It's "up to" $4mil, guessing a lot isn't guaranteed, and it's less than he made the last 2 years when he was the backup.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
When he was the backup to Chubb who made a LOT more $ than him.It's "up to" $4mil, guessing a lot isn't guaranteed, and it's less than he made the last 2 years when he was the backup.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
And? He was still the back-up, and made more than the absolute maximum he can make this year, so your "that's not backup money" comment is demonstrably false. It is less than backup money that this same team paid this same player for the last 2 years. We also haven't seen the details of the contract yet, it's entirely possible that it's "really" much less than that.When he was the backup to Chubb who made a LOT more $ than him.It's "up to" $4mil, guessing a lot isn't guaranteed, and it's less than he made the last 2 years when he was the backup.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
Don't kid yourself this is gonna be a 50/50 split. Heck it was a 60/40 split with one of the best RBs in football.
The only way he is the backup is if Hunt has not kept himself in shape which is very possible.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
Not sure if he was "beaten out by Ford" so much as the increased value in Hunt was not good enough to justify the cost increase from Ford's salary to Hunt's demand (offseason). Still think it will be a similar situation to last year with Hunt taking the change of pace role, but I could see Hunt getting a slightly larger share of playing time this time. Any way you carve it, Ford (or any other RB) is a huge drop off from Chubb.Hunt was chosen by this team because of his history with the offensive scheme. This player, needing this very circumstance in order to be viable again had to have been beaten out by Ford. Have no idea which premise is right or wrong but this could very well prove to be best case scenario for Ford. That it was Hunt they were looking to resign is what got me to ante up for Ford.
That's a bit misleading. In week 1 Ford got 8 of his opportunities after Chubb was pulled with 9 minutes left in the blowout. On Monday Chubb had 10 opportunities to only one for Ford before getting hurt.When he was the backup to Chubb who made a LOT more $ than him.It's "up to" $4mil, guessing a lot isn't guaranteed, and it's less than he made the last 2 years when he was the backup.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
Don't kid yourself this is gonna be a 50/50 split. Heck it was a 60/40 split with one of the best RBs in football.
Agree, best case for Hunt is he gets the old 1B role he had with Chubb. But I'd be shocked he's close to that player now.Hunt was chosen by this team because of his history with the offensive scheme. This player, needing this very circumstance in order to be viable again had to have been beaten out by Ford. Have no idea which premise is right or wrong but this could very well prove to be best case scenario for Ford. That it was Hunt they were looking to resign is what got me to ante up for Ford.
I was going to write something similar to this.Hunt was flat out bad last year. They chose Ford over Hunt for this season. Stefanski has stated in no uncertain terms that Ford will be the feature back. Hunt didn't have the benefit of a training camp and is coming in off the street cold. Hunt has missed half the season in 2 of the last 4 years. We knew Cleveland was going to add somebody. Hunt signing was inevitable IMO as he knows the offense/staff and they didn't have to give up a pick to get him. IMO signing Hunt was a best case scenario for Ford, much better than if they had traded for Akers.
I did consider that it may have been salary related, but what kept them from resigning him right away? Also, my understanding is that a relevant portion of what teams pay veteran players who are paid the minimum doesn't count against the cap. Meaning, the incentive stuff they may pay him, but it doesn't affect the cap.Not sure if he was "beaten out by Ford" so much as the increased value in Hunt was not good enough to justify the cost increase from Ford's salary to Hunt's demand (offseason). Still think it will be a similar situation to last year with Hunt taking the change of pace role, but I could see Hunt getting a slightly larger share of playing time this time. Any way you carve it, Ford (or any other RB) is a huge drop off from Chubb.
Board Bet, they let Hunt go and kept Ford. How does that statement even make sense? Hunt was brought back because he is familiar with the system. No one here knows any more than that.The only way he is the backup is if Hunt has not kept himself in shape which is very possible.Hunt got $4m. Thats not backup money
the incentive stuff they may pay him, but it doesn't affect the cap
Aren’t most?Messy timeshare incoming.
Hooray, another one.
What kept the Browns from immediately resigning him is because Hunt wanted more than the Browns were willing to pay at the time. He was an unrestricted free agent going into the season. It wasn't like he got cut. His contract was over.I did consider that it may have been salary related, but what kept them from resigning him right away? Also, my understanding is that a relevant portion of what teams pay veteran players who are paid the minimum doesn't count against the cap. Meaning, the incentive stuff they may pay him, but it doesn't affect the cap.Not sure if he was "beaten out by Ford" so much as the increased value in Hunt was not good enough to justify the cost increase from Ford's salary to Hunt's demand (offseason). Still think it will be a similar situation to last year with Hunt taking the change of pace role, but I could see Hunt getting a slightly larger share of playing time this time. Any way you carve it, Ford (or any other RB) is a huge drop off from Chubb.
Wait, Hunt is familiar with the system?
Browns offense will look ‘totally different’ in 2023
Browns offense will see significant changes in 2023
"Everything's new"
So a RB that wasn't with the team in the off-season is only signed because he is familiar with a "totally different" offense that has seen "significant changes" where "everything's new?"
^We have a winner ^CLE was gonna sign someone . Hunt has lost a step. His signing is the least intrusive to Ford owners - as opposed to Taylor, Akers, or Fornette. Ford should put up at least high end Rb2 numbers in that Browns system.
I would lump Akers, Fornette and Hunt all together. Taylor probably would have commanded a Chubb like role. Amongst those other guys and Ford I don't see anyone of them with that type of ability.CLE was gonna sign someone . Hunt has lost a step. His signing is the least intrusive to Ford owners - as opposed to Taylor, Akers, or Fornette. Ford should put up at least high end Rb2 numbers in that Browns system.
Browns head coach Kevin Stefanski reiterated on Wednesday that “Jerome [Ford] is the lead back.”
Stefanski was asked the question on Wednesday and gave a direct answer. Even with Kareem Hunt in town, Ford should be expected to operate as the lead back. Hunt will certainly get his opportunities, and there’s a chance he could steal more work, but the Browns were happy going into this season with Ford on the team instead of Hunt, and Ford has done nothing for them to change that assessment. It might be fair to assume Hunt gets back a similar role to the one he had last season.
I would have appreciated your understanding of the rule. I'm citing an article I found, but it's not the 1st that I've read:Not correct
I would have appreciated your understanding of the rule. I'm citing an article I found, but it's not the 1st that I've read:Not correct
"The Veteran Salary Benefit (VSB) rule was created by the 2020 CBA and replaced the old Minimum Salary Benefit (MSB) Rule. These rules were put in place to allow veteran players to be signed to Cap-friendly deals instead of being replaced by cheaper, more Cap-friendly, younger players. The Veteran Salary Benefit allows veteran player to be signed to 1-year contracts with the applicable minimum salary (based on the player’s service time) and a small signing bonus ($152,500 in 2022), but only have to count that player at the salary level of a player with only 2 years of service time (plus the bonus)."
So Hunt gets limited damage over the next few weeks while Ford gets destroyed by some of the toughest Ds in the NFL…Hunt was flat out bad last year. They chose Ford over Hunt for this season. Stefanski has stated in no uncertain terms that Ford will be the feature back. Hunt didn't have the benefit of a training camp and is coming in off the street cold. Hunt has missed half the season in 2 of the last 4 years. We knew Cleveland was going to add somebody. Hunt signing was inevitable IMO as he knows the offense/staff and they didn't have to give up a pick to get him. IMO signing Hunt was a best case scenario for Ford, much better than if they had traded for Akers.
They choseFordFord's contract overHuntHunt's contract for this season.
I see, that's Chad's point, that it was a salary-related move. There was no such lowball offer because they knew he wanted more. Nor did he just sign for the vet minimum, okay got it. But still, there's their GM, (Berry) quoted.. this one is early April:That isn't the type of contract Hunt signed. And very clearly wasn't a contract he would have considered this offseason as an alternative to Ford in the #2 role.
Good point. The following 4 games (plus a bye) are brutal for the Browns running game. Ford was pretty bottled up, and that was against the worst run def in the league. Early on I can't imagine Hunt is much better. I don't think either is startable for six weeks when they play Seattle.So Hunt gets limited damage over the next few weeks while Ford gets destroyed by some of the toughest Ds in the NFL…Hunt was flat out bad last year. They chose Ford over Hunt for this season. Stefanski has stated in no uncertain terms that Ford will be the feature back. Hunt didn't have the benefit of a training camp and is coming in off the street cold. Hunt has missed half the season in 2 of the last 4 years. We knew Cleveland was going to add somebody. Hunt signing was inevitable IMO as he knows the offense/staff and they didn't have to give up a pick to get him. IMO signing Hunt was a best case scenario for Ford, much better than if they had traded for Akers.
Tried to move him and two projected high 2nd 2024s for a projected top 6 in 2024 in dynasty, and was turned down, but they did contemplate for a long time, wasn't an automatic no. Hoping for one more big game, and then want to move him to get to a high first.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
No way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
I get that, and there’s a very real chance you’re right. These guys are tough to value. If he excels you won’t touch him at today’s prices, if he sucks he’ll be nobody by seasons end and you’ll be glad you didn’t pay em.No way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
Yeah, I probably wouldn't move him for less than two future 2nds rn. I just figure if a rookie draft was held rn he'd go in the 2nd, so why move him unless you don't think much of him. I wouldn't give a first or expect someone else to trade me a first though either.I get that, and there’s a very real chance you’re right. These guys are tough to value. If he excels you won’t touch him at today’s prices, if he sucks he’ll be nobody by seasons end and you’ll be glad you didn’t pay em.No way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
There’s just zero upside in selling him for a 3rd tho. 3rds are routinely spent on guys with the same lack of resume/pedigree that we are just hoping get a shot like this, and have to hold for sometimes multiple seasons waiting. If I’d spent a 3rd on him this off-season I’d be ecstatic rn
this is probably where I'm at..if I think it has a chance to be an early 2nd. which would be perhaps counterintuitive in the sense that it's the kind of trade a competing team makes, to trade for a RB, such that if that team is competing then at least *they* think their pick will be late.Yeah, I probably wouldn't move him for less than two future 2nds rn. I just figure if a rookie draft was held rn he'd go in the 2nd, so why move him unless you don't think much of him. I wouldn't give a first or expect someone else to trade me a first though either.I get that, and there’s a very real chance you’re right. These guys are tough to value. If he excels you won’t touch him at today’s prices, if he sucks he’ll be nobody by seasons end and you’ll be glad you didn’t pay em.No way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
There’s just zero upside in selling him for a 3rd tho. 3rds are routinely spent on guys with the same lack of resume/pedigree that we are just hoping get a shot like this, and have to hold for sometimes multiple seasons waiting. If I’d spent a 3rd on him this off-season I’d be ecstatic rn
No way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
I mean, you coulda also lost dobbins or been relying on Mattison or any number of guys. Agreed it only really makes sense if you’re a contender with a hole. Lotta folks have holes at the moment though, especially in deeper leagues where there’s not much on the wireNo way I pay a 1st for him. Not with that resume. Not even sure I'd pay a 2nd, TBH.I don’t think you’ve got a prayer of getting a 24 y/o with a projected feature back workload who just looked pretty damn good on national TV for a 3rd
Feels like another of the many guys on the “buy for a 2nd, sell for a 1st” borderline
This. First would be hilarious, if I knew the second I had would be late then maybe, but the situation where you're knowing that for sure and are in a position where you need to acquire Ford is surely limited to the exact spot where you have Chubb and passed on the opportunity to get a cheap handcuff last season, or any point prior to last week for that matter