Josh Cribbs "insulted" by Browns latest offer (1 Viewer)

[Chicago Hooligan]

Why do players sign 6 years deals out of college??Sign a two year deal, see where you stand and sign another two year deal.

No rookies sign 6-year deals - except Crabtree, who conceded it in return for the bigger $ he wanted.No team would want to sign a rookie to a 2-year deal though.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

This is pretty much the same stuff Hester, to name one among many guys, said in the early stages of getting a new deal.I have absolutely no doubt that Cribbs will get his contract and stay with the Browns. You can get other pretty good kick returners but very few players who are worth an extra 2 or 3 wins per season.

How many wins did Hester directly account for in Chicago this year? Or since he's signed the big bucks contract? Does he still play with his edge? I don't follow the Bears to know, but I don't recall any splash plays this year. , You can understand the Browns caution in handing over huge money to a player that relies on reckless regard for life and limb for his success. Will he continue to bust his butt after he's paid? Will he get injured playing in these high-risk parts of the game (returns / wildcat)? It all has to be weighed out by management.

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned Hester in making that point. Could just as well be Lance Briggs or any of the other guys who said "I'll never play for this team again" and then yeah playing for that team again with a new contract.These are the things I am 100% sure of- the Browns will re-sign Cribbs- he will sign for significantly more than any other ST player but significantly less than HesterI would look for something like a 3-year deal with a pretty nice signing bonus and guarantee, nothing crazy.

 

[Steelfan7]

Browns fans will regret the day Mikey came on board. Dude won a Superbowl with a stacked roster full of Favre in his prime and Reggie White and company and pissed away another one against inferior Denver team. I've never seen a worst coached team in a Superbowl than his Seahawks against the Steelers. He's a clueless blowhard who likes to hear himself talk. I think what has been failed to be mentioned is the fact that Cribbs is so pissed at the browns because they lied to him multiple times on getting him his deserved new contract. The Browns keep dangling the carrot but never keep their promise. This guy has been Browns fans only hope the last 2 years and he played his butt off and is the best special teams player in the entire league period. I hope he stands his ground and gets traded out of the division.

 

[pollardsvision]

I fully support Cribbs' right to do whatever is necessary to get paid what he feels he's worth.

On the other hand, I'd be leery of giving him too much money. No more than about $3 million or so.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ridiculous offer. I thought they'd finally get it right. Now not so sure.

J

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

He had over 2,500 all-purpose yards last season and scored 6 of the team's 20 TDs. He accounted for more yards than all of the team's QBs combined. More yards than all of the team's RBs combined. And more yards than all of the team's (other) WRs combined. I don't think anyone is absolutely calling for a Devin Hester $10 million a year deal, but there's no getting around the fact that the Brown are really screwing him. "Just" a kick returner or not, $1.4 is a joke.At the very least he can be compared to Dante Hall, who signed for about the same as what they're offering Cribbs......7 years ago.

10/10and those stats are jawdropping.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

My guess is Mike Holmgren doesn't want to make his first act running the show in Cleveland to be giving a guy a new deal with three years remaining on his current deal (especially since it's not a rookie contract). You can definetly argue whether Cribbs is worth more but redoing this deal will set a precedent and open the door to future scenarios such as this. Usually teams like to redo a deal if it gives them a few years more of production at the backend of the deal at an affordable price (as well as holding off free agency for the player) in exchange for giving the player more money upfront than what he's currently getting (but potentially less than market-value when their actual deal would expire). In this situation there really isn't much upside for Cleveland to redo this deal unless you think Cribbs will remain an elite return-man for another five or six years which doesn't seem to be the norm for the majority of players who fit his profile. At the end of the day the real cuprit here is whoever advised Cribbs to sign his current deal. He's making below-market money and if he didn't sign that deal he'd probably be on the doorstep to cashing in. He may eventually get a new deal but right now he has virtually no leverage as the Browns were bad with him and have a multitude of holes to fill throughout their roster before they get better...and since it will probably take a few years to accomplish that Holmggren may be leery of giving big money to a guy who though he maybe a force at what he does doesn't play a core position.

thats why he is holding out. cuz teams don't "like" to do this otherwise.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Maybe he's using McDaniel's ousting of Cutler as a business model. Seriously, how do you not reward the team's best player after everything he's accomplished over the past 3 years? Pathetic!

cutler was ousted?

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

He's a kick returner who has already peaked IMO.

I have to say I agree with this. While he should get more than 2 mill/year, I also believe the Hester money was a little out of whack. I understand a dynamic kick returner can add a lot to team and can alter a game, I also feel that it is strange that arguably the three most dynamic kick returners in NFL history played in the last 6 six years (Hall, Hester, Cribbs). This may just be pure circumstance, but with three, I think it is becoming a trend, and if it is, Cribbs was just unluckly that he was the last guy in this great run of returners we have seen as far as getting a big contract goes. I think teams are starting to think these guys are out there now and why pay a guy 40 million when you have a chance to draft him in the 2nd or 3rd round. I also think it is interesting that in three years under three separate regimes, he still has not gotten his contract renegotiated.Now Cribbs is special compared to Hall and even Hester in that (1) he is a better kick returner than either of those two were (2) can run the wildcat or act as a RB (which the other two could not), and (3) at least compared to Hall is a better receiver. He also is a popular player in the city of Cleveland when they have had little to cheer about, so that adds value, but I still don't see breaking the bank for the guy. With 8 kick return TDs, he is the NFL leader all-time. How many more do people expect him to get? I just feel these guys peak very quickly and fall at the same rate (whatever happened to Hall who just 5 years ago was discussed as an NFL MVP candidate), so I would be hesitant to deliver the aroured car to their doorstep.

Also, this is a little off topic, but still relates; How does one value what a kick returner brings as far as the game goes. I know that teams alter the way they kick/punt, thereby giving up some yards or facing the chance they run it back, but how many yards on average, does a Hester or Cribbs bring over a guy like Leon Washington or Sproles (maybe not the best example as they are valuable in the running game too, but maybe even whoever returns kicks for Houston or KC, just to throw some teams out there)? I remember in the 90s Jason Elam had about 5 more yards on his leg when kicking field goals than anyone else in the NFL (which would equal about 10%)...Does Hester or Cribbs add more than 10% more yards over the course of the year than the next guys? Even if they do, do they deserve 10X the money that the average kick returner gets?

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HallDa00.htmHow soon they forget.

At their peak; Hall was on par or just slightly below Cribbs in kickoff returns, Hall was the better put returner, and Hall's receiving stats in years 2-6 exceed Cribb's best effort.

i don't remember hall making 6-7 tackles a game on special teams...

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

He's a kick returner who has already peaked IMO.

I have to say I agree with this. While he should get more than 2 mill/year, I also believe the Hester money was a little out of whack. I understand a dynamic kick returner can add a lot to team and can alter a game, I also feel that it is strange that arguably the three most dynamic kick returners in NFL history played in the last 6 six years (Hall, Hester, Cribbs). This may just be pure circumstance, but with three, I think it is becoming a trend, and if it is, Cribbs was just unluckly that he was the last guy in this great run of returners we have seen as far as getting a big contract goes. I think teams are starting to think these guys are out there now and why pay a guy 40 million when you have a chance to draft him in the 2nd or 3rd round. I also think it is interesting that in three years under three separate regimes, he still has not gotten his contract renegotiated.Now Cribbs is special compared to Hall and even Hester in that (1) he is a better kick returner than either of those two were (2) can run the wildcat or act as a RB (which the other two could not), and (3) at least compared to Hall is a better receiver. He also is a popular player in the city of Cleveland when they have had little to cheer about, so that adds value, but I still don't see breaking the bank for the guy. With 8 kick return TDs, he is the NFL leader all-time. How many more do people expect him to get? I just feel these guys peak very quickly and fall at the same rate (whatever happened to Hall who just 5 years ago was discussed as an NFL MVP candidate), so I would be hesitant to deliver the aroured car to their doorstep.

Also, this is a little off topic, but still relates; How does one value what a kick returner brings as far as the game goes. I know that teams alter the way they kick/punt, thereby giving up some yards or facing the chance they run it back, but how many yards on average, does a Hester or Cribbs bring over a guy like Leon Washington or Sproles (maybe not the best example as they are valuable in the running game too, but maybe even whoever returns kicks for Houston or KC, just to throw some teams out there)? I remember in the 90s Jason Elam had about 5 more yards on his leg when kicking field goals than anyone else in the NFL (which would equal about 10%)...Does Hester or Cribbs add more than 10% more yards over the course of the year than the next guys? Even if they do, do they deserve 10X the money that the average kick returner gets?

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HallDa00.htmHow soon they forget.

At their peak; Hall was on par or just slightly below Cribbs in kickoff returns, Hall was the better put returner, and Hall's receiving stats in years 2-6 exceed Cribb's best effort.

And Cribbs had better rushing stats. Overall, their 1st 5 years are very close, with Cribbs having about 9100 total yards and Hall about 8400. Interestingly, Hall signed a 5 year extension after his 3rd year just before his 2003 season. The amount - 5 year, $5.2 million, about the same (per year) being offered Cribbs seven years later.

can someone smarter than me adjust this for inflation? I'd bet that would be close to 2,2-5 now.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

It's only the market value if other teams believe it is - see the Roy Williams trade. As to Hester, he barely does returns anymore. He's a receiver - maybe even an overpaid receiver. The Chargers also made a mistake by overpaying for their kick returner - and I'm pretty sure that they, and most other teams, know it. Cribbs, in my opinion, is worth about what the Jets were offering Leon Washington in the offseason - about 3.5 million.

Sorry, but that's incorrect. It's market value whether or not the team believes it is. What the TEAM thinks is irrelevant to what market value is. Now, they may not agree with it and can certainly choose to not pay market value, but they will likely be without Cribbs from now on. Also, under the assumption that he would play for the last couple years was that the Browns would work on renegotiating. There's a certain expectation with that and the Browns look absolutely classless on their end as a result.Now, I'm not saying Cribbs should get $10 million/year. However, the league minimum for Cribbs is $600k. They are offering Cribbs only double the league minimum. How ANYONE can defend that for the BEST PLAYER ON THE TEAM is beyond me. Especially when so many players hold out, they've been stringing him along, he puts out his best year, almost gets injured severely, and this is the offer they make? There's a reason the Browns are what they are.

Usually, you and I agree on most things here - but market value isn't some number made by the player - it's determined by the teams. If no team is willing to pay Cribbs the type of money he thinks he's worth then he's not worth it - it's just that simple.I've been both a Saints and Browns fan all of my life (I live in Cleveland) and I can surely say with all certainty that I agree with you that the Browns look totally classless in these three years of negotiating with Cribbs. No doubt in my mind.As to Cribbs being the best player on the Browns -- while true, it isn't saying much. While I like Cribbs and love the way he plays the game, he's not worth the kind of money he's apparently looking for - he's worth more (probably just over double) than the Browns offered, but nowhere near the 10million that Hester fleeced the Bears for.

I think we do agree here but we're just discussing different things. You're absolutely right that it's determined by the teams. That's my point, though. Other teams do pay their PR/KR more. The offer he got wasn't even in the top 10 of KR/PR. Cribbs is the best KR/PR in the NFL and possibly in the history of the NFL and the Browns are NOT offering him market value or close to it. Guaranteed if Cribbs was a FA, he'd land a helluva lot more than $1.4 million from some team. And while some team may overpay and offer him $10 million, and I'm not saying that that would be his market value. Just that I can assure you that the majority of NFL teams would gladly pay this guy at least $3-4 million for him to do what he's able to do. The fact that there's at least 10 other guys at his position that make more than the $1.4 million he was offered is a testament to that. So, in the end, I don't think the Browns are offering anything close to what his "market value" would be if he were a FA. Of course, he's under contract and they aren't obligated to. But, you don't then string the guy along for 3 years telling him you'll rework his contract and make it sound like you'll take care of him and then offer 2x league minimum to the best in the business at what he does (and much more). Particularly when he threatened to hold out and played the full season in good faith to get something done as promised. I truly hope he walks and goes to another team as I can't stand teams and owners that behave in this manner. I'm sorry you're a Browns fan and have to put up with that. At least the Saints are in the playoffs

especially not so that all your FA's and draft picks see how you take care of your "hard working" and talented stars. A high profile fiasco is JUST what this new Browns regime DOESN'T need.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Why do players sign 6 years deals out of college??Sign a two year deal, see where you stand and sign another two year deal.

so they don't become "lionized".

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

It's hard to imagine anyone who posts here often not understanding that an "nfl contract" is not a contract legally. In law an agreement that can be broken by one party at will does not constitute an enforceable contract.

Do you have an example of a situation where a team has breached a contract by releasing a player?

circuitous.since it's fine as per the NFL for them to cut them and not pay them the remaining contract, a player in a FREE SOCIETY has the right to not do that. It's not slavery, is a business agreement. And very often parties in business who are not satisfied with a deal, with refuse performance in order to forge a better deal. So you hold out, the team outwardly fines you, and then if you are worth it the team pays you, if not they cut you or trade you. But since cribbs value to the browns is MUCH greater than the money they are paying him, you can guarantee they'll either pay him or trade him.not sure why guys who break agreements and deals all the time get their panties in a wad about guys who pay a huge physical price for their performance in a league where longevity is not a given. Get your money while you can. As evidenced by this ####ty offer, in violation of "good faith negotiations with the browns management" they ####ed him. He should holdout. It's the American way.Though he might wanna fire his agent and sign with Rosenhaus if he really wants to make some cash.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

He's a kick returner with 3 years left on his deal. Let him sit out if he feels so insulted.

he signed the contract right? sadly this isnt how it works though. he can make a scene and be a distration until they trade him and some other team pays him.

sadly?It's hard to imagine anyone who posts here often not understanding that an "nfl contract" is not a contract legally. In law an agreement that can be broken by one party at will does not constitute an enforceable contract. Then again you do where rubberbands on your wrists and floss in gas station t shirt attire.

Fascinating. Wrong, but fascinating.

I was pretty drunk, but what I mean is this. When the league can freely cut players at will for under performance, and not have to pay the remainder of said contract, people should cut the moral tirades when a player decides to breach his contract in an effort to negotiate a better deal. It's the same thing tey would do in that situation, if they actually had the leverage.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

And Cribbs had better rushing stats. Overall, their 1st 5 years are very close, with Cribbs having about 9100 total yards and Hall about 8400. Interestingly, Hall signed a 5 year extension after his 3rd year just before his 2003 season. The amount - 5 year, $5.2 million, about the same (per year) being offered Cribbs seven years later.

can someone smarter than me adjust this for inflation? I'd bet that would be close to 2,2-5 now.

It looks like the salary cap in 2009 was about double what it was in 2002. So your guess looks about right.While having nothing to do with this thread, I did find this odd fact when looking for the salary info:

For the 2003 season, the highest paying NFL team (Cincinnati Bengals) paid a median salary of $731,200 while the lowest (Indianapolis Colts) paid a median average of $454,000.

As a Bengal fan, that's really hard to believe.

 

[treat88]

When the league can freely cut players at will for under performance, and not have to pay the remainder of said contract, people should cut the moral tirades when a player decides to breach his contract in an effort to negotiate a better deal. It's the same thing tey would do in that situation, if they actually had the leverage.

This I at least somewhat agree with, but you do understand that the team is acting well within their contractual agreements when they cut a player...for whatever reason, right?The player knows with 100% certainty that the only monies they are guaranteed when they sign a deal is the guaranteed portion.It is highly misleading when a contract is reported as say, in Albert Haynesworth's case, a 7 year 100 million dollar deal. The deal could potentially reach that level, but neither the team nor the player believe that will happen when the deal is signed.After the guaranteed money there is no "remainder of said contract". The player absolutely knows this right up front and with 100% clarity, so let's not act like they are victims.That said, I agree that withholding services is the only recourse a player has when he is deserving of a raise and locked into an unfortunate situation. You won't hear any moral tirades out of me.Folks have to understand though that players are in no way victims in this process.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I was pretty drunk, but what I mean is this. When the league can freely cut players at will for under performance, and not have to pay the remainder of said contract, people should cut the moral tirades when a player decides to breach his contract in an effort to negotiate a better deal. It's the same thing tey would do in that situation, if they actually had the leverage.

why is it every time I read these kind of threads I run across these kind of posts --- how are there still people that don't understand the nfl contract?aren't you some kind of regular on this board?the nfl players association signs a cba with the nfl which determines the types of contracts that are signed.many players get a signing bonus UP FRONT that goes right in their pockets, and is generally tied to the contract as a whole.the remaining salary portion of the contract may be guaranteed, partially guaranteed, or sometimes not guaranteed.if it is not guaranteed, there is no promise of money, but rather a promise to pay said money if the player is to play for that team in those given years.you don't need to be a labor lawyer to understand any of this.if you have some kind of moral indignation about they way they do business, I suggest you e-mail the nflpa and suggest they do away with signing bonuses and work on a month to month basis like most of the rest of the world --- then they could go in and ask for raises whenever they feel like it.edit psif the "league can freely cut players at will for under performance, and not have to pay the remainder of said contract" then the raiders would be in a lot better situation with offthemarcus russell.maybe they should hold out his paycheck and demand he leaves town or starts earning it.

 

[treat88]

why is it every time I read these kind of threads I run across these kind of posts --- how are there still people that don't understand the nfl contract?

aren't you some kind of regular on this board?

Totally agree.I think people intentionally misunderstand simply to propagate the victim mentality they feel towards the players.

By now, anyone who frequents this board with any regularity should understand this business to a great enough degree to intelligently comment on contractual issues.

 

[daveR]

And Cribbs had better rushing stats. Overall, their 1st 5 years are very close, with Cribbs having about 9100 total yards and Hall about 8400. Interestingly, Hall signed a 5 year extension after his 3rd year just before his 2003 season. The amount - 5 year, $5.2 million, about the same (per year) being offered Cribbs seven years later.

can someone smarter than me adjust this for inflation? I'd bet that would be close to 2,2-5 now.

It looks like the salary cap in 2009 was about double what it was in 2002. So your guess looks about right.While having nothing to do with this thread, I did find this odd fact when looking for the salary info:

For the 2003 season, the highest paying NFL team (Cincinnati Bengals) paid a median salary of $731,200 while the lowest (Indianapolis Colts) paid a median average of $454,000.

As a Bengal fan, that's really hard to believe.

Why is that hard to believe? All it means is that the Colts found more ingenious ways to spend their money than the Bengals. The Bengals biggest problem has always been their front office.BTW, all the teams are required to spend within 10% (I think) of thier total cap figure.

 

[Bobcat10]

I believe Holmgren on the "take it or leave it" issue. It's also pretty obvious the Cribbs Camp took that first offer and used it as their only possible leverage (saying it's unfair, cleaning out locker, making the ESPN interview tour, etc etc).

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/..._to_announ.html

Another offer to Cribbs coming: Holmgren disputed the characterization of the club's $1.4 million-a-year offer to Josh Cribbs as "take it or leave it" and indicated the team will continue to negotiate an improvement to his existing deal.

"That 'take it or leave it' stuff, I think that went out a long time ago," Holmgren said. "I'm not sure you ever say that. The one thing that I think you have to try and avoid is negotiating against yourself.

"My hope is that we can get this to a win-win situation. Yes, I think there's a chance [of another offer]. There's light at the end of the tunnel, hopefully."