Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Browns FA questions linger


ballpeen

Recommended Posts

Will key Cleveland Browns stay or go? A lot hinges on labor talks

By Tony Grossi

December 31, 2009, 7:19PM

 

The futures of some key Browns players are hinging on current labor negotiations taking place between league management and the players union.

 

At stake is the free-agent status of players such as running back Jerome Harrison, linebacker Matt Roth, fullback Lawrence Vickers, safety Abe Elam, safety Brodney Pool and linebacker D'Qwell Jackson.

 

All have contracts expiring after Sunday's season finale against the Jacksonville Jaguars.

 

In a normal year, all would be unrestricted free agents, free to switch teams without the Browns being compensated with a draft pick because they would have completed their fourth NFL season. Roth and Pool, in fact, are completing their fifth season.

 

But the league's collective bargaining agreement needs to be extended for the same rules to apply. Otherwise, the league salary cap will be disbanded for 2010 and new rules take effect. And one rule calls for players to need six years of NFL service to be eligible for unrestricted free agency.

 

So the Browns players are in a group of 212 fourth- and fifth-year players leaguewide who would be restricted free agents instead. Restricted free agents can change teams, but their existing teams require draft-pick compensation if they leave. Thus, their ability to move is restricted.

 

"It would be tough," said Hank Fraley, the Browns' players union representative. "There's a lot of issues with it and a lot of concern about being restricted or unrestricted. That stuff's going to be worked out."

 

Ordinarily, teams proactively re-sign desired players in December before they can test the market in free agency. But uncertainty about the labor situation has stifled activity on new contracts.

 

"Without any clarity, it's hard to know who's going to be available and who on your team will be here or not," Browns coach Eric Mangini said. "I'm sure everybody's going through the same thing. You don't know what the landscape is, so you have to plan for all of it."

 

Further complicating the situation with the Browns is the uncertainty of Mangini's immediate future. He will meet with incoming team President Mike Holmgren on Monday or Tuesday to determine whether the two men can co-exist.

 

"It would be ideal if the same guys come back. It's who I know and who I like," said Roth, who has four sacks in five games since being claimed from Miami through waivers. "We've gotten on a little run, but . . . it's out of our control."

 

Another player who says he wants to stay is Vickers. But the fullback readily admits he was hoping for the leverage of unrestricted free agency in contract talks.

 

"I want to be here. I like being here," Vickers said. "It's just a time for me to get my just due. I've been putting out, putting out. I've started three of my four years here, ended up starting at the end of my rookie year. What else can you ask of me? And I've excelled every single time. I feel like I'm the best fullback in the game.

 

"I don't want to go anywhere. But if I have to, I have to. As a man, you have to do what's right for you and your family. If this is not the place, then I have to look at my options."

 

The CBA talks limit those options.

 

Harrison might be the most interesting case among the Browns.

 

A training camp knee injury reduced his effectiveness early in the season. Then, after a 121-yard rushing effort in Game 4, he was hardly used for nine successive games. Harrison and Mangini had a meeting to clear the air. Since then, Harrison has run for 286 and 148 yards in successive games. He carried the ball 34 times and a franchise-record 39 times, establishing himself as a feature back with some team, if not here.

 

But Harrison most likely won't be able to test his market value, if the rules change.

 

"I let my business people handle that part. We've talked a little about it. But the goal right now is just to finish up strong with another win," Harrison said.

 

Asked if he has convinced the Browns he can be the guy, Harrison said: "I'll let them control all that. I can't control who likes me, who don't like me."

 

Elam was one of 10 ex-Jets Mangini brought to Cleveland. Pool's future has been uncertain since he went on injured reserve after suffering the fourth concussion of his NFL career. Jackson has been unseen since he was put on IR with a shoulder/pectoral injury Oct. 20. Jackson's agent was seeking a new contract before the 2009 season.

 

Most of the players are finishing up their rookie NFL contracts, which means they are earning the NFL minimum salary for fourth- and fifth-year players ($620,000).

 

Many players and fans think a financial windfall will take place if the CBA is not extended and the salary cap is abolished, freeing teams to throw money at free agents. But the opposite may occur because the little-known salary floor is also abolished and teams may spend under what they are now required to spend.

 

Talks are proceeding between management and the union. An extension would have to be in place by March for the cap and the current free-agency rules to be in effect for 2010.

 

"I don't know if it's going to happen before March," Fraley said.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another player who says he wants to stay is Vickers. But the fullback readily admits he was hoping for the leverage of unrestricted free agency in contract talks.

 

"I want to be here. I like being here," Vickers said. "It's just a time for me to get my just due. I've been putting out, putting out. I've started three of my four years here, ended up starting at the end of my rookie year. What else can you ask of me? And I've excelled every single time. I feel like I'm the best fullback in the game.

 

"I don't want to go anywhere. But if I have to, I have to. As a man, you have to do what's right for you and your family. If this is not the place, then I have to look at my options."

 

 

This translates into making a million a year isnt going to be good enough, I want two matching Ferraris not one. It could always be worse Vickers, you could be working 50 hours a week and only making $40,000 a year like most of the people who will spend half they're check to watch you play a game you spend 20 hours a week preparing for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This translates into making a million a year isnt going to be good enough, I want two matching Ferraris not one. It could always be worse Vickers, you could be working 50 hours a week and only making $40,000 a year like most of the people who will spend half they're check to watch you play a game you spend 20 hours a week preparing for.

 

Regardless of scale, people are always going to seek the best pay for their labor.

 

This is Vickers money contract which will take him to year 8-9 of his career. Fullbacks don't usually play more than that, so he would be foolish to not seek as much leverage as he can and seek as big a contract as someone is willing to pay.

 

It isn't his fault people are working 50 hours a week for 40K.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like both roth and vickers... but VICKERS NEEDS TO STAY. He is a major part of our run offense.. watch the game film. This man just likes to go out and knock people down.... If you notice one thing, our great run success has come when we have vickers lead blocking... not one man backfields. Would also like roth to stay as well...

 

EDIT: Vickers wants to stay, but can you blame someone for leaving if he was going to make more money doing the same job???? If you worked at company A, but company B offered you more money to do the same job, wouldn't you leave A for B?! I sure would... remember, football is still a business.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will key Cleveland Browns stay or go? A lot hinges on labor talks

By Tony Grossi

 

It's hard to believe with the economy the way it is - this kind of shit is going on. As much as I like our finish this year, I mean WHY are these guys making so much more cake than Clay Matthews, Kevin Mack, Ernest Byner, Mike Johnson, Webster Slaughter, Bernie Kosar, Brian Sipe, Ozzie Newsome, etc. I know I'm not watching a better bang for the buck today. I don't mind an ENTERTAINER that wants to entertain makign BIG money but we've been watching 4-12 football for quite some time now.

 

Seems like we've been waiting an eternity to get THESE types of players back. As soon as we're getting a hint that things might be changing for the better - this is just another disturbing interference we're getting boned with. When is double digit millions enough? I think the PLAYERS created their own nightmare which has CAUSED salaries first round picks to sky rocket their expectations. If you disagree with that statement, show me 1 first round draftee that doesn't have a greedy Drew Rosenhaus type attached at the hip whoring after an enormous signing bonus. Just 1. Sure the owners PAY it to reinforce it BUT where has the player's union ever given you the idea they want money slated fopr each round going down? Understanding the avg length of career doesn't exceed 3 years when you factor in all those picks that never got off the practice squad or to week 1. They're never gonna be able to get enough players to feed into the old - let's back the 10 year vets because there's just not enough of them to give that any foundation.

 

HALF these agents suck. You want an example? What has Donte Stallworth's agent done for him or guiding his career after the signing bonus last year? Alot of these kids going from the hood to big money don't need agents - they need freakin Case Managers. Understanding cashing a check doesn't mean understanding society or socioeconomic culture shock when one goes from poverty to lottery winner. And then there's the Rosenhaus clients like Me-o that get their dream salaries and decide it isn't enough 1 year later so they causetrouble hoping for more money our out of the contract. In our case, we've drafted the Tom Condon Qbs who made more cake than some small countries and they've been showered with excuses since their contract ink dried. I've never seen Tom Condon - I just have a visual he wears a turban and flip-flips. He may not be this way with front offices that have more competance than our's had. In hind sight, who was the genius in our organization that scouted McNabb and Couch? It's not like Philly was the place to play heading into 1999 either.

 

Long story short, NFL get this nonsense settled because "It's a Wonderful Life" you have.

- Tom F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does everyone feel about Dq Jackson's return?

I like his skills but not sure he warrants top ten dollars, which I think he is demanding. The fact that he has not been seen since his injury speaks volumes.

 

I wish we had seen more of Veikune and Maiava to clear up the LB picture before going into negotiations with DQ

 

I am confident and hopeful that we can retain Roth and Vickers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of money other people make is of no consequence to me. If they can parlay their skills into a substantial paycheck, then more power to them. I'd do the same if I had the chance. If it's okay to tell someone else they make too much money, then it's okay for them to do the same to me. There's no guarantee anyone else would give me more for what I do, given the chance. Granted, they make a lot for what they do but they have short careers and not all of the players make multi-millions of dollars. Their bodies are beaten up in the process and their careers can end at any moment because of injury.

 

I would like to see the Browns hang on to the best players so the team can improve sooner rather than later. The $$$ end of that process is not up to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Kathy. As I said, it is all a matter of scale, and these guys are hitting at a time when things are pretty good for them.

 

It's not their fault that what they are able to do pays more than what you and i are able to do.

 

It's just the way it is and always has been....and always should be.

 

 

If people want to blame anybody, blame the fans. They are the ones who pay for tickets and fuel the whole thing.

 

Curlers don't make much money because people aren't willing to pay to watch them.

 

It's about demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how much more entertaining this game would be if each player only got paid if they won? It should be if you dont go out and win then after the game it's back to the 9 to 5 at the Chrysler plant to put food on the table. You would think people would realize that some of these players go soft after they sign for big money and still get paid even if they drop every pass that comes there way. Say you just signed an 8 year deal for 15 million, do you honestly think you would go out on the field and give it your all knowing that if you dont you will still get that money? I know I would think twice before taking that big hit that could turn me into a vegetable for the rest of my life. Im just waiting for the day America and the rest of the world get sick of watching a bunch of rich, whiney, athletes play a game while they sit at home trying to figure out how to make ends meet every week. I think this is why watching college football can be more entertaining most of the time. Everyone is playing there asses off to try and get that huge contract. Once they get drafted and sign on the dotted line it's a different story.

 

Personally I dont think ANY of these guys should be making more then $100,000 a year but that's just me. I can understand that they're risking an injury that could cripple them for the rest of they're life and ruin any chance they have at getting real job so they need something in the bank just in case but what about all the people with real jobs who put they're life on the line every day? Take the military for example. They're out there willing to lose everything for less then $2000 a month. Seems to me they should be making the millions protecting the country while the people playing a game should be making that $2000 a month doing what they love to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I dont think ANY of these guys should be making more then $100,000 a year but that's just me. I can understand that they're risking an injury that could cripple them for the rest of they're life and ruin any chance they have at getting real job so they need something in the bank just in case but what about all the people with real jobs who put they're life on the line every day? Take the military for example. They're out there willing to lose everything for less then $2000 a month. Seems to me they should be making the millions protecting the country while the people playing a game should be making that $2000 a month doing what they love to do.

 

All of that sounds great but you obviously don't understand how the world and business works.

 

Counting guys who float in and out of the league, there are only 2000 people able to play NFL football. The demand is there and the supply is slim....thus....big bucks. Anybody who knows someone down at the union hall or at a higher position can work in a car plant. Young, old, weak, strong, skinny,fat, smart, not so smart....and there is a world full of people like that

 

$100,000 a year...are you nuts, that isn't a lot of money. Any average Joe can make that with pre-planning, just a little luck, and lot's of effort .

 

If we could defend the country with 2000 people....sure thing...pay them millions, otherwise, you need to come to grips with reality.

 

 

But then, you probably think tickets should cost $6 a seat and you should get a bag of popcorn and a beer for $1...

 

Dream on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was up to me I would rather play a game and make millions so I could retire when im 30 but im 5'5 and weigh 150lbs so I have to work a real job where they take half my check and give it people who dont want to work at all. Gotta love America.

 

 

Now I agree with you there....no thumbs-up button, so...thumbs-up

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do you have to say about pre 60's football when the players had to work a real job on top of playing the game? That showed it is possible but your saying it's not. If the shit worked back then why couldn't it work today?

 

The average cost to train a marine is over 3 million. So yes it would be possible to give each person a million.

 

Did you know that with the hundreds of billions they gave to the banks they could of gave each American over $100,000 instead? But no, rather then give the people they're own money back to pay off there mortgages and actually help the economy they gave it to the banks so they could stay in business and kick the same people out of there homes that they just got the money from.

 

For the record, OUR TAXES pay to build the fukin stadium so yes tickets should be cheaper seeing as how if WE didnt pay for it then it wouldnt exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do you have to say about pre 60's football when the players had to work a real job on top of playing the game? That showed it is possible but your saying it's not. If the shit worked back then why couldn't it work today?

 

The average cost to train a marine is over 3 million. So yes it would be possible to give each person a million.

 

Did you know that with the hundreds of billions they gave to the banks they could of gave each American over $100,000 instead? But no, rather then give the people they're own money back to pay off there mortgages and actually help the economy they gave it to the banks so they could kick the same people out of there homes that they just got the money from.

 

For the record, OUR TAXES pay to build the fukin stadium so yes tickets should be cheaper seeing as how if WE didnt pay for it then it wouldnt exist.

 

The average cost to train a marine is over 3 million. So yes it would be possible to give each person a million.

 

I question that figure, but if so, and we gave them a million dollars, we wouldn't have Marines trained to the same level would we??

 

 

Did you know that with the hundreds of billions they gave to the banks they could of gave each American over $100,000 instead? But no, rather then give the people they're own money back to pay off there mortgages and actually help the economy they gave it to the banks so they could kick the same people out of there homes that they just got the money from.

 

 

With 300 million people, that amounts to $30,000,000,000,000. That is 30 trillion FYI...even if you half the number to take away children etc...you can figure that one out...

 

As you said, the bailout was in the billions, so again you are wrong.

 

For the record, OUR TAXES pay to build the fukin stadium so yes tickets should be cheaper seeing as how if WE didnt pay for it then it wouldnt exist.

 

At least this makes a little sense, but if you want to keep a team, that is what you do....it all goes back to demand...there are a lot of cities that would welcome a NFL team...and forgive me, was Aurora inside the area that had to pay a sin tax to help pay for the stadium?? I moved out of Cleveland 40 some years ago, so my memory is a little foggy....seems like Aurora is a pretty good ways east of Cleveland...again...my apologies in advance if I am off base on that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the point on it costing $3,000,000 to train a Marine.

 

There are roughly 180,000 Marines...so that equals 540,000,000,000.

 

That is 540 billion...about the total of the defense budget...so we train these Marines but don't have rifles, ammo, tanks etc??

 

Not to mention we don't train people in The Army, Navy, Air Force, or Coast Guard?? Sailors do have boats and aren't required to swim the Seven Seas.

 

I am trying to inform you. If you are just making stuff up, well, I can't do anything about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...