunch of jerks around here.

it took you 20 years to realize this?! LOL

Notice I didn't put a question mark behind my comment. I've known it for a long time. I was just making commentary on what you said.

*are

Official cap space by team entering the draft (1-11):
1. CLE: $37,547,510
2. DET: $29,488,200
3. PHI: $27,145,824
4. NYJ: $25,164,780
5. WAS: $24,943,685
6. DEN: $24,173,954
7. IND: $23,926,469
8. MIA: $22,682,552
9. TEN: $21,896,801
10. LAC: $20,994,933
11. BUF: $20,596,199

Cap space by team entering the draft (12-21):
12. HOU: $19,371,257
13. JAX: $18,639,538
14. NYG: $17,087,541
15. TB: $13,548,667
16. SF: $13,101,739
17. SEA: $12,300,846
18. MIN: $12,265,443
19. BAL: $11,263,779
20. GB: $11,163,308
21. DAL: $10,557,605
22. CHI: $9,254,421

Cap space by team entering the draft (23-32):
23. ARI: $8,933,375
24. LV: $7,690,618
25. CIN: $7,454,685
26. CAR: $7,008,210
27. PIT: $5,767,814
28. NO: $4,067,357
29. ATL: $2,232,688
30. KC: $1,475,171
31. LAR: $1,382,085
32. NE: $1,076,775

https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1252569106051739649

Pharoah's back! I didn't even know he was gone.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/former-oregon-ducks-te-pharaoh-162126314.html

I didn’t know he was from Ohio, not that I care, although he must have Browns fans in his family, so they’re happy. Maybe he was a little dawg when growing up.

Is blocking his main attribute? I hope so.

Was he with us last year? I honestly cant remember

Yes, he played a lot.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/2019-snap-counts.htm

He was our 4th most used TE, playing 16% of the snaps with 2 receptions ... I don't think that qualifies as "a lot". TE was one of several really disappointing positions last year after Njoku went down (and before I guess). One reason I liked the Hooper signing so much - he was the best FA available and he's a nice pairing with Njoku.

As the season wore on he became More Visible he seemed to be in a lot of important situations. Although I did not make the Snap count...just going on importance of those opportunities given to him...the kid did OK.

Texans cut old friend Tashaun Gipson.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/04/27/texans-cutting-safety-tashaun-gipson/#comments

He's older, but he's not ancient. I haven't kept up on his performance since the moment he left town. He seems like exactly the type of player that tends to get on BOB's bad side in a hurry (talks).

We already brought in a mediocre vet... is Gipson a better, mediocre vet?

I didn't watch their games, but he had 3 picks, 1 for a TD, in 14 games. Maybe he'd be useful in a defense that features more DBs and less LBs?

I don't think it makes sense to add yet another veteran to that room right now.

Maybe not, but I just like Safeties with a knack for the ball. Tipped balls, overthrows, and fumbles just seem to find him, kind of like Felix Wright back when we were good.

Kinda like our MLB last year .........

I’d be okay adding a vet LB ... but we already did at S in Joseph

I agree with you. No way we're interested now.

But let's just say you do have that time machine. Do you fire it up to get Gipson? I don't know.

I would risk it with him, or at least something like him. We need a Schobert alternative (don't think we can replace all the 'extras' he gave us infield and on roster, at least not quickly.

Matthews would suit me, but not sure he is mobile enough anymore.

j/c...

We just had a draft that was loaded with them and they didn't take one??

Is Ted Ginn a tight end? I thought the Bears were only allowed to sign tight ends?

JADEVEON CLOWNEY
DL, UNSIGNED FREE AGENT

ESPN's Dianna Russini reports the Seahawks and Titans have made "multiple" offers to free agent Jadeveon Clowney.

And none have reportedly met his desired price tag. Russini was also told the 27-year-old EDGE rusher is "just not in a hurry to sign" considering organized activities are still up in the air. With no mandatory workouts in the near future, Clowney's market will likely remain at a standstill until he budges from his own requests. This situation could last well into the summer.

RELATED: Seattle Seahawks, Tennessee Titans
SOURCE: Dianna Russini on Twitter
May 1, 2020, 10:14 AM ET

Well, I'd say we are absolutely out of that market (aside from not being mentioned).

I’m surprised Clowney is still just 27 lol

Retweeted

Terez A. Paylor
@TerezPaylor
·
7h
The Chiefs have agreed to a 1-year deal with DL Taco Charlton, a source tells Yahoo Sports.

When he was in college, I thought that Taco was going to be a better pro than he has been thus far.

The Browns are in a unique cap position to make a blockbuster move along with some signings that would immediately upgrade the defense.

With Garrett basically locked in for the next 2-years, (I would however expect them to renegotiate during next summer) and Mayfield and Ward looking at 5-year options being exercised next year - the biggest concern next off season will be running back with Hunt being a FA and Chubb going into his final year. With RB investments now questionable, it will be interesting to see if the Browns invest.

That said, on defense the Browns should make a couple of moves to dramatically upgrade the defense now. Trading for DE Ngakoue from Jacksonville would be a huge improvement move. This would have to be a sign and trade deal where the Browns would offer to pay 24-year old Ngakoue a 4-year deal at 80 million and front end load the deal. The deal would include the Browns next year 2nd round pick and Njoku. The Browns would then immediately release Vernon and his 15.5 million dollar cap hit with no dead money. Ngakoue would be such an upgrade there would be no reason to keep Vernon and his balloon contract when that money could be used for the upgrade.

Vernon's salary and Njoku's would almost pay for the year 1 cap hit for Ngakoue (20 million vs 18.5 million) basically costing the Browns a 1.5 million cap hit in 2020. In year 2, Njoku's 6-million dollar cost plus the saving of the 2nd round pick of approx. 8-million total would pay almost 75% of the cost for Ngakoue in year 2 meaning the Browns would not take a serious cap hit until year 3. This would be a huge upgrade at DE with a young player (age 24) and not hurt the Browns at all parting with a TE #2 that's under performed and a DE that has not lived up to his contract.

The Browns should then sign Clay Matthews to a 2-year 8-10 million dollar deal to bring that experience factor in for the defense. The Browns should also sign 25-year old LB Darron Lee who was very productive at LB for the Jets but played a backup role for the Chiefs last year. Lee should come relatively cheap and a 2-year deal would bring that experience factor from a youthful veteran player to work in a rotational basis.

These moves would instantly give the Browns a defense to be reckoned with and the increased cost over the next 2-years is minimal, about 12-15 million per year cap increase for 3 players over the next 2-years.

I am not sure anyone should sign Clay Matthews at all, let alone for more than one year at more than the league minimum. He is basically a situational pass rusher who is old and was injured last year.

Also, I don’t see David Njoku having much value.

I’d much rather just sign Eversen Griffin or Jadeveon Clowney and not give up any draft picks.

If Clay Matthews’ name was Cam Wake no one would want him.

Quoted for truth. I wanted us to draft him and I thought he had a pretty productive career. But at this stage in his career I don't think signing him would be much help.

Clay's dad and uncle (Clay Jr, Bruce) both played productive football until the age of 40 - he is 33, about to be 34. He was injured last year (broken jaw), missed only 3 games due to it, but still had 8 sacks, 2 FF, 3 PD, 37 tackles (27 solo). He also had 1 TFL and 3 QB hits, in addition to those already counted by his sack total.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MattCl99.htm

Given his genetics, and the high quality of play over most of his career, I see no reason why he couldn't be a significant contributor as a situational LB and/or pass rush specialist, nor should he be all that expensive salary-wise.

j/c

In terms of Matthews, it would definitely be cool .. but IMO would be a dumb signing. By all accounts he is basically done. I think we’d be better off signing a guy like Bradham than an aging guy like that. You hate to admit it, but take away his last name and nobody would blink an eye about him

I don't know if this was a reply to me, but if it was, I wouldn't admit anything when it comes to the Matthews family. They are built different than most of us, and most football players too - better, stronger, and with more longevity. When you're talking about Clay Matthews III, you can't take away the last name because the long-term productivity is baked into the genes that come with that name - IMO, of course.

I would be fine signing Clay Matthews to be a situational pass rusher for very little money (no more than one year).

I would be too, but his son is probably going to want a 2-3 year deal.

So, give up a 2nd and Njoku for one player... Give up two starters for one (technically three, but we get one back)?
And give him a fat contract, fatter than Clowney?



What is the fascination of weakening one area in order to overpay on upgrading another area?

Why wouldn't we just sign Clowney and keep Njoku and our draft pick?
If anyone has PFF premier to look this up, but I'm betting Clowney is a much better run defender than this guy. Better overall, lower cost.


And, I'd love the story of Clay coming here, but there's no chance. He's past his prime and also is on record of never wanting to play here because he knows he'd be in his Dad's shadow the entire time.

No, it wasn’t a reply to you ... thats why i put j/c before .. just my general thought lol .... its all good

j/c:

I always loved Clay Matthews Jr as a player and it would have been cool to see him in Cleveland, but at this particular point in time, it would not be a wise signing. Great player, but the sun is setting on a brilliant career. Hopefully, that doesn't offend anyone.

I'm not offended, but in the interest of accuracy, *our* Clay Matthews was the "Jr". His dad, Clay I, played for the 49ers in the 50's. We are talking about Clay Matthews III. I only mention it because this family is football royalty, and I find it hard to believe he is finished at 33, given his lineage. Its fine if we disagree, and I don't dispute that there's some degree of sentimentality in my wanting Clay III to finish his career where his father's started. I still think he could help this defense.

I agree. Go for the free agent. You don't have to give up anything in the way of draft picks and it isn't like Clowney isn't a good player.

Where's the value:

Ngakoue
Age: 25
Pro Bowls last 4-years: 1
Games Last 4-years: 62 starts in 63 games (missed 1 game)
Sacks: 37.5
Comb Tackles: 122
QB Hits: 85
Contract demands: long term 20-million per
Status: JAC Franchise Tagged 17.88 million

Clowney
Age: 27
Pro Bowls last 4-years: 3
Games Last 4-years: 56 starts in 58 games (missed 6 games)
Sacks: 27.5
Comb Tackles: 189
QB Hits: 72
Contract demands: Long-term 20-million
Status: FA

Vernon
Age: 29
Pro Bowls last 4-years: 1
Games Last 4-years: 49 starts in 49 games (missed 15 games)
Sacks: 25.5
Comb Tackles: 157
QB Hits: 67
Contract demands: signed for 15.5 million with bonuses could be 17-million
Highest scheduled paid Brown for 2020 to date.
Status: Under contract to the Browns

Just a quick comment on the Browns offensive plans of being a rush team first. In 2019, if you take out Baltimore who ran for an unbelievable amount of yards (3296) led by Jackson, you would see that the Browns were only 405 yds less or 25 yds per game less than the 2nd rated team SFO (2305 yds in 2019). In fact, if you look at yds per carry, the Browns finished 4th in the NFL at 4.84 only trailing Baltimore 5.53 (with a running QB), Arizona 5.03 (with a running QB) and Tennessee 5.00 with the leagues leading rusher. At the same production rate, the Browns would only have to run the ball about 5 times more per game than they did in 2019 to catch 2nd rated SFO.

In comparison to Minnesota where Ski was offensive coordinator last year using the double TE concept, they did rush for more yds total than the Browns but they also had to use 105 more attempts for .52 less yds per carry. Offensive total yds varied by only 12.5 yds per game with the vast majority of it coming on those extra 5 rushing attempts per game.

Red Zone (TD) offense was similar with the Browns rated 14th and MIN rated 10th. The huge difference is home and away Red Zone (TD) Offense. In 2019 at home, the Browns were the 4th most efficient team in Red Zone (TD) Offense in the NFL at 67.86% while MIN was 17th at 57.69%. On the road in 2019, the Browns were a meager 45.5% and rated 25th in the NFL while MIN was 14th at 62.86%.

The Vikings did heavily utilize two-plus tight end sets throughout the season. Minnesota ran 550 plays (56.7 percent) with multiple-tight end formations, which was second-most in the league behind Philadelphia who also had serious WR issues in 2019. Twenty-eight of Minnesota's 45 offensive touchdowns were scored when there were two tight ends on the field.

The Browns ran 293 two-plus tight end sets throughout the season. Cleveland ran 30.4% with multiple-tight end formations yet managed more yds per carry from their RB's and nearly matched total offensive yds (12.5 yds per game difference). Some of the disparity can be attributed to Thielen missing 6 games and Diggs missing 1 game. With weak backups, this could account for the need to go to multiple TE sets.

Though I would expect a slight increase in multiple TE formations, I don't believe the increase will be noticeable. With upgrades at RT, TE, FB, and possibly LT with a full year of Hunt available, The Browns 4th rated yds. per carry rush offense should be equal too or better than 2019 without sacrificing 3-WR sets. The Browns have more of a question at WR3 than multiple TE sets. Another concern would be that MIN TE Rudolph's targets went down from an average of 98.3 the previous 3 years to 48 in 2019.

More games played than Clowney, FAR fewer tackles. It tells me that if he isn't getting to the QB he isn't doing much else. That highlights my concerns about him (aside from the exorbitant cost of two starters plus a fat contract). It's in all of his scouting reports.... best "pure pass rusher", but a liability in the run game.

You can't just give up two starters AND create a hole in the run game. Yes, you might get better pass rush stats, but you have to have balance AND value.

He fits the perfect age range this FO would pursue... productive young player seeking his first real contract, but that Franchise Tag is a killer. I can't even think of any player who was Franchise Tag'd, then traded, and then produced up to the value of the trade cost (plus contract). The value just isn't there.

Colts Rumors: Malik Hooker's 5th-Year Contract Option Declined by INDY

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2890...declined-by-ind

That’s kind of surprising. I knew they were rumors about them trading him before draft.

I didn't realize that he's still with the Colts through 2020, so he won't be available until next season. In other words ... never mind.

Just a couple of items, Ngakoue is rated the #4 DE in the NFL. His pass rush capabilities would be a huge asset to our secondary. His pass rush capabilities would be a huge asset to Garrett. Ngakoue's asking price is similar to Clowney's except a long term deal would make much better sense than a 1 or 2 year deal on Clowney due to the age difference. Vernon and his 15.5 million is expendable with Ngakoue where that's questionable with Clowney making Clowney/Vernon about a 36-million dollar price tag for the position - REALLY?

As for his run defense and/or tackles, if he sets the edge and forces the plays inside then he's doing his job without making tackles. If he engages the o-line preventing them from getting to the second level so the linebackers can flow and fill the hole then he's doing his job without making tackles. D-line tackles are a little overrated because those usually mean they are beating the block. However, if the linebackers are consistently being blocked then your d-line is not doing their job of keeping the o-line from getting to the second level.

Now this may just be me but when I see a team go out and sign a FA like the Browns did with Hooper making him the highest paid TE in football, I don't suspect they plan on giving 50% less targets than the year prior. Also, if the Browns thought that there was any chance of Njoku being that player they wouldn't have sought out Hooper. I also believe that the more Njoku's poor run blocking is exposed the less playing time he will see.

The chances that Njoku sees 56 receptions like in 2018 is a pipedream. I suspect he'll get about 35-40 targets. Unloading Njoku now while teams are still looking at 2018 because of his injury last year makes perfect sense. If he is worse than 35
targets then there is no chance in hell that the Browns can unload his 6-million dollar contract in 2021.

All TE's combined in MIN last year had 83 receptions on 105 targets. Hooper himself had 75 receptions on 97 targets and got the highest contract for TE's in the NFL. I highly doubt that the Browns will do to Hooper what Ski did to Rudolph where Rudolph only saw 48 targets with 39 receptions. If they do then someone should be seriously questioning how we could have the highest paid TE in football getting only 39 receptions.

Trading Njoku is not weakening the TE position, it's actually already weak with him playing there with Hooper on the team because he's weak at run blocking and his targets will be very minimal this year.

Ngakoue's price is similar to Clowney. . . but we'd have to give up assets to get him.

I hope we stick w/Vernon and say no to Clowney and Ngakou.

It's confusing the stands that are taken on this board at times.

Signing a Clowney to whatever is going to cost somewhere between 18-20 million. Even at a 1-year or 2-year deal that's a huge investment. Signing Clowney and keeping Vernon now makes that investment somewhere between 35-37 million for a single position. Numerous posts here talk about the future and what the Browns might have to pay (blah Blah Blah) but don't hedge a moment about investing 35-million in the off side edge rusher for this year.

Now, in the last 3 years Vernon has missed 11 games. Production wise he's had 17 sacks and 66 tackles. All things considered, that would mean the Browns can expect 12 games out of Vernon with 5.6 sacks and 22 tackles. 15.5 million for that type of production is hugely over paying. Considering the weakness at LB and safety at this point, going into the season with Vernon when you could upgrade the position that would help out those weak areas seems like a valued investment especially when you consider Vernon is in his final year in Cleveland. Like Vernon or not, he has not lived up to his value cost.

The future: in 2021 off season, the Browns will have 4 question marks on offense. Upgrade at RG, do they exercise the 5th year option on Mayfield, RB with Hunt being a FA and Chub going into his final year of his contract and do they make a huge investment at RB, and did the Wills move work.

Defensively the Browns have huge issues. 1 safety opening for sure assuming Delpit becomes a starter. Whether to exercise the 5th year option on CB Ward. Garrett in his final year of contract and an extension. All LB positions are questionable at this point. Off side DE open if not addressed this year. DT Larry Ogunjobi will be a FA. This means the Browns could have 6 of the 11 defensive positions as question marks in the 2021 off season.

So player value becomes important at this stage. Vernon has no trade value (no one would trade for his contract with his past production) but Vernon's team value is a release with no dead cap and using that money to upgrade the off side DE now.

Njoku's team value now is in question. Signing a Hooper to the highest deal for a TE and expecting him to share his targets and receptions is highly unlikely. I don't believe you sign a guy to the highest deal in football for a TE to cut his targets by 50%. That would mean that Njoku's main contribution would be blocking in 2-TE sets which is the weakest part of his game outside of his drops. It also means that his targets will drop to around 30 at best. Is 3-million this year and 6-million next for a weak blocking TE with reduced targets a good value move? Today, Njoku's value is based on his 2018 production since he was injured for most of 2019. Thinking that Njoku will have 56 receptions for the 2020 Cleveland Browns is a pipe dream. Njoku's team value at this point is trade capital. Not making the move this year will eliminate any trade value in 2021 if he posts the projected numbers above. No team is going to trade for TE #2 and
his 6-million dollar contract for 30 targets and 25 receptions or so. Also, is it a good value move for the Browns to keep a poor blocker for 25 receptions at a 6-million dollar tag in 2021? Njoku's biggest value for the Browns today is trade value and should be used to bolster the defense if available.

But, we *should* trade Njoku, the starter we'd draft in 2021, and take on $20 million per year for a guy that has a history of NOT doing exactly what you yourself say "all he has to do in the run game". He was a starting DE on one of two teams that were worse against the run than Cleveland at 5.1 YPC. Sorry, that stats gets owned by the DLine. If they do their thing, then the LBers actually have gaps to fill. The simple fact that he has more snaps than Clowney but what... 60+ fewer tackles? That is a CLEAR indicator that he either runs himself right out of plays, or plays literally run right past him. I'm still waiting for anyone to show anything to the contrary. I don't have PFF Premier, so I cannot look up his situational stats, but all signs point to him being a liability in the Run game, and that goes back to his college days as well. That leopard hasn't changed his spots.

If Clowney as a long-term (3-4 years) option isn't an option, I'm all in favor of just sitting tight with Vernon.

It would be REALLY nice to lock up a long-term deal with a DE this year so that it is staggered with Garretts coming next year, but it MUST be the right deal for the right player. It makes zero sense to bring in a player that is a liability in the run after spending the offseason focusing on getting better against the run.

Vernon is a lot better DE than our fans give credit to. He is oft injured lately so he would need a guy to take reps and keep him fresh. But he can play that edge and is very good. Maybe all we need is Clayborn to give him that rest.

I am very curious how fast Jordan Elliot is now that he lost 30 pounds? Is he a kid that can take some reps at DE???
jmho

David Njoku and what? That’s the problem.

I think that your conclusion is predicated by this assumption, that imo is a false assumption. Hooper is quite capable of working his route tree from the inline TE postion.

j/c...

Date of birth: May 14, 1983
So next week he turns 37

What a machine Gore is .. so iimpressive

Loses early taking the weak way around mediocre blocking. I think those stats are very telling, especially across an entire season. Regardless, Clowney still has some gas left and some freak type physical moments. I think he is approaching sensible values now, at least for a short timer. JMHO. Really might be worth our look if still available.

Just to keep things on the up and up and have a decent exchange, you are not talking to someone who just got off the bus. To make a comment that Ngakoue can't defend the run or that he'd be a liability in the run game is ridiculous.

Let me explain:

Garrett who the Browns are about to give a contract of about 25-million per year averaged over the last 3-years a whopping 2.11 tackles per game. Approximately 1 of those 2.11 tackles was a sack (.87).

Clowney averages a whopping 2.39 tackles per game and .52 of those tackles per game was a sack the last 3-years.

Ngakoue averages 1.80 tackles per game and .63 of those tackles per game were sacks the last 3-years.

Vernon (the heralded run stopper here) averages a whopping 2.0 tackles per game of which .52 are sacks the last 3 years.

Clowney 2.39 tackles per game
Garrett 2.11 tackles per game
Vernon 2.0 tackles per game
Ngakoue 1.80 tackles per game

So basically you are trying to tell me that Ngakoue would be a determent and a step backwards in the run defense because the Browns would sacrifice a half tackle or less per game?

The real numbers come from your DE's getting after the QB. That tells a completely different story over the last 3-years.

Garrett age 24 30.5 sacks 65 QB hits
Ngakoue age 25 29.5 sacks 71 QB hits
Clowney age 27 21.5 sacks 55 QB hits
Vernon age 29 17.0 sacks 44 QB hits

Again to prove my point.
2019 totals for tackles:
Garrett 20 2.0 per game
Ngakoue 37 2.3 per game
Clowney 21 1.6 per game
Vernon 20 2.0 per game

Your assessment of getting Ngakoue will set back our improved run defense is without merit. What he would bring is a youthful player that has a solid history of getting after the QB which would be a huge benefit to our young linebackers and young secondary. In retrospect, so would Clowney but his numbers have fallen each of the last 3-years and his demands are similar to Ngakoue who would also be a long term option where Clowney would not.

I am not arguing for or against any of the players that you have listed. I will only say that using their number of tackles is a misuse of stats.

Things like setting the edge, drawing double teams, providing outside containment, getting penetration that causes a back to go off course, etc are all important when evaluating how good an Edge guy is against the run.

I retract some of what I said... the numbers you had posted above were apparently career tackles, not just 2019. I didn't catch that and thought the massive gap in number of tackles between them was for one season. That is what drove my logic & conclusion.

I still assert that a declining Clowney is still a better overall player. The difference being that Ngakoue is likely still on the ascent while Clowney is at the top of his game now. I absolutely cede that if all else were equal in terms of availability, Ngakoue is the one to go after... however, he is franchised. That changes things completely.

A healthy Vernon brings everything Ngak has, except age (and health). His last year in NY at RDE, he had production comparable to Ngak and in his last full season ('16) he had numbers Ngak has never sniffed. However, that's the gigantic question mark... can he stay healthy? Either way, this is his last year in C-Town so we do have to look replace him.


You make a lot of sense with the choice of player, but not with the cost. Forgetting about cutting Vernon for the salary; giving up whatever starter we would get with our 2nd next year AND Njoku - who absolutely still has value to this offense - is just too much and I do not think it makes us better enough in 2020 to do it. The only real value in it comes in 2021 when we already have that DE spot locked up at the time we are about to give Garrett a giant deal, but meanwhile we lost one offensive weapon - who, by the way, we'd end up playing against this year. I do not like that idea at all.

In the end, I don't think any of it matters. Following today's story about the extension talks, I think they might have decided to use all that cap we have this year not to bring in a new, shiny player, but get Garrett locked up this year and we'll be looking at a rookie DE opposite him next year..... or, we get Yannick, or Leonard Williams, or another DE then as a free agent, but most likely a rookie to keep salaries under control because then we will start needing to look at new deals for Baker, Chubb, etc...

thank you for the stats and numbers but that only tells me who I should get in my Strat-O-Matic game of old (is it still around?).

We got film to tell us who what and where. Not in on those stats is who makes penetration and forces the runner to change his running path and others make THE TACKLE. Or a DE taking on blockers with that penetration which frees up a LB to make the tackle. There is so much more than pure numbers which I love to get when I cannot see for myself.

Garrett and Vernon I saw every snap they took. I saw a lot of Clowney as my best friend is a Seahawk fan and they played a lot of late games after the Browns. So I saw a few games there. However this kid Ngakoue, I'll be honest, I really saw little of his games if any at all. So the numbers help me to imagine his game and they don't look all that great compared to others. But we need pieces of the puzzle and not ALL STARS.

I'll let Berry and Ski get the pieces of the puzzle that they feel will get the Browns playing as a team.

I'm giving them their free ride to success and won't tell them what is best for the team, I believe they know the answer and have a PLAN.

jmho

j/c:

DeShone Kizer is available. The Raiders cut him. Oh, the memories.

Yes, I was sorry to have correctly projected him to be a bust. The only saving grace (somewhat) was the fact that we only used a 2nd and not a 1st round pick on him.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/browns-sign-15-undrafted-free-191643824.html

Browns sign 15 undrafted free agents:
CB A.J. Green, Oklahoma St
RB B. Herrien, Georgia
LB S. Ajayi, Liberty
S E. Benton, Liberty
WR J. Bradley, Louisiana-Lafayette
WR T. Brown, Colorado
QB K. Davidson, Princeton
OT D. Dorbeck, Southern Miss
CB J. Houston, Baylor
RB B. LeMay, Charlotte
S J. Moffatt, Middle Tennessee State
DE G. Obinna, Sacramento State
OT A. Taylor, South Carolina State
DE J. Whatley, South Alabama
TE N. Wieting, Iowa

I know we’ve got 2 great backs, but I’m intrigued by those RBs

The more I read about AJ Green...the more I don't understand why he went undrafted.

Me too ... if for nothing else for next year keeping one or both around on the PS.

Herrien or another UDFA type is probably what we will be able to afford if and when we extend Chubbs contract.

He was basically a career backup to first and second round talent ahead of him on the depth chart. Many probably would have transferred out of the program for a better oppritunaty in his shoes.

That tells me that he has the makeup of an unselfish team player.

Herrien runs like a back that is some 20 lbs heavier and tested out simular to that of Kareem Hunt coming into the League.

I'm not saying he will be the next Kareem Hunt, but that they have similar physical attributes.

Good points. And sometimes when RBs are backups in college they actually do better in the NFL

Destroying A Quarterback, The DeShone Kizer Debacle

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/browns-mav...e-kizer-debacle

DeShone Kizer was unceremoniously waived by the Las Vegas Raiders this week. The Cleveland Browns second round pick of the 2017 NFL Draft is 24 years old and he's been on three teams in four years. While first round picks Myles Garrett and David Njoku are having their fifth-year options being picked up by the Browns and Jabrill Peppers by the the New York Giants, Kizer's career in the NFL may well be over, going out with a whimper; a combination of a poor decision and gross mishandling by the team that selected him.

Kizer opted to declare for the 2017 NFL Draft with the possibility he could be a first round pick. And going in the second round certainly wasn't a failure. It was probably still early for him, but it was far more reasonable. He wasn't ready to be in the NFL. He wasn't particularly good in college at Notre Dame. Kizer had great size, mobility and tools for the position including a strong arm and some truly special throws along the way that made him an attractive prospect. Kizer was selected by a team that seemed to understand where he was in his development, save for the head coach, Hue Jackson.

When he was drafted, Sashi Brown, the Executive Vice President of the team at the time noted the team intended to let Kizer sit and develop, trying to put him in a position to succeed. But as minicamps and training camp got going, Hue Jackson kept talking up Kizer's ability and progress, which proved to be hollow excuses to tell everyone how great he was as a coach.

The team released Robert Griffin III, the team's veteran quarterback option they signed the year before who missed much of the year due to injury. Josh McCown was released as Jackson thought he'd be a really great coach, but didn't think he was good enough to play any longer. McCown signed with the New York Jets and had a year the Browns would've killed for in 2017. Efficient, he helped a pretty bad Jets team win five games of the thirteen games he played that year.

Last but not least, the Browns let go of Brock Osweiler. Osweiler was acquired in a trade with the Houston Texans as a massive salary dump that allowed the Browns to move up from the fourth round of the 2018 NFL Draft to the second round. Osweiler was already fully paid for the 2017 season, regardless of what the Browns would do. Cutting him didn't save the team a dime and keeping him wouldn't have cost them a dollar more. Nevertheless, cut.

Despite the fact he had a very young, very raw quarterback, Jackson and the Browns released any meaningful potential support system within the quarterback room in the form of veterans, moving on from Griffin, McCown and Osweiler in favor of second-year quarterbacks Cody Kessler and Kevin Hogan. Kessler was a third round pick by the Browns in 2016 and Hogan was a fifth round pick in 2016, picked by the Kansas City Chiefs, who they had waived.

Jackson believed in his ability to teach and coach Kizer so much that he thought he was all that Kizer needed. In some ways, it seemed Jackson wanted his voice to be the only one they heard. David Lee, the quarterbacks coach of the Browns in 2017 came out and said he thought Kizer wasn't ready. Along with the front office, one of Jackson's own assistants didn't think Kizer was ready to play. Jackson ignored them because he knew better. Lee was let go after the 2017 season.

Kizer had a pretty good debut in preseason against the New Orleans Saints. He completed 11 of 18 passes for 184 yards and a touchdown, including a 45-yard touchdown pass to Jordan Payton and a 52-yard pass to Richard Mullaney. It was against a third string defense, but it was a positive step for Kizer. It should've been the type of competition he faced that year and little else.

Kizer went 8 for 13 for 74 yards and ran for 35 yards against the New York Giants the second week of preseason, playing against the second string. Despite actually doing very little, the fanfare and anticipation grew. Against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Kizer completed just six passes on 18 attempts and threw an interception.

This should have been the wake up call Jackson needed. However talented he might have thought Kizer was, it was clear he wasn't there yet, which is no shame for Kizer as a player or Jackson as a coach. But Jackson had gotten so drunk on his own ambition and unwavering belief he could will Kizer into a franchise quarterback, he couldn't turn back and announced him the starter for the season.


Jeff Schudel
✔
@jsproinsider
Hue Jackson: "If I'm worth my salt as a coach, I'll get the most out of DeShone Kizer." #Browns

View image on Twitter
32
3:22 PM - Aug 28, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy
29 people are talking about this
For so much of camp and early into the 2017 season, Jackson was effusive with praise for Kizer, saying he had the tools to be a franchise quarterback and that he was the man to get that out of him. After the Pittsburgh Steelers game to start the season, Jackson was convinced everything was going to click into place and Kizer would get better and better throughout the year.

Going 20 of 30 for 222 yards with a touchdown and an interception in a game the Browns lost 21-18 to the Steelers, it seemed like maybe Kizer could figure it out. Unfortunately, that game was arguably the best Kizer played that season and the rest of the year was a slow, painful trickle downward.

And while Jackson's delusions with Kizer were misguided and he was setting this poor 21-year old kid to fail as a rookie, it didn't make Jackson a bad guy. It wasn't until Jackson came to the conclusion that Kizer wasn't the franchise quarterback he built him up to be, that he proclaimed to the world he could create that he became one. When Jackson made that turn, it revealed a truly ugly side.

Kizer didn't make any proclamations. He was humble throughout the process, just trying to find his way in the NFL and adjust to that life. It really did seem too much for him initially, because he was a 21-year old kid born in Toledo and had the hopes of an entire fanbase resting on him, amplified by his coach out there with a megaphone telling anyone who would listen how great he was going to be.

Fans are allowed to be unrealistic and overzealous in their belief that a rookie quarterback who completed a third of his passes against an NFL defense could go out there and start. The head coach wasn't. And the head coach wasn't supposed to actively destroy any potential support system around him in the process, save for himself.

That's when the yo-yoing began. Kizer was benched. And at that point, there seemed like maybe an epiphany was reached, that Kizer wasn't ready, that he needed to learn and simply adjust to this new NFL reality. But as losses piled up and Jackson realized that the quarterback room he assembled was woefully inadequate to the task of starting, he went through the quarterbacks like a batting order, going from one to the next.

These three young quarterbacks were just trying to survive and they are being put into and taken out of games to the point where it lost all meaning. It might as well have been a random number generator each week.

The Browns finish 0-16. All these quarterbacks were effectively damaged goods in Cleveland for it and moved to other teams, almost as acts of mercy. Kizer was traded to the Green Bay Packers for Damarious Randall. Kessler was traded to the Jacksonville Jaguars for a conditional seventh round pick in 2019. Hogan was waived.

The NFL is a cold, often unforgiving machine that rolls on regardless of how many young men it chews up and spits out along the way. It's possible that Kizer was never going to be successful in the NFL based on his skill set and the issues he had coming into the NFL. His stints with the Packers and Raiders could be evidence of that. It's also possible that Kizer could've been drafted to a team with a coach that cared about the person first and the player second. And had he been developed for a few years, he'd be 24 years with three seasons under his belt, just 11 months older than the top pick of the 2020 NFL Draft Joe Burrow. There might be a team that would be excited to have him. Regardless of the truth, DeShone Kizer deserved better than Hue Jackson.

Thanks for the article ... he was thrown to the wolves too quickly ... plus, we sucked and he sucked.

Looking back, it was an awful season in every regard

He should have never ever ever came out .. i said it before his junior year started and then he stunk the joint up ,,, CFRS and I argued over weather he’d come out at the very beginning of the season ... i said he wasn’t ready and cfrs said any QB rated to fo top 5 always comes out ...

Well i was wrong and CFRS was right in that he came out ... he was way wrong about why he came out as he no one had him going in the 1st rnd much less top 5 ....

I blame Brain Kelly for why he came out .. Kelly was brutal to him .. after almost every series he’d scold him when they came off the field ... 1/2 way through the year Kizer started avoiding Kelly coming off the filed only to have Kelly find him and scold him wherever Kizer ended up ..

Kelly’s behavior on the sidelines that year he was told by our pencil necked geek AD to behave better (one of the few things I agreed with the little worm of an AD they have) ... it wasn’t just Kizer he embarrassed ... anyone that made a mistake faced his wrath coming off the field that year ...

I actually thought he was worth the move up to get him ... i didn’t know if he would be any good but dude that wrote this article is whacko if he thinks Kizer didn’t have a great year the year before he came out ... he lost all cred with me when he blew off what Kizer did taking over for Zaire after the 1st or 2nd week and led us to within a close loss to Clemson at there place in a monsoon from a birth in the BCS ..

Kizer had a GREAT YEAR and stunk his last year .. dude saying he “wasn’t particularly good at nd” ... he had a hell of a year in his 1st year and it was far from not particularly good ... dude also said he thought he may go in rnd 1 ... ... no one had him slated there ...

Then again .. it’s from SI and they’ve not been particularly good for over 3 decades now ... that thing is a rag ...

j/c:

Pete Smith articles should not be allowed on this site. The guy is a hack and makes things up constantly. The crap about Sashi and Hue is not true in regards to Kizer. In fact, Hue wanted to start Osweiler and when the change was made, Osweiler said "ask the GM" when questioned about why he was not a starter.

Take a look at Pete Smith's picture next to his article. The dude is a freaking joke. His stories are full of lies and his goal is to mislead people.

This image is always w/Pete Smith's articles. Again, this dude is a joke and his articles should be banned from this site. I posted one of his articles once because it said Sports Illustrated. I looked more closely and saw it was that dude and apologized to the board for posting such nonsense. Here is the image:

You do know the picture is from Monty Python, and probably a joke, right?

Also, where was all this reported that Hue wanted Osweiler? Nate Ulrich reported at the time 3 separate times Osweiler said he would respect Hue's decision, and once to ask the GM.

I know about the image, but how in the hell does that speak to credibility? I am not going to battle w/you. I offered my opinion and I also know for a fact what Osweiler said when he lost the starting job. Have a nice night.

You used the picture to help say the writer is a joke. I was just pointing out that the picture itself is probably a joke.

Also, I agree that Osweiler said it. He also said that it was up to Hue and and that he would respect Hue's decision.

All I am saying is you can't state for fact that Hue wanted Osweiler and Sashi overruled him.

Why are you arguing about this? Seriously? The dude is a hack. Almost every single article he writes is BS. What legitimate reporter would use that image w/his articles. He makes things up. I get that it is important to you back Sashi and trash Hue and myself...........but that doesn't change the fact that Pete Smith is a hack.

I think the article lays it on way too thick at times. Look dude, we get it... you're not a fan of Hue Jackson.

But when you boil down the article to its hard points, the guy is mostly right. We 100% ruined Kizer. We handled him in the absolute worst way, and then invented newer, badder ways to handle a rookie QB. The cycling through the QBs each game, specifically, didn't age well. Bringing in RG3 when you KNEW he was going to get injured (he did). Letting McCown go to be a positive vet presence elsewhere.

So bad.

He lays into Hue quite a bit, but at the same time I think he exposes just how much Hue deserves to be laid into. It seems that he single-handedly created the situation to ruin Kizer in his attempt to "fix/coach" Kizer up.

If he got that one so consistently wrong over and over again, how many other positions had similarly ego-driven disasters created by him?

I constantly tried to support him, and I was always looking for the up-side in his moves and giving him the benefit of the doubt; mostly because I was already three coaches deep into being sick and tired of our constant change and I wanted us to just stick with something for once.... but, Hue really seems to have exemplified our "rock bottom".

Kizer was never going to be a successful QB in the NFL. We did not ruin Kizer.

He was bad in college at Notre Dame.

He was bad with the Browns.

He was bad in Green Bay with Aaron Rodgers as a mentor.

I agree. I don't think we "ruined" Kizer. I just don't think he had the football smarts [not the same thing as academic intelligence or IQ] to be very good. He would do some good things and then make the dumbest decision possible. Usually in the red zone.

In order to ruin something it had to be good to start with. I don't think Kizer qualifies.

In those contexts, we maybe didn't ruin him, but we absolutely ruined any chance he had of ever developing into anything more than he was in this league.

I guess if one feels a QB's career is decided by or hinges on his first 18 starts that's what it means.

Alright, alright. 'Ruin' isn't the right word to use.

Put in the worst possible situation to succeed is more accurate. Getting rid of all of the vets just looks horrible.

j/c...

Feel bad for the kid.

We seem to have our coaches making bonehead moves alot. I hope it stops with Ski at the helm. Hue went All In with the kid and I doubt our GM made that move. As it was still with Hue at the Helm and with Ownership behind him. Deciding on the starting QB had to be Hue's call.

One of the weirdest moves was the all in no holds bar commitment with Tyrod Taylor who honestly was not much better than Kizer. We make an overall #1 pick with Baker and then make a decision to not have him take ONE SNAP in Training Camps and Preseason with the Number Ones.

Thing was Hue was suppose to be a so called QB guru. And yet he really was the opposite. The Kizer move and possibly the FO had to take some blame there as they completely dismantled the QB room especially with letting McCown go. But there was those articles stating Hue wanted him to coach but not be on the roster as backup QB.

We were lacking overall talent as we were in that total rebuild but we made it even less by some of the decisions we made. Unless the plan was to get the overall #1 pick 2 years in a row. If so...job well done

Source: The #Saints have cut guard Larry Warford, who will be one of the top FAs available.

@RapSheet

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/saint...lary-cap-space/

Larry Warford for RG?

Warford was drafted in the 3rd round in 2013 - he's 28. Here's NFL.com's scouting report from his draft year:

Analysis

Strengths
Big-bodied guard prospect with lower-body girth. Quick feet for his size, keeps them moving in pass protection to mirror his man and can adjust quickly to ride defenders penetrating gaps out of the play. Also plays with knee bend and has arm length to maintain distance from his man, will reset and punch with one or two hands throughout the play. Capable of getting off tackle block to pick up delayed blitzer. Flashes quickness to trap and get around the tackle to lead run plays. Gets down quickly to cut block and take out linebackers in the hole on traps. Hustles downfield to help out ballcarriers when needed. Plays with some attitude, brings some pop to his punch when helping his tackle against a pass rusher.

Weaknesses
As one might imagine for someone of his size, Warford is not tremendously explosive out of his stance. He also struggles to react quickly enough to defenders who are simply diving at his legs. For this reason, running directly behind him on short yardage situations is not as successful as one might expect given his size. It's also possible that quicker defensive lineman in the NFL with active hands could give him problems due to this deficiency.

NFL Comparison Marshal Yanda

Bottom Line
Warford translated his power as a drive-blocker, unexpected foot quickness and downfield hustle into a fantastic, decorated college career and should win his share of battles against NFL linemen when able to get his thick body moving quickly off the snap. That size, strength, and those surprising nimble feet should help him nab a draft slot in the top half of the draft and step into a starting lineup at the next level immediately.

He’s not a scheme fit for the ZBS and you wonder if there’s more to the story than just a cap casualty ... but I’d at least think about it

If he’s not a fit why think about it? Also, are you sure he isn’t a fit? I know next to nothing about him. I know that the Saints drafted the Ruiz kid from Michigan so maybe that is the reason he is expendable.

Jake Burns
@jake_burns18
·
2h
Don’t quite know if the scheme fit is there but he’s a quality Guard.

This is my reverse jinx.
Quote Tweet

Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet
· 3h
Source: The #Saints have cut guard Larry Warford, who will be one of the top FAs available.

I don't know much about the dude and I won't make stuff up, but I can tell you this.............New Orleans OL impressed me like no other this year.

I mean.....it is certainly worth a consideration. I suppose it depends on what Berry thinks of the current options we have now, specifically Teller and Forbes. Forbes had some hype to him before falling to injury.

I'd prefer Zeitler.

We can only spend so much on the OL. We have 3 FA and a 1st round pick already on the OL. Unless Warford would be inexpensive, I just can't see them spending more there. Plus, we have several interesting candidates at the RG spot, in Forbes, Weller, and Nick Harris, who we drafted this year.

LOL............this won't go over well, but I don't really care. I read this forum and it's like some posters think we need to have an All Pro at every offensive position just so Baker can be decent. The number of excuses for the guy are mind-boggling. One might think that it's the first overall pick who should be elevating the play of others, rather than the other way around.

And I know you love Baker, YTown...........but, my comment was not directed towards you.

This board is insane.

Agreed.

LOL...............you might be indicting me, but still, I agree. LOL

Me thinks the Ravens will jump all over Warford - now that Yanda retired.

I will say this about Josh Rosen, as a player he has all the skills, as a person to lead a NFL team, there are problems that became apparent.

It is similar to a Manziel situation, except Rosen was a more prototypical QB.

thats the rumor on Twitter based on Ingram’s comments

That would suck if the Ravens got Warford.

Warford was a ProBowler the last three years.

We have $39 mil in cap space. He could be signed for around $7. Sure take a look. Investigate.

If you can improve the team at reasonable cost why not?

You look at your plans for RG. You look ay Warford and determine if is a good move.

I would love to see a like type linebacker become available.

I certainly would look into it also. The O-line is the most important unit on the team. A strong O-line that can open holes for the running game and really protect the QB is invaluable. It can make an average QB look much better and keep a D off the field. We all have seen what an average or worse O-line can do to an offense. JMO

I'm not understanding why people think Warford isn't a scheme fit for a ZBS when, AFAIK, New Orleans runs a ZBS and Warford was a Pro Bowler the last 3 years in that very system?

Exactly - I think the OL is plenty good right now - but if you can improve it at a reasonable cost then do it. And to be honest - we could do the same sort of thing we did with Conklin - good salary, big guarantee, short contract. Puts him back onto a contract close to his prime making it very attrctive for him, and frees us up to sign our young talent when the time is right.

I have also seen comments about us not wanting to invest too much into one position group .. but we’ll see

I agree

Too late for that!

Players likely to be cut

Some interesting LB names on there...not sure if any of them are a scheme fit. I have a feeling the Browns pick up someone from this list before the season starts to add some competition and a veteran to the LB group.

If they gave a trophy for most unused cap space, we'd be the freaking Patriots ... perennial champs. For me personally, the two units I don't mind being over-invested in are OL and DL.

we will certainly be paying Garrett very soon ... 25 million per season

Not coincidentally we would also win the trophy for worst drafting.

We would probably be able to trade for Avery Williamson from the Jets, but I'd be surprised if the Dolphins moved Raekwon McMillan (even if he only stays as a back up, he is cheap on the final year of his rookie deal).

Downside is, Williamson has had a high level of success (prior to last year's injury) as a 3-4 ILB.

I'd wouldn't be against randomly offering a 6th for McMillan though, just to see if the 'Phins would consider it.

Yep that is why us fans wish to get better talent... man get off the Baker crapola its nausiating and totally unfounded!

You have a funny way of burying the hatchet. I thought you meant that we would try to let old differences go and try to treat each other civilly. Instead, your version of "burying the hatchet" is to place it directly in the back of my skull. Have a nice life, tab.

Can Clowney and Griffin just sign with someone already?

Should he have prefaced with "this won't go over well, but I don't really care"?

Larry Warford

I agree adding Peters would be smart.. depth.. experience.. rotate..

All upsides.

Perfect spot for Peters and Wills.

Peters to start and Wills to quickly succeed him.

We drafted as high as we did because we are prepared to start him day 1. He will have a very good, experienced LG in Bitonio next to him, and a good blocking TE in Hooper. (as well as us having 2 good blocking RBs, and I suppose a FB, as well)

I don't think we need him.

Robinson is the bar that has been set. As bad as he was last year, he wasn't terrible. I think Wills is better than Robinson right out of the gate. That's good enough, and he will get better as we go.

I am in the sign Peters camp.

I am not confident that Wills is simply going to step in and be as good as Peters day one.

I think he will get there, but he can use a little mentoring.

Joe might help for a while, but he isn't going to be there every day like a teammate is.

J/c

If we can get Peters for 1-2 years I think we should do it. That 6th OL is so important ... and he’s one of the best. If we want Wills to make the transition, perhaps having him learn from Peters and Thomas .

We’ll see how serious we are about it

I agree, and as I said, I like the idea of Joe helping the kid, but Joe isn't going to be there every day. Really teaching people takes more than a day or two here, a day or two there.

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

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

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

That's a possibility. Playing RG is the easiest spot on the line. Far easier than playing LT.

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

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

Actually I doubt that Peters is in the Browns picture.

I just don't see it. They want Wills to play.

Warford is the more likely. But my guess is someone would pay him more than the Browns would.

Roster moves from this point will more likely center upon the bottom 15 of the roster. Try and improve depth. Get guys you feel have a chance to develop that other teams had to let go.

The exception here is a vet linebacker who fits Woods scheme.

Re: Warford. It was mentioned above that he brings about $7 mill in salary. It's actually $8.5 mill with bonuses, etc. AND he is an UFA next year. Teller, who had some nice games last year, will carry a salary of about $725K into this season and is signed thru 2022.

Putting aside for the moment that Warford isn't even a great fit for us (just look at his film. He played in a totally different system), the contract and $ makes it a real poor deal for the Browns. We take him on and that's $7 mill less we have to spend in salaries for other positional groups like LB, safety, etc, or even another guard if a cheaper one becomes available when teams cut veterans.

Peters could be a different story, because he is a better fit and might be willing to fit his contract better into the Browns' plans. My only concerns are that 1) You have to burn muscle memory into Wills playing LT. There is no other substitute. And having him play behind Peters would stunt Wills' growth.

2) Would Peters be willing to come here for a year? I don't think so. When a player is on the backside of his career and wants to play for a still longer time, like Peters indicated, the last thing he wants to do is to sign a 1-year contract. He wants to lock himself into as long of contract as he can. But the Browns aren't going to offer a long-term contract for Peters at the money he has been making to have him back up Wills after one year. It just doesn't make sense for them. It seems to me the only instance where Peters would come is if he is willing to make less money for a longer period of time in a back-up, spot starter role.

I think it really depends on what the actual expectations are this season. I know the line is always "SB or bust" but the actual expectations that help guide the plan are usually different. If they expect to make the playoffs and put together a decent run, then a vet LT (and on the cheap, at that) makes a bunch of sense. If the plan is more focused on the long-term, then I don't think taking reps away from a guy that needs to get comfortable in a new spot on the line makes much sense, when you step back and really look at the situation.

I like having him play guard even less. I'm a little gunshy about moving new, highly-drafted linemen all over the line.

Good stuff here the past many posts...including yours above.

I tend to think more like Vers (insert vomit icon ) on the belief that a top 10 overall pick should step in as a starter. I'm a little conflicted with that belief because it MIGHT indicate that the pick in question was a "need" over "BPA". (Whatever BPA means.) And therefore was chosen to fill an immediate/starting hole. Anyway...

I'd be ok with Peters. I don't want him per se, but he'd be better than any other 3rd OT on the team.

Lastly, I'd like to read the OL guru comments on Warford. I've read comments elsewhere that dovetail with yours above...and I've read others that he'd be s fine fit here.

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

Just defending my boy Baker who you trash in 50 posts and then I finally say man that's enough and make a post. Burying the hatchet - that is to not go after you with every post. But I cannot sit and not do anything when you are talking so negatively about a player that I think is the guy who will be taking us to the next level.

So as usual, you will take your ball and go home. Man you create this environment with AGENDA posting. Bury the hatchet doesn't mean you get a FREE RIDE in your opinion. Bury the hatchet doesn't mean I have to just let you insult and in many cases regarding Baker, LIE about him and what he is or isn't doing.

In this case you are claiming that if a team tries to improve their O roster it is because of the lack of skill of our QB...really and you are upset if I call you on it.

Have a nice life??? Grow up - you act like a little spoiled kid.

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

Good catch. I don't know what I was thinking. I guess I wasn't
Maybe I should have my coffee before coming here?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

j/c

A friend of mine and I were texting about this very thing yesterday. The signing of Peters. Now I'm fully aware that Wills is certainly no Joe Thomas.

But in both cases they were top 10 draft picks. So I'll pose a very similar question to the board that I posed to him with a little more detail.

How much more salary cap do you think this FO will put into the OL than they already are? Who was Joe Thomas back up and how much did they pay him?

They drafted Wills to play LT. It's not like they feel he is a project because you don't invest a top 10 pick in someone you consider a project.

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

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

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

I think that's probably true, with the difference being that since he has no contract there is now more flexibility, e.g. put most of the money upfront so in 1-2 years when our payroll explodes he doesn't affect it much,lock him into a couple of years, etc.

Then the difference between his contract with Peters is a lot less, and whether or not we pursue Warford is more a decision re: position and suitability than financial, imo.

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

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

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

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

As long as Peters is ok with playing a "back up" role should Wills prove to be good enough to start...then bring Peters on board for depth, if needed.

Problem is, such a transaction would violate one of depo's "golden rules"...Don't Pay For Depth...

Good article here: https://www.si.com/nfl/saints/news/three-reason-for-larry-warford-release

Summary-
1) Warford dropped off considerably in his pass-protecting the last part of last season, though his run blocking was superb.
2) Warford struggled with getting outside when asked to pull around the edge or getting to the spot in a timely manner on screen passes (?!!?) Warford has never been a top of the line athlete, but his weight and conditioning were both issues with the coaching staff last year.
3) His replacements are more athletic
4) Contract

1), Contract

Well it worked with "T-bone" Tony Jones.
... ...

In normal circumstances yes. I agree with your statement. A #10 draft pick should start day 1. But, with Covid there are many voluntary and mandatory camps rookies are missing this year. It might be much harder for them to be ready on opening day. Our front office may be thinking this way and have the salary cap to act. This is unusual times.

I would give Peters one year and $6 million today and not look back. We would have a player that we know can start day one at left tackle and if Wills is ready a great backup. I don’t see the downside.

(I’m not too into this kind of stuff but Peters is supposedly a great locker room guy too.)

I never thought about it from that aspect. That makes a lot of sense.

This is the first I've read about what Peters may actually want/need to sign with a team. I'm not wild about anything longer than a 1-year deal, and I suspect the same opinion from the FO given what they've said about Wills.

I'm all for adding a stabilizing vet presence and making the rookie earn his job vs just handing it to him. The $$ just has to make sense, though. We have some large contracts coming due very very soon.

Good point. I did not consider that.

I don't think it is automatic. . . I am not making light of the challenge. I am simply stating that the majority of what I saw, read & heard from Joe Thomas and Scouts - was Wills should be able to make the transition. And JT may have a propensity to praise players once they are Browns. . . he made his assessment and call on the OT's BEFORE the draft.

With regard to the plan - the FO has said the plan is unequivocally to have Wills start at LT. Again - not making an assumption that he can - just stating what they said. . . . as others have mentioned - you don't draft your RG at #10 in the draft.

I agree there is some risk. I agree that having a contingency would be smart. But my belief is Wills is going to transition and rock it.

J/c

I dont know this, but I’d assume Peters is looking for a 2-3 year deal ... which would be an issue for us (or any other team). If he was good with a 1 year deal for like 7 million? Yeah I’d be all in with that

What his demands are in the length of the contract will have a huge impact on any possible decision made.

The issue is and still remains that Wills moving from RT to LT is a huge move that is rarely done with even rarer success. Let's be candid here for a moment. When Wills was at Alabama he played RT. As a freshman, he was a backup at RT with a So. right handed QB in Hurts. As a sophomore, Wills got the RT job because Womack broke his ankle in spring drills and reinjured it during summer camp. At that point, there was zero thought of switching to Freshman Tagovailoa in 2017, 18, or 19 for that fact because they had Hurts. If Wills had LT capabilities he would have been moved as a freshman to back up 1st Rd pick Jonah Williams. Instead they had freshman Alex Leatherwood back up Williams. Leatherwood is projected to be a top 10 pick @ LT in next years draft since he decided to return to Bama for his senior year. Though Wills did indeed get to protect Tagovailoa's blind side because he was a LH QB, that surely doesn't mean he has LT capabilities. Alabama surely did not believe he had those skills. Now, sitting him to learn as the #10 pick doesn't make any sense at all. You don't draft a player at #10 to sit and learn. You draft a player at #10 to be a day 1 plug-n-play.

Now the Browns do have options like moving Wills to RG which would be a smooth transition for him. It does address a problem area but it also makes the pick a real stretch because you just don't draft RG's at #10.

The Browns could sign Peters to play LT or go with something else but IMO Wills is going to have a very difficult time making the switch not to mention the amount of work he has missed already. The Browns went into the draft with 1 idea for the 1st round and that was to address the LT problem the team had. The FO has decided Wills is that guy. It just seems very strange that the Browns would draft a player that has never played a single down in HS or college at #10 to play a position considered the 3rd most valuable on the team. I hope they're right but I think Wills raises more questions than answers going into 2020 at the LT position.

I am amazed how good Jason Peters PFF numbers are for a 38 year old tackle.

OVERALL
82.4
PASS BLOCKING
87.3
RUN BLOCKING
72.5

I might normally agree, but these young guys are missing a lot with things closed down. I don't think it unreasonable to think it might start slow for the rooks, and even the vets. We lost on an extra 2 weeks of coaching new staffs are granted.

IMO the Browns did not use the 10th pick in the draft on a player to sit that player, or to move him to RG. Wills may have some hiccups early, but I'm thinking (along with people much more qualified than me - Bill Callahan, Joe Thomas) that he will be fine at LT. I think the money would be better spent on Warford at RG, if at all.

I agree. The Browns did not draft Wills in a vacuum.

They have a well respected OL coach. They have connections to Saban. They have Joe Thomas to provide input.

That does not mean a rookie at a new position under current conditions will not struggle some.

However, he was the second tackle taken in the draft. By all accounts he has the skills to make the transition to LT.

He will have a very good veteran player next to him. A lot of time and coaching will go into his preparation.

With all that said if you can improve the team without killing cap space on a one year deal for any player at any position do it.

We have money. The goal is to win.

If it were Freddie and Dorsey still in charge, I might be a little more worried. I'm confident the new crew have a plan and will stick to it. They can give him help with Hooper. They can lean on the run and playaction. They probably are not going to send him out to block Von Miller one on one while they drop back for Hail Mary heaves every play.

There may be some growing pains, but it won't look any worse than the game last year when Robinson got ejected.

Wills sounds like he is (and will be) putting in the work, and he has the tools.

I'm more curious what the plan is for the UDFA guy from South Carolina State(?).

Peters would be nice to have. As others have mentioned, though, our contract ideas probably don't matchup with his.

I agree ... last year’s offense could not have been worse. Penalties, no discipline, no plan, didn’t play to our strengths, etc

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

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

Roughly the same as Zeitler, I believe. I’d rather he stayed at RT, personally. But, Baker did better with a stout G/C/G line, so, maybe?

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

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

I always think back on the “Ballad of Baker” video that has been posted here and there, and the way he looked so much better with that Bitonio/Tretter/Zeitler line.

No

I think it was pretty apparent last year that Baker is much better with the best OL possible (imagine that lol) and multiple TEs. However/whatever our FO has to do to make the OL the best is ideal

Gosh, I thought Hyde was washed up here lol

I think Hyde is much better than people on here give him credit him for. He seems to perform wherever he goes. He does switch teams a lot. It seems some players just get into this scenario where that is there NFL lot in life, a long career on many different teams.

Hyde had a solid season last year with the Texans.

Didn't he have over a 1,000 yards or am I mistaken?

All I know is that he is not nearly as bad as some folks claim.

2019 Carlos Hyde 245 Att. 1,070 Yds. 4.4 YPC 6 TD's

Thanks. Sounds like a solid season to me.

No doubt he was way more effective last year as the two previous ones. IIRC he was asked to drop weight after he left here (and KC?) and it benefited him.

If you go back and watch games from 2018 when he was here, he looked way slower than last season. Could be the weight or injury

Carlos Hyde 2018 Cleveland Browns 172 ATT. 571 Yards 3.3 YPC 5 TD's

so a way worse average and half the yards on only 70 less carries

Sean O Hagen, of strongman, is 31 ish,(1990), I think someone should bring him to America and tell him to play football,
This tatooed, jovial, Irishman, looks a lot like Joe Thomas (in the face), in interviews and is a lean 440 at 6'11, with relatively good knees and noticeable stamina.
One year flyer, could find somewhere for him.

Jason peters is a beast if his knee is healthy.

Why do I feel like we are going to be facing Flacco when we play the Jets?

Also..

Sign Clowney and Keep Vernon

Here's the full segment - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVX9KsC_qwI

Or, if they sign Clowney, cut Vernon (opening up $15M), extend Myles and allocate much of that guaranteed money in 2020. Hell, even make some other extensions.

Now that's what we call efficiency. I like Hyde, and giggles aside, how might he perform with this line?

Just to ponder while we wait for pigskin to break out, I think that Cam Newton is just as available as JFF. Coincidence? Anybody want to take a flyer? Not me, just asking. The irony is overwhelming sometimes.

Great Memorial Day, dawgs! Be safe. Hope the barbecue is pure bliss.

I liked Hyde. He was a pro, acted as such, and brought it every carry. As I like to say about guys like him... there's room on just about any roster for a guy like that.

Even here, I don't think he was all that bad. He just happened to be the guy that was getting carries instead of Chubb. He was a little on the slow side, but he ran hard and always fell forward.

One memory I’ll have of Hyde is when he returned from the hospital and scored 2 TDS vs the Jets ... that was cool

That whole night was a great memory.

Remember when Chubb carries the ball three times for 105 yards against the Raiders and Hyde got 22 carries and we lost.

Good times!

Chubb needs to learn to block better before he gets a larger role!

Hue followed that Raider game up with three carries for Chubb the next week and only three carries again the week after that.

Finally, Dorsey stepped in and Billy Beane'd Hue.

and Hyde was painful to watch if you go back and look

Hue wasn't calling plays that season. Haley was.

Dorsey Billy Bean'd Haley!

The weird part was that Dorsey also signed Hyde.

Why is that weird?

Because he obviously wanted Hyde to some extent and then quickly moved on from him when Chubb wasn’t being used.

I was always under the assumption that they didn’t think Chubb would be as ready as he was. IIRC Chubb was even poor in the preseason games ... so I think they thought it was prudent to have Hyde be the place holder .. obviously that wasn’t really needed

I think it became more of a thing of the GM vs the coaches. This made sure Dorsey got what he wanted. And it worked out. Hue and company were fired shortly thereafter. That also worked out but it should have happened the season prior.

Yeah, I always thought Dorsey was forcing Hue's hand. If you aren't going to play the better guy, I'll make it so you have no choice.

I can only imagine Chubb was showing things in practice in addition to the games that supported this. And possibly Hue was trying to be loyal to a veteran.

I was at that game and couldn't believe that Hue didn't put Chubb in more.

Hyde reminds me of that saying by Madden, though I forget which running back he was referring to. But it's something like 'Hyde will get you 3 yards when you need 2, and will get you 3 yards when you need 4.'

I think it was our own Leroy Hoard.

"If you need 1 yard, he'll get you 3. If you need 5 yards, he'll get you 3."

I don't miss Hyde.

Loved Leroy Hoard. was excited when we drafted him.

Hyde was a good player...

Chubb is much better...

jmho

Clowney:

Talk about mixed feelings. You watch his highlight tape and you see what talent he has; and you see what he can do.

Then you watch more tape and you see what he actually does and you wonder. Why doesn't this guy bring it more?

It makes me wonder what would he do opposite Garrett? Myles is a hard worker. A physical phenom. If Clowney was in the building. If he worked out with Myles and practiced with him on the field would that motivate him more? Would he take Myles's presence as a direct challenge? Would he not want to be showed up?

They have the same agent. Both were the first picks in the draft. There would have to be some level of competition to show who is the man.

It is enticing to think about them rushing the passer.

Honestly I just don't know. I would have to have great intel on who is Clowney? What makes him tick and what is realistic to expect from him now?

FA has not gone the way he imagined. He is not going to get what he was expecting. The reason is. The production is not there.

Maybe this is the time to get him?

Hard to say.

If the $15M he made last year in his free agent walk year didn't inspire him to greater heights then I'm not sure teaming up with Garrett is going to motivate him. On the other hand, PFF seems to think he had a good year in 2019 despite him not producing stellar stats, so I could be off base.

Clowney didn’t have many sacks but his pressure rate and play against the run were very good. He’s not signed yet because his health is a huge question and teams can’t get him in for a physical with their doctors. I would expect to see him signed soon after team facilities open back up.

I agree, he was very disruptive in the run game.

If there is a weakness in MG game it would be his contribution in the run game.

He also was on the team with JJ Watt.

That is why I would need deep intel. I have reservations.

He is a good player. The Seahawks offered him a deal.

It is a matter of knowing what you will get. Basically do your homework on the guy.

Physically I am pretty sure he can get checked out.

This is a wait and see right now. He is on the radar.

I don't think this is only about his health. He was healthy last year. I think the amount of money he wants combined w/his inconsistent motor/production are larger factors than his health concerns. I am not saying that health concerns aren't a factor, but I think one poster is overstating them and apparently ignoring the other factors.

Hey I agree. If you read my previous post.

I lay out all of what I feel about Clowney.

The physical is the least of my concern because that is the easiest to get cleared.

I know you do. That is why I replied to you. LOL

This could be an overstatement on my part but I think Clowney is physically dominating but mentally weak. We have had too many of those types of players and I think that is one of the reasons we have struggled for as long as we have.

to explain, I think physically he has the capability to be a HF performer. But I never got the impression that he loved football. Never had the desire to be great other than to get paid. That may be an unfair sttement on my part but it is the impression that I get from him.

Many agree with you.

If he matched his talent to production; he would get paid the amount he thinks he should get.

Clearly teams do not feel that way.

I think a lot of Texans fans felt that way for a while

I wonder if there is something where we're greasing the skids a bit since he has the same agent as Myles. Basically, the agent would be getting to double-dip from us, so perhaps we're working a way to take care of him for more favorable dealings?

Not too likely, but it's a hopeful possibility.

Well then. . .

This was kinda alluded to this morning on 92.3 The Fan w/ a Charles Robinson interview. That the Browns are the ones with the interest and have stayed steady in their belief in his market value and have not wavered from it.....also, Clowney is still shopping hoping for a better deal referencing the figure. .

Interesting. I'd be curious to see the terms of the deal offered.

There really is no hurry.

Until camp breaks no drop dead date.

Maybe he is just waiting to see if a team will give him more.

I would not speculate that he doesn't want to be in Cleveland. I think he wants to get the most he can.

I don't hold that against him.

I don't want him here because I don't think he wants to be here. If true that Cleveland has offered him the most money and he is still waiting, then that says it all. If Cleveland is offering him a short-term contract and he is waiting to see if he can score a long-term contract somewhere, that's a mistake. With soft demand for his services he is taking a big risk with that strategy.

If Cleveland offered him a longer-term contract, and he is waiting for more $ the same thing applies. Soft demand isn't going to get him a long-term contract for more $ most likely. He is probably waiting for a one year 'prove it' salary with a team he likes.

His smartest move would be a one year contract here with Myles on the other side, so he can have a good year and then cash in next year with a team he wants. But where I am sitting, he doesn't even want that. Screw him.

IF its a one year deal I’m all in ... anything longer than that ... say hello to Jamie Collins Jr. ...

Meh... a 3-year deal (possible out after 2) would still be "off-the-books" by the time we have to get Baker his big money deal.

Not to mention he'd be a 30-year old FA when it ended.

I’m kinda with this thought as well ... and I bet our FO is looking at a big paycheck for 1 year as well

No offense but I don't think you know his reasons.

Not fair to speculate. "If" we have the highest offer on the table? Maybe he is waiting to see if someone will pay more?

We just do not know.

If he was quoted and came out and said I don't want to play in Cleveland. Then that is different.

I am sure the Browns know what is happening if anything at all. I mean they are in negotiations with Myles on an extension. Same agent.

I am actually indifferent. If they sign him ok. If not ok as well.

Well, if I don't know I like to miss big.

I'm about here with ya.

j/c:

I hope we don't sign him.

I don't hold it against him if that's true (Cleveland has the competitive offer and he's waiting to see if there's more). That's the name of the game with the big FAs. Dude wants to maximize the money. Just how it is... he's not unique in this regard.

If the Browns really want to bring in extra talent, I won't complain. I just hope that the contract is manageable (and more from a duration perspective).

I concur doctor

maybe it's because he doesn't want to play in the shadows of a better player on the opposite end of the line.

AKA Kyrie Erving Syndrome

You are still thinking along the lines of the old salary cap restraints. off the books by then would be good. But now, if w don't use it, we can carry it over which several years ago we couldn't.

Players hire agents. They pay them to get the best deal.

Players listen.

They should. They paid for the advice.

Of course they should. However, this goes back to what we were discussing earlier. The biggest reasons why Clowney is still available are his asking price and his motor. Not his health concerns.

Houston traded him because they could not agree on a long-term contract. That is about money. Seattle hasn't kept him because of his contract demands and overall production. There is a pattern here.

Again, I think it would be a mistake for the Browns to sign him. He is a good player, but he would be too expensive in comparison to his production.

I agree ... especially if wed lock him up for more than a year or two tops ... he has a tendency to coast and skate by when he’s comfortable

He's pretty much been on "show me" seasons for the last two years. Both teams moved on from him. Just say no.

He played opposite Watt, and was the same player.

So here's the situation. Most of the people on this forum don't think he is worth the money. And judging by the reaction of most of the teams so far, they appear to agree. You can say that they are holding back for whatever reason, but a guy who supposedly has that much talent doesn't hang from a branch this long.

The one exception is the Browns. They have supposedly made the best offer so they value him at this time more than others. Not saying this in order to point fingers at them but this is definitely a data point to remember when we evaluate the front office in the future. How Clowney performs this year will tell a bit about our front office.

my thinking is that he has Kyrie Irving Syndrome. He wants to be the man and doesn't want to live in the shadows of Garett

I'm not sold that what Clowney does or any other free agent NOT signed by the Browns does elsewhere proves anything about the Browns. Each team is a separate and unique organism. All teams have variables including: contract terms (which might differ depending on where he signs) defensive scheme, surrounding talent, schedule, offensive productivity, veteran leadership and organizational stability among other factors.

If you can't control for these conditions, and you can't, it's just an elaborate conjecture about what he would do in Cleveland.

Judge the Browns by wins and losses, if you are inclined to judge.

Agreed.

Unless it’s a one year contract, not interested.

Too many guys to pay to be paying a guy with injury/work ethic questions. Esp one who seems to be unsure about being here.


I’m still of the team building mindset to get let Vernons contract run out, replace it with Garrett’s, and hope to get a DE in the first round next season. I’m convinced that Depodesta and Berry plan to rack up comp picks by letting these 1 year contracts expire and doing very little in FA next year


There’s plenty of our own players to re-sign instead of giving a multi year contract to Clowney. As Diam said earlier, I get the feeling of Jamie Collins Jr with this one.

Well if we do go and get him - between he and Vernon we got one full time DE opposite Garrett due to health issues.

jmho

He's available for a reason
He's a name. He's a 1st RD bust.
This regime hopefully has learned the errors of past regimes
If this was George Farmer he would have had Clowney signed and way overpaid
For him

He's not a bust. LOL........this place is crazy.