Flyin J Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I really think we swung and missed on Byrd. Dansby and Whitner compared to Jackson and Ward are an upgrade for now but theyre older and about the same price. All we did was replace two pretty good players. Still have tons of holes, who do we need to get to call free agency successful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remarker Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Respectable with the potential for overwhelming success. The Browns of the Pettine/Farmer era are clearly in the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Whitner for Ward is a wash, but replacing a pro-bowl level safety that doesn't want to be here for one that does on similar money is decent business. Dansby looks better and cheaper than Jackson, but older. I'd say it's a successful step 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammertime Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Whitmer will be an upgrade over Ward without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml1138 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I think there's gotta be some value in the attitude of the players they picked up vs the ones who just left. I think you will find yourself surprised at the Browns D this year with Whiter and Dansby over Ward and Jackson. Byrd was expensive. He just signed with NO for 6 years, $54 mil, $28 guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 They need to get Mack locked up. They signed Trufant to add depth to the CB position, but I could see one more addition in the secondary. They need to get a WR b/c the Bengals are going to keep Hawkins. They need to get more depth at LB. It would be wise to add a RB into the mix as well. So far, a success though. We filled 2 of our 3 biggest FA needs... hopefully Mack doesn't get an offer we can't match... We haven't made any moves that are going to affect our draft plans... yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 We've filled the holes created by letting players go. So we still have the original needs on D - a bigger CB and a better ILB. Outside of that, most other starters should be joining on offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml1138 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I think they will try their best to get Mack solidified. Letting him go out there and find the best deal he can and then seeing if they want to match that....makes sense to me over offering him too much right away, just to get him to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin J Posted March 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I think they will try their best to get Mack solidified. Letting him go out there and find the best deal he can and then seeing if they want to match that....makes sense to me over offering him too much right away, just to get him to stay.My question is, if he gets an offer and we match, does he have to sign it? Can he go back and say screw it give me the tag at that point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml1138 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 My question is, if he gets an offer and we match, does he have to sign it? Can he go back and say screw it give me the tag at that point? I don't think so. That's part of the point to the transition tag, I believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 My question is, if he gets an offer and we match, does he have to sign it? Can he go back and say screw it give me the tag at that point? No I think he has to sign, basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Only concern about Mack is if his agent is clever enough to work out a contract with someone else that Cleveland can't match or won't want to match. This is what his agent has said on the matter: Mack's agent, Marvin Demoff, told TheMMQB.com's Peter King that he believes he could craft a contract that would be tough for the Browns to match. "I'm confident we can come up with a structure that would have a reasonable likelihood to not be matched by theBrowns -- and would be in full compliance with the collective bargaining agreement," Demoff said Monday night. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000332797/article/alex-macks-agent-browns-cant-match-all-offers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John.R.Brown1968 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Only concern about Mack is if his agent is clever enough to work out a contract with someone else that Cleveland can't match or won't want to match. This is what his agent has said on the matter: Though it would create a massive hole, if Mack doesn't want to be here, let him walk. I don't want a bunch of malcontents taking up roster space. Slide Greco to center, and then upgrade both guard positions - one in FA, and one through the draft. I want players on the Cleveland Browns that area not only quality players, but they WANT to be here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John.R.Brown1968 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Though it would create a massive hole, if Mack doesn't want to be here, let him walk. I don't want a bunch of malcontents taking up roster space. Slide Greco to center, and then upgrade both guard positions - one in FA, and one through the draft. I want players on the Cleveland Browns that area not only quality players, but they WANT to be here. Or trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I really think we swung and missed on Byrd. Dansby and Whitner compared to Jackson and Ward are an upgrade for now but theyre older and about the same price. All we did was replace two pretty good players. Still have tons of holes, who do we need to get to call free agency successful? But Dansby and Whitner are the spackle for two holes filled. We need them and we got them. Probably with a slight upgrade imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEinCHI Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I really like what they did yesterday... front loaded contracts so we did not overpay in the long term, solid/elite players who are coming off their best seasons, versatility and attitude... we now have absolute dawgs on all three levels (Taylor, Dansby, Whitner) in addition to some real talent (haden,sheard,bryant,mingo) and people who know how to win (Krugar,Whitner) - if they somehow find a way to bring in Revis I think we could have a top 3 defense. This is all before the draft....where we have 10 picks...this is going to be a fun year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml1138 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Only concern about Mack is if his agent is clever enough to work out a contract with someone else that Cleveland can't match or won't want to match. This is what his agent has said on the matter: When they first announced placing a transition tag on Mack, I had to look up what a transition tag was. I guess it got out of hand about 10 years ago that teams would structure contracts that couldn't be matched by the original team. Things that had to do with playing time and starting games. I didn't quite understand it all but supposedly the NFL has put a stop to that nonsense. So I think this means Mack's agent is threatening to find someone who will pay Mack bigger numbers than Cleveland is willing to front. I'd like to see him stay, but if he really wants to leave then let him. The other players that want to be here don't need that negativity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 When they first announced placing a transition tag on Mack, I had to look up what a transition tag was. I guess it got out of hand about 10 years ago that teams would structure contracts that couldn't be matched by the original team. Things that had to do with playing time and starting games. I didn't quite understand it all but supposedly the NFL has put a stop to that nonsense. So I think this means Mack's agent is threatening to find someone who will pay Mack bigger numbers than Cleveland is willing to front. I'd like to see him stay, but if he really wants to leave then let him. The other players that want to be here don't need that negativity. As far as I understand it teams would heavily front load the contract - like, a $50m, 5-year deal, paying $30m in the first year that the current club can't afford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEinCHI Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 When they first announced placing a transition tag on Mack, I had to look up what a transition tag was. I guess it got out of hand about 10 years ago that teams would structure contracts that couldn't be matched by the original team. Things that had to do with playing time and starting games. I didn't quite understand it all but supposedly the NFL has put a stop to that nonsense. So I think this means Mack's agent is threatening to find someone who will pay Mack bigger numbers than Cleveland is willing to front. I'd like to see him stay, but if he really wants to leave then let him. The other players that want to be here don't need that negativity. I am not so sure he wants to leave...I think that is just the narrative they want to get out there so other teams drive the price up thinking the browns only want people who want to be here.... If he signs the tag (gets 10mil for 1 year) than I guess that narrative still has some merit, if he signs long term deal - it was all just fluff... either way he is a pro and will play out through next year making an obscene amount of money for a center... lets just hope if he really does not want to be here, the browns can start winning and those feeling start to change...winning cures everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 As far as I understand it teams would heavily front load the contract - like, a £50m, 5-year deal, paying $30m in the first year that the current club can't afford. I don't know if these players would accept their pay in pounds sterling g. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I don't know if these players would accept their pay in pounds sterling g. I suspect they would, to be fair, but fixed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I suspect they would, to be fair, but fixed now. Maybe when the NFL places that expansion team in London? You, sir, have the power.....what would you name the London NFL team? The Lords and Ladies? (Don't laugh, that was the name of my son's college's sports teams) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Make-Believe Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I'm going to say no. But that's while realizing it's only the first day and there's plenty of time left in this offseason. Big thing is, the Browns only filled two holes that they had just created this offseason. I don't know if Whitner is better than Ward, but I'm pretty confident that he's a better fit for Cleveland than Ward was. Dansby I get the feeling is the opposite. Better player, worse fit than DQ. Even if it is a net gain, it's two steps back and three steps forward. Certainly better than not going forward at all, but the Browns are a 4-12, not a 12-4 team and minor upgrades are not what is required. Difficult for me to share enthusiasm at this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remarker Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Maybe when the NFL places that expansion team in London? You, sir, have the power.....what would you name the London NFL team? The Lords and Ladies? (Don't laugh, that was the name of my son's college's sports teams) The Jaguars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 The Jaguars No, they will move to LA to become the Leopards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John.R.Brown1968 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I think it's mixed. The Hawkins offer was a bit puzzling, given the price tag for a slot receiver with no real track record. Bungles are going to match the offer anyway, so it's a moot point. And, while I like the signings, I think the Dansby/Whitner options are a bit of wash. Both are better players, but they're also older, and they cost us a little more cash. Such is life when trying to bring free agents to a perennial loser. Would be okay with the Tate signing if it's an incentive based deal. He has to stay healthy. Then draft a middle round back. Add possibly one FA guard and WR ( Edelman/Sanders ), and then draft one of each. I like Decker as a # 2, but he will want # 1 money. A guy I haven't heard a peep about is ILB Rey from Shitanasty. I think he could start next to Dansby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I have a good one: The London Knights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 Maybe when the NFL places that expansion team in London? You, sir, have the power.....what would you name the London NFL team? The Lords and Ladies? (Don't laugh, that was the name of my son's college's sports teams) I'd have to go Bulldogs, Knights or something like that. Maybe Redcoats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remarker Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 I'd have to go Bulldogs, Knights or something like that. Maybe Redcoats? The Dangerfields Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 As far as I understand it teams would heavily front load the contract - like, a $50m, 5-year deal, paying $30m in the first year that the current club can't afford. Actually, it would probably be the opposite. Teams know we want to extend contracts for Haden, Cameron, and probably Taylor if not others. So, if they offered a back-loaded contract it could affect our ability to sign those guys. No team can offer more this year than we can, so loading up the front of the contract won't really affect us. Of course, if a team offered a HUGE guarantee number, we would also probably not match it b/c of our future FAs as well... All-in-all, he is going to be overpaid, and unfortunately it will probably be by us. He'll take the $10mil this year, and bolt to a contender next year. Just my thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.