Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

**** CLEVELAND BROWNS THREAD ****


Recommended Posts

Heckert sure gets a lot of love, and while I think he's doing a good job, I don't get why so many are enthralled with him. In the end in the last two drafts he nailed his one top 20 pick and has mixed results thereafter. I think Taylor, Sheard, and Ward are all good players but there are warts on all of them. Little too. And Hardesty is a complete bust. All that and what do we have to show for any picks made after round 2? Don't get me wrong, he's an improvement over what we had but is that really saying much?He needs some home runs this year and to stop hitting doubles.

What exactly are your expectations here? For example, in the last 2 years what GMs have drafted better than Heckert? What kind of drafts would you consider adequate?
I liked the move to trade down from Julio Jones. I didn't like the trade back up to get Phil Taylor. I would have preferred we sit and wait and keep the extra pick. I didn't like the trade up to get Hardesty, again would have preferred the wait and see. I wanted Emmanuel Sanders instead of Colt McCoy. I liked the Haden, Sheard, and Little picks. I warmed up to the Ward pick once I understood more about him. Everything after pick 60 has been meh. That's when GM's make their $. They don't need to hit on every pick, but I don't think expecting us to find a gem or two/year is unreasonable.That and while I agree with avoiding the big free agent strategy good teams make mid market acquisitions to fill holes. We rolled out Sheldon Brown, Jayme Mitchell, Tony Pashos, Usama Young/Michael Adams, and garbage at WR. You build through the draft, but you stay compeittive in free agency. I don't want DeSean Jackson or Carl Nicks here, but get me a Sproles or Jonathan Joseph. At least place a phone call.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 24.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • MAC_32

    2612

  • ghostguy123

    2329

  • amnesiac

    1931

  • Bracie Smathers

    1923

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Of course he was concussed...I'm sure Haley kept reminding him on the sideline he was concussed.  Haley wasn't going to let him back in that game, Hue be damned.   Taylor: Coach, I can play.  I ju

This isn't going to be a "only positive comments allowed" type thing. But don't do what you did. And you know what you did. If you've got something constructive to discuss about how the team

Ryan Engle‏ @rengle83 13h13 hours ago I read the survival handbook for these situations. If you’re attacked by a Jermaine Whitehead, just pretend like you’re a tight end running at a moderate pac

ok you gotta be kidding right....Brad Childress as the OC? :no:

Childress isn't the answer for Browns

January, 27, 2012

JAN 27

9:30

AM ET

EmailPrintComments

262

By Jamison Hensley

The Browns made the right call when they decided to add an offensive coordinator, and they needed to hire someone with experience.

Childress

But hiring Brad Childress -- who is reportedly the front-runner for the job -- is not the answer. The Browns really needed to push to get Mike Sherman, who appears to be headed to the Miami Dolphins to be their offensive coordinator.

The problem with Childress is his track record with offenses. In the eight years that Childress has been a head coach or offensive coordinator in the NFL, his offenses have ranked in the bottom half of the league five times.

The disturbing part is he's only been an NFL playcaller for one season. The result? The Vikings finished 23rd in yards and 26th in points (17.6 per game) in 2006 before Childress passed those duties over to offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell the next season. Childress didn't call the plays in his three seasons as the Eagles' offensive coordinator (Andy Reid held that role) and he didn't call the plays in his final four seasons with the Vikings.

That resume doesn't inspire confidence that he will turn around a Browns offense that scored more than 17 points twice last season. Then again, it's hard to imagine any coordinator could really affect an offense that has major question marks at quarterback and running back as well as a void of playmakers at wide receiver.

If the Browns hire Childress, it wouldn't be the worst move. The team could have simply promoted quarterbacks coach Mark Whipple, but that wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Pat Shumur was overwhelmed in his first season as the Browns head coach, and he needed to have the responsibility of running the offense taken away. The only way an inexperienced head coach will succeed is if he has experienced coordinators supporting him. The Browns will have veteran voices with Childress and defensive coordinator Dick Jauron.

If I were Shurmur, I would rely on Childress' advice but not his play-calling ability.

Edited by eric rymer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good deal. Thanks guys. We pretty much just get the syndicated stuff here. Mike&Mike and Cowlherd. 12-3 is great with the David Glenn show but those Donks that come on at 3 are just awful. Thank God Cam Newton is here so we actually get to listen a little talk of football. Otherwise its just UNC/Duke basketball. :thumbup:

Didn't realize you were around these parts. Sports talk here is the worst, turrible, awful. For the teams they have in the area I was really surprised how bad it is.

Bob LaMonte. Sure looks like a bunch of good ole boys cashing in. Only two guys interviewed for the position appear on the list below. Anybody here Mike Florio's interview yesterday regarding the Brown's? Oof

Some of LaMonte's clients include:

Mike Holmgren (Cleveland Browns President)

Andy Reid (Philadelphia Eagles Head Coach/Executive VP)

John Fox (Denver Broncos Head Coach)

Steve Spagnuolo (St. Louis Rams Head Coach)

Leslie Frazier (Minnesota Vikings Head Coach)

Pat Shurmur (Cleveland Browns Head Coach)

Jim L. Mora (UCLA Bruins Head Coach)

Charlie Weis (Kansas Head Coach)

Josh McDaniels (St. Louis Rams Offensive Coordinator)

Brian Schottenheimer (New York Jets Offensive Coordinator)

Mike Martz (Chicago Bears Offensive Coordinator)

Mike Nolan (Miami Dolphins Defensive Coordinator)

Clyde Christensen (Indianapolis Colts Offensive Coordinator)

Al Saunders (Oakland Raiders Offensive Coordinator)

Gunther Cunningham (Detroit Lions Defensive Coordinator and Assistant Head Coach)

Sean McDermott (Carolina Panthers Defensive Coordinator)

Mike McCoy (Denver Broncos Offensive Coordinator)

Marty Mornhinweg (Philadelphia Eagles Offensive Coordinator and Assistant Head Coach)

Jay Gruden (Cincinnati Bengals Offensive Coordinator)

Mike Singletary (Minnesota Vikings Linebackers Coach and Assistant Head Coach)

Brad Childress (Former Minnesota Vikings Head Coach)

Mike Sherman (Former Texas A&M Aggies football Head Coach)

Tom Heckert (Cleveland Browns General Manager)

Chris Polian (Indianapolis Colts General Manager)

Howie Roseman (Philadelphia Eagles General Manager)

Mark Dominik (Tampa Bay Buccaneers General Manager)

Rick Smith (Houston Texans General Manager)

Chris Carpenter (St. Louis Cardinals Pitcher)

Pat Hentgen (Former Toronto Blue Jays Pitcher)

Dave Steib (Former Toronto Blue Jays Pitcher)

Joe Nedney (Former San Francisco 49ers Placekicker)

Jon Gruden (ESPN Analyst for Monday Night Football)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he was the best of the Bob Lamonte pool that we're only allowed to choose from. :shrug:

Cleveland Browns hire Brad Childress as offensive coordinatorPublished: Friday, January 27, 2012, 2:55 PM

Updated: Friday, January 27, 2012, 3:27 PM

By Mary Kay Cabot, The Plain Dealer The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Brad Childress has been hired as the Browns new offensive coordinator, the NFL Network is reporting.

The Browns had narrowed their choices to Childress and Mike Sherman, a league source told The Plain Dealer on Thursday. Sherman is expected to be named offensive coordinator of the Miami Dolphins.

Childress, the former head coach of the Minnesota Vikings, had been offensive coordinator in Philadelphia under head coach Andy Reid. Current Browns coach Pat Shurmur was also on that staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony Grossi's reassignment was a painful necessity: Ted Diadiun

Cleveland.com

Saturday, January 28, 2012

By Ted Diadiun

The era of instant communication has brought with it two overriding verities: We have the ability to let loose our thoughts practically the instant we have them. And we have the corresponding responsibility to keep our inner editor on standby alert during every waking minute.

Unfortunately, and to our peril, the second occasionally fails to keep up with the first. That is true of anyone who has access to an email account or a cellphone, and it is especially true for those of us who make our living as communicators. Once it's out there, it's OUT there -- and no amount of attempted deletions, apologies, excuses or modern technology can take it back.

That sad fact led to a painful decision Plain Dealer editors had to make last week.

Tony Grossi, who had covered the Cleveland Browns at this newspaper for roughly two decades, was removed from the beat on Tuesday by Editor Debra Adams Simmons, Managing Editor Thom Fladung and Sports Editor Roy Hewitt after an ill-considered Tweet went unintentionally viral.

Grossi had typed a message, which he termed "a smart-(aleck) remark to a colleague," that called Browns owner Randy Lerner "a pathetic figure, the most irrelevant billionaire in the world."

But instead of sending a text message only to its intended recipient, he hit the wrong button and sent it out to his 15,000-plus Twitter followers.

Grossi said he discovered to his horror what had happened within about 60 seconds, and immediately retracted the Tweet, but the damage had been done. When he realized the following morning that the Tweet had been copied and re-Tweeted around the football world, he called Fladung to give him the bad news.

An apology -- to Lerner, the Browns and Grossi's Twitter followers -- was quick in coming. Editors also posted an apology on cleveland.com and Publisher Terrance C.Z. Egger sent Lerner and the Browns a letter of apology.

But Fladung was still left with a problem: His Browns reporter had revealed to the world his utter disdain for the owner of the team he was covering. How would the paper's readers be able to have faith in the objectivity in his reports following that?

"In another area, it would be an obvious call," said Fladung. "What if the reporter covering City Hall called the mayor pathetic and irrelevant? What if a reporter in the Columbus bureau said that about the governor? They would be removed from the beat immediately. It's the same with this situation."

Editor Adams Simmons said the discussion was dismal, but the three editors reluctantly decided that Grossi could not continue on the beat.

"If in your most private moments you feel like the leader of the institution you cover is pathetic, that raises questions about how fair you can be," she said. "And once those opinions become public, it becomes a bigger problem. There's the potential for readers to question the objectivity of everything you write."

An important point to make is that there is a difference between columnists and reporters at a newspaper.

"If it had been a columnist who wrote that, we might cringe, but that role is different," said Adams Simmons. "They're paid to offer up opinions, however prickly. But we're not asking them to go out and cover a team in a fair and balanced and objective way, like we are with a reporter."

It's also important that you know what didn't happen, because there are a lot of questions and conclusions being thrown around by people who don't know what they're talking about:

• Tony Grossi was not fired, nor was the move disciplinary. He will be reassigned to a different role in the sports department, not as punishment but because editors decided that he could no longer credibly remain on that beat.

• The Browns had nothing to do with the decision. None of the editors involved talked with anyone connected with the team before making the call. In fact, the Browns' first communication with the paper's leadership was not until Wednesday, after the decision had been made, when Egger met with Browns President Mike Holmgren and Lerner.

• The Browns did not threaten to remove Grossi's media credential, nor did such a consideration play any role in the decision, as a radio talk-show host alleged last week.

• This was not an issue of First Amendment rights or of censorship. Anyone who works at the paper has the right to say, write or Tweet anything they wish. But they do not have a corresponding right to say it in the newspaper or on the website or on their newspaper Twitter account. If they do, the editors who are in charge of maintaining the credibility of the newspaper have the right to change their assignment.

Understandably, Grossi does not agree with the decision. He said he didn't mean it as a malicious Tweet, that he doesn't typically interact with Lerner, "and my opinion of him doesn't color my coverage of the team."

"We're given these marching orders to Tweet your beat, to gather and attract a following, to be provocative, because it's good for our brand to interact with the readers," he said. "But we're all learning the perils of this new invention."

Reporters know or should know the mechanics of Tweeting, and that the journalistic standards are the same as they are with any other form of reporting. But he's right that newspaper folks are asked to perform on a lot more platforms than in the past, and to do it quickly, without a lot of reflective time.

Grossi is a passionate guy with strong, honest opinions, who cares deeply about the team and its fans, and he brings that quality to his reporting -- mostly for good but not always. In 1990, his acrimonious relationship with then-owner Art Modell led to a journalistic breach that resulted in his removal from the Browns beat and reassignment to general NFL coverage, where he stayed until the Browns came back under different ownership in 1999. Modell had no personal impact on that decision, either -- I know, because I was metro editor and then sports editor during that time.

He's been on the beat since the Browns returned, and he has done a terrific job. Nobody disputes that. I'll go further and say that I've never read a football writer who does a better job at game-day coverage -- telling us what happened and why -- than Tony Grossi. So this is a big loss, for us at the paper as much as anyone.

Knowing all that, the editors in charge made a painful but principled decision based on what they believed best for the newspaper. The good news is that we'll still have Grossi's passion and ability. But it will be in a different area of the sports section.

Link
Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical that a GM with needs in virtually every category isn't at the Senior Bowl?

This was questioned alot on the radio here. Local media in attendence said most GM's and higher ups in the league were NOT at the Senior Bowl. I think we just have to let Heckert do his thing. Scouts and other personel people handle the on site duties at the Senior Bowl, report back to GM (who also has access to hundreds of hours of video), and they prepare for the combine.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical that a GM with needs in virtually every category isn't at the Senior Bowl?

This was questioned alot on the radio here. Local media in attendence said most GM's and higher ups in the league were NOT at the Senior Bowl. I think we just have to let Heckert do his thing. Scouts and other personel people handle the on site duties at the Senior Bowl, report back to GM (who also has access to hundreds of hours of video), and they prepare for the combine.
I took a look at ClevelandBrowns.com to see their front office and see this:

Jon Sandusky: Director Player Personnel

Jon Sandusky is in his second season with the Cleveland Browns after spending the previous nine seasons on the personnel staff of the Philadelphia Eagles.

Sandusky joined the Eagles as an intern in 2001 before being named a pro scout the following year. He served in that role from 2002-07 before being promoted to director of pro personnel in 2008. During Sandusky's nine seasons in Philadelphia, the Eagles reached the playoffs seven times, won five NFC East Division titles and appeared in five NFC Championship games. In 2004, the Eagles won the NFC Championship and appeared in Super Bowl XXXIX. Before joining the Eagles, he was a coaching intern for one year at Penn State (2000).

A native of State College, Pa., Sandusky was a safety for Penn State from 1996-99, and graduated from the school with a degree in exercise science. As a Nittany Lion, he was a member of the Big Ten's all-academic squad from 1998-99 and received the Frank Patrick Commitment Award in 1998 for his dedication, academics and conditioning. He is the son of former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky. Jon and his wife, Kia, have a son, Brady.

They might want to consider fluffing his resume in other ways then the Penn State/Jerry Sandusky association. Eesh. Not something you want to advertise.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard Rizzo this morning saying that a source (I did not hear who) said that if the draft were today that the Browns would be taking Claiborne. I know this isn't really news as it has been mentioned here before, but there was some pretty good discussion. I don't know why but I really don't think there will be a trade up if we "want" RG3. I really like what McShay mentioned in his weekly draft podcast with Kiper. He expects the top 3 picks to the Luck, Kalil and Rieff. I think this is a great scenario for us. It gives us the chance to get any of the guys that were realistically on our radar or the option to trade down still. I've seen a few mocks that have us taking Blackmon and I just pray that doesn't happen. I like the kid but just don't think he's worth the #4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard Rizzo this morning saying that a source (I did not hear who) said that if the draft were today that the Browns would be taking Claiborne. I know this isn't really news as it has been mentioned here before, but there was some pretty good discussion. I don't know why but I really don't think there will be a trade up if we "want" RG3. I really like what McShay mentioned in his weekly draft podcast with Kiper. He expects the top 3 picks to the Luck, Kalil and Rieff. I think this is a great scenario for us. It gives us the chance to get any of the guys that were realistically on our radar or the option to trade down still. I've seen a few mocks that have us taking Blackmon and I just pray that doesn't happen. I like the kid but just don't think he's worth the #4.

Hey man. Good info.Sorry about the draft. I was super busy w/work negotiations, and tried to log in using my phone to post, but it wouldn't let me do it. been busy since and haven't had the time to sit and enjoy any news about the browns.Not surprised to hear that the Browns would take Claiborne (they took my advice) haha. Though, if the first 3 were to go in that order, I don't know if the Browns can possibly pass on RG3. Many, including myself were adamant that the Rams would NOT trade down, because they need kalil like nobody's business. Ive heard some compelling arguments as to why they Vikes and Rams would trade down, but I dont see them missing the opportunity for rieff or kalil. In which case, I think the Browns get put into a very tough spot. The Brown likely are forecasting a trade down by the rams/vikes, and thus RG3 being gone by the 4 pick. They won't move up, we all know that. So, in the scenario that RG3 is sitting still, at no4... I dont think there's a chance in hell they pass on him. If they do, I pray it's for claiborne... Blackmon pick would send me through the roof with anger, regardless of how badly our offense stinks.In my eyes, it starts with the QB. Edited by rizzler
Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard Rizzo this morning saying that a source (I did not hear who) said that if the draft were today that the Browns would be taking Claiborne. I know this isn't really news as it has been mentioned here before, but there was some pretty good discussion. I don't know why but I really don't think there will be a trade up if we "want" RG3. I really like what McShay mentioned in his weekly draft podcast with Kiper. He expects the top 3 picks to the Luck, Kalil and Rieff. I think this is a great scenario for us. It gives us the chance to get any of the guys that were realistically on our radar or the option to trade down still. I've seen a few mocks that have us taking Blackmon and I just pray that doesn't happen. I like the kid but just don't think he's worth the #4.

I can't see us taking Claiborne unless we add another top 50 pick. Meaning, we'd have to trade down with someone like Washington and add their #2 pick to do it. Problem there is if Claiborne is there for Tampa I'd be stunned if they pass on him.BPA is the name of the game, but if we keep taking defenders when our offense is as bad as it is then I'm more inclined to believe we just over value defenders.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I would love if we managed to stay at #4 and had a pick between Claiborne and RG3. I don't know who I would be happier with there. Just too many instances of top QBs busting out. Not sure how accurate it is, but it seems like high CB picks are just safer to me, and a secondary of Haden + Claiborne + Ward + whoever else would be sick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing I liked was when asked if he felt he could play in a WCO his reply was "It's my job to learn the system for whatever team selects me." super impressive kid. I want him but after today we wont get him at 4. We'll have to get to 2 in order to make it happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Miami or Washington will offer more to move up to 2 to get RG3 than we will. Probably for the better. Those teams are closer to competing and can withstand losing a 1, a 2, plus more to get him. It'll be 2014 or 2015 before they'll be in position to make title runs, but they could get there and won't suck in the meantime. I don't think we will. Those teams are closer to 8-8 with him than we are, and our idiot coaching staff will probably find a way to muck up another game or 3. Another lousy season and the front office will begin to be emptied, basically wasting RG3's 2012 season. IF we make good hires this time it could work, but I think selecting RG3 sets us back another 3 years.

When all is said and done we'll probably have a choice of Blackmon and Claiborne. I don't think the franchise can sell the city on Claiborne, so we'll have to take Blackmonn (which I am more than ok with) unless we're blown away with an offer by a team wanting Claiborne because everyone knows if Mo falls to 5 that he'll be a Buc.

Man, I'm just uneasy about everything because I think this staff sucks. RG3 is a franchise QB, we won't close the gap if we stay the course at QB, but if we take him we'll screw it up and a new staff will need a year to get up to par to get us straight.

I hate this team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it suggested elsewhere that if Washington deals for the Rams pick, St Louis might want to trade back up to 4 from 6. They would still end up with extra picks and be might be able to get the player they wanted all along at 2.

I think the Rams want Kalil. If they trade with Washington who takes RG3 then the Vikes are deciding between Claiborne and Kalil? If they go Kalil I don't see the Rams trading up, if they do it's to get Blackmon. If the Vikes go Claiborne, yea, maybe we can trade down. But then what do we do at 6? I guess we hope Tampa signs a guy like Manningham and doesn't take Blackmon? maybe they'll take Reiff instead? Unless we let Hillis walk and Richardson is our plan B (or plan A) I don't like this plan. Very risky. We need one of RG3, Blackmon, or Richardson. If we don't leave this draft with one of them we better have a ransom in tow instead.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it suggested elsewhere that if Washington deals for the Rams pick, St Louis might want to trade back up to 4 from 6. They would still end up with extra picks and be might be able to get the player they wanted all along at 2.

I think the Rams want Kalil. If they trade with Washington who takes RG3 then the Vikes are deciding between Claiborne and Kalil? If they go Kalil I don't see the Rams trading up, if they do it's to get Blackmon. If the Vikes go Claiborne, yea, maybe we can trade down. But then what do we do at 6? I guess we hope Tampa signs a guy like Manningham and doesn't take Blackmon? maybe they'll take Reiff instead? Unless we let Hillis walk and Richardson is our plan B (or plan A) I don't like this plan. Very risky. We need one of RG3, Blackmon, or Richardson. If we don't leave this draft with one of them we better have a ransom in tow instead.
Michael Floyd? Really Quinton Coples might be the smartest pick in the long run, but it sure would frustrate Browns fans who want something for the offense now.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it suggested elsewhere that if Washington deals for the Rams pick, St Louis might want to trade back up to 4 from 6. They would still end up with extra picks and be might be able to get the player they wanted all along at 2.

I think the Rams want Kalil. If they trade with Washington who takes RG3 then the Vikes are deciding between Claiborne and Kalil? If they go Kalil I don't see the Rams trading up, if they do it's to get Blackmon. If the Vikes go Claiborne, yea, maybe we can trade down. But then what do we do at 6? I guess we hope Tampa signs a guy like Manningham and doesn't take Blackmon? maybe they'll take Reiff instead? Unless we let Hillis walk and Richardson is our plan B (or plan A) I don't like this plan. Very risky. We need one of RG3, Blackmon, or Richardson. If we don't leave this draft with one of them we better have a ransom in tow instead.
Michael Floyd? Really Quinton Coples might be the smartest pick in the long run, but it sure would frustrate Browns fans who want something for the offense now.
I'd be happiest if we just target Wright or Floyd at 22. I don't think we need to trade down to get one of them. If we want one of them then go another direction at the top (Richardson or RG3) then target one of them later in round 1.Coples could be a manimal on some team, but I don't trust him on a team like the Browns. He seems like the type that needs a strong locker room around him and unfortunately we don't have that right now.
Link to post
Share on other sites

CBSsports.com reported on Saturday that at least three teams are seriously considering deals to move up to No. 2: Washington (No. 6), Miami (No. 8) and Seattle (No. 12). It said the Browns (with the fourth and 22nd picks in the first round) are interested in trading up, but not as much as the other teams, and that the Redskins are the front-runners.

Howard Eskin of WIP Radio Philadelphia reported Sunday that Redskins sources told him they're prepared to offer their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks this year and at least a 1st next year.

Too much. Hope the Browns don't do something like this.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bolded the part that bothers me the most.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/27/reports-suggest-browns-cautious-about-griffin-trade-thus-far/

Reports: Browns cautious about potential Griffin trade:

It’s late February, which means the rumors and speculation surrounding St. Louis’ No. 2 overall pick have only just begun. In this infant stage, the Browns aren’t showing their hand by showing great interest in the pick.

John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com reports the Browns have been showing “weird, uninterested signals” in the pick. Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com reports that Washington, Miami and Seattle have shown more interest in trading up for Robert Griffin III.

We’re not sure this means a lot at this point. Perhaps the Browns really would prefer to go after Matt Flynn in free agency. Or perhaps they just don’t want to show their intentions this early in the process, which makes a lot more sense.

Czarnecki, however, writes the Browns coaching staff “remains confused on what to do with RGIII.”

If that’s true, it says more about the Browns coaching staff than it does Griffin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bolded the part that bothers me the most.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/27/reports-suggest-browns-cautious-about-griffin-trade-thus-far/

Reports: Browns cautious about potential Griffin trade:

It’s late February, which means the rumors and speculation surrounding St. Louis’ No. 2 overall pick have only just begun. In this infant stage, the Browns aren’t showing their hand by showing great interest in the pick.

John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com reports the Browns have been showing “weird, uninterested signals” in the pick. Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com reports that Washington, Miami and Seattle have shown more interest in trading up for Robert Griffin III.

We’re not sure this means a lot at this point. Perhaps the Browns really would prefer to go after Matt Flynn in free agency. Or perhaps they just don’t want to show their intentions this early in the process, which makes a lot more sense.

Czarnecki, however, writes the Browns coaching staff “remains confused on what to do with RGIII.”

If that’s true, it says more about the Browns coaching staff than it does Griffin.

I love how a sportswriter nobody knows can write that the coaching staff is confused & people believe him. It's very unlikely that any sportwriter spends enough time with the group of coaches to know what they discuss privately.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully Manning goes to Washington so we don't have get into a bidding war with them. I'm all for the Browns trading the 22nd and 2nd round pick for RG3 but when you start talking about giving up next years pick, I think that is too much. At that point I would rather they sign Flynn and draft Richardson and Floyd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bolded the part that bothers me the most.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/27/reports-suggest-browns-cautious-about-griffin-trade-thus-far/

Reports: Browns cautious about potential Griffin trade:

It’s late February, which means the rumors and speculation surrounding St. Louis’ No. 2 overall pick have only just begun. In this infant stage, the Browns aren’t showing their hand by showing great interest in the pick.

John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com reports the Browns have been showing “weird, uninterested signals” in the pick. Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com reports that Washington, Miami and Seattle have shown more interest in trading up for Robert Griffin III.

We’re not sure this means a lot at this point. Perhaps the Browns really would prefer to go after Matt Flynn in free agency. Or perhaps they just don’t want to show their intentions this early in the process, which makes a lot more sense.

Czarnecki, however, writes the Browns coaching staff “remains confused on what to do with RGIII.”

If that’s true, it says more about the Browns coaching staff than it does Griffin.

I love how a sportswriter nobody knows can write that the coaching staff is confused & people believe him. It's very unlikely that any sportwriter spends enough time with the group of coaches to know what they discuss privately.
He's just saying what a lot of people hear have been saying as well. I'm not saying he's right or wrong just passing info along. I don't think they are getting feet though. I don't think you can believe a word of what any GM says at this point. Especially a team sitting at 4 who might really want RG3. From some initial reports on the Rams it sounds like their asking price for the 2 is pretty steep.

FWIW:

I wouldn't say he's a guy that nobody knows. :shrug:

FOXSports.com Senior NFL Writer

John Czarnecki has been the editorial consultant for "FOX NFL Sunday" since its 1994 inception. This season marks Czarnecki's 32nd year covering the NFL. He is one of 44 selectors to the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Edited by eric rymer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Redskins fan I know is saying "hopefully the Browns sign Flynn so we can get RGIII."

Hopefully Manning goes to Washington so we don't have get into a bidding war with them. I'm all for the Browns trading the 22nd and 2nd round pick for RG3 but when you start talking about giving up next years pick, I think that is too much. At that point I would rather they sign Flynn and draft Richardson and Floyd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns and middle linebacker D'Qwell Jackson have agreed to terms on a long-term contract.

A source told The Plain Dealer the contract was for five years and $42.5 million. It includes $19 million in guarantees and bonuses.

Jackson's representatives and the Browns had a positive meeting at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis over the weekend and were able to finalize the deal.

After missing almost two full seasons with separate pectoral muscle injuries, Jackson returned to anchor the defense last season. He played in all 16 games last season, leading the AFC and finishing second in the NFL in tackles with 158.

link

:thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns and middle linebacker D'Qwell Jackson have agreed to terms on a long-term contract.

A source told The Plain Dealer the contract was for five years and $42.5 million. It includes $19 million in guarantees and bonuses.

Jackson's representatives and the Browns had a positive meeting at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis over the weekend and were able to finalize the deal.

After missing almost two full seasons with separate pectoral muscle injuries, Jackson returned to anchor the defense last season. He played in all 16 games last season, leading the AFC and finishing second in the NFL in tackles with 158.

link

:thumbup:

:thumbup: Very good news.
Link to post
Share on other sites

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns and middle linebacker D'Qwell Jackson have agreed to terms on a long-term contract.

A source told The Plain Dealer the contract was for five years and $42.5 million. It includes $19 million in guarantees and bonuses.

Jackson's representatives and the Browns had a positive meeting at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis over the weekend and were able to finalize the deal.

After missing almost two full seasons with separate pectoral muscle injuries, Jackson returned to anchor the defense last season. He played in all 16 games last season, leading the AFC and finishing second in the NFL in tackles with 158.

link

:thumbup:

:thumbup: Very good news.
:goodposting:
Link to post
Share on other sites

well now we know where he has been.

Heckert

Heckert recovering after heart surgery

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on February 27, 2012, 3:32 PM EST

AP

Browns G.M. Tom Heckert is recovering after undergoing heart surgery to repair blockage, Browns President Mike Holmgren revealed Monday via the Cleveland Plain-Dealer.

Heckert missed both the Senior Bowl and the Scouting Combine, although he participated in Combine interviews via Skype. Heckert did not suffer a heart attack, but surgery was required after blockage was revealed. It’s believed the surgery was a bypass.

Holmgren stressed that Heckert “will be an integral part of the draft process” and he’ll be back at work in the office in some capacity Tuesday. (It’s unclear when the surgery took place.)

Working for an NFL team is an inherently unhealthy occupation. We wish Heckert all the best in getting healthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yikes, here's hoping for a speedy recovery for Tom.

What is up with the Browns PR referring to this as Tom being "a little ill" or "under the weather"? They don't have to get into the gory details, they just have to say that he's significantly sick enough that he is physically unable to attend the combine. Can someone please fire Neal Gulkis already?

well now we know where he has been.

Heckert

Heckert recovering after heart surgery

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on February 27, 2012, 3:32 PM EST

AP

Browns G.M. Tom Heckert is recovering after undergoing heart surgery to repair blockage, Browns President Mike Holmgren revealed Monday via the Cleveland Plain-Dealer.

Heckert missed both the Senior Bowl and the Scouting Combine, although he participated in Combine interviews via Skype. Heckert did not suffer a heart attack, but surgery was required after blockage was revealed. It’s believed the surgery was a bypass.

Holmgren stressed that Heckert “will be an integral part of the draft process” and he’ll be back at work in the office in some capacity Tuesday. (It’s unclear when the surgery took place.)

Working for an NFL team is an inherently unhealthy occupation. We wish Heckert all the best in getting healthy.

Edited by nxmehta
Link to post
Share on other sites

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns and middle linebacker D'Qwell Jackson have agreed to terms on a long-term contract.

A source told The Plain Dealer the contract was for five years and $42.5 million. It includes $19 million in guarantees and bonuses.

Jackson's representatives and the Browns had a positive meeting at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis over the weekend and were able to finalize the deal.

After missing almost two full seasons with separate pectoral muscle injuries, Jackson returned to anchor the defense last season. He played in all 16 games last season, leading the AFC and finishing second in the NFL in tackles with 158.

link

:thumbup:

:thumbup: Very good news.
:goodposting:
Now we can franchise Dawson! :thumbup:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Redskins fan I know is saying "hopefully the Browns sign Flynn so we can get RGIII."

Hopefully Manning goes to Washington so we don't have get into a bidding war with them. I'm all for the Browns trading the 22nd and 2nd round pick for RG3 but when you start talking about giving up next years pick, I think that is too much. At that point I would rather they sign Flynn and draft Richardson and Floyd.

Right, for the exact reasons Menace said. The price will be lowered if either Wash or Cle are not bidding. The only way to TRULY know that the other team isn't bidding is if one of them has Flynn (or Manning from the Skins perspective). Miami and even Arizona are still wild cards here and could play a part in all the scheming.
Link to post
Share on other sites

No tag for Hillis?

link

Report: Browns won’t use franchise tag on Hillis

Posted by Mike Florio on February 28, 2012, 7:17 AM EST

Getty Images

Now that the Browns have worked out a new contract with linebacker D’Qwell Jackson, they won’t have to use the franchise tag to keep him on the team.

But that doesn’t mean the Browns will use the franchise tag on someone else.

The two prime candidates are running back Peyton Hillis and kicker Phil Dawson, recipient of the team’s tag in 2011. According to Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, however, the Browns remain disinclined to use the tag on Hillis.

Though Hillis finally got his head pointed in the right direction late in the season, his unexpected 1,177-yard performance in 2010 coupled with his appearance on the cover of the Madden game caused him to have an overly high opinion of his value. And when he didn’t get the kind of contract he thought he should get from the Browns, he started behaving a bit bizarrely. Eventually, Hillis acquired some humility, and he put together strong performances against the Cardinals and Ravens in Weeks 15 and 16.

With the franchise tender for running backs expected to be at $7.7 million for 2012, applying the tag to Hillis would potentially rekindle his ego and dust off those moon-shot monetary demands. And so the Browns will allow him to hit the open market. Once he sees what his value is (and via the pre-free agency negotiations that inevitably occur, he possibly already has), Hillis could be in position to work out a long-term deal that would have an annual value far less than $7.7 million.

The risk for the Browns is that someone else could offer Hillis more than the Browns will pay. As Peter King explained during one of the various editions of Football Night in America last season, former Browns coach Eric Mangini will tell anyone who asks that Hillis is a great kid and a great player and would be a great addition to the team.

The Browns nevertheless should maintain an attitude of nonchalance. Hillis plays the most fungible position in football that doesn’t involve long-snapping, kicking, holding for kicks, or punting. The Browns will find someone else who can move the chains and compile yards and score touchdowns and strike a chord with the fan base and infatuate fantasy owners and maybe even end up on the cover of Madden.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No tag for Hillis?

link

Report: Browns won’t use franchise tag on Hillis

Posted by Mike Florio on February 28, 2012, 7:17 AM EST

Getty Images

Now that the Browns have worked out a new contract with linebacker D’Qwell Jackson, they won’t have to use the franchise tag to keep him on the team.

But that doesn’t mean the Browns will use the franchise tag on someone else.

The two prime candidates are running back Peyton Hillis and kicker Phil Dawson, recipient of the team’s tag in 2011. According to Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, however, the Browns remain disinclined to use the tag on Hillis.

Though Hillis finally got his head pointed in the right direction late in the season, his unexpected 1,177-yard performance in 2010 coupled with his appearance on the cover of the Madden game caused him to have an overly high opinion of his value. And when he didn’t get the kind of contract he thought he should get from the Browns, he started behaving a bit bizarrely. Eventually, Hillis acquired some humility, and he put together strong performances against the Cardinals and Ravens in Weeks 15 and 16.

With the franchise tender for running backs expected to be at $7.7 million for 2012, applying the tag to Hillis would potentially rekindle his ego and dust off those moon-shot monetary demands. And so the Browns will allow him to hit the open market. Once he sees what his value is (and via the pre-free agency negotiations that inevitably occur, he possibly already has), Hillis could be in position to work out a long-term deal that would have an annual value far less than $7.7 million.

The risk for the Browns is that someone else could offer Hillis more than the Browns will pay. As Peter King explained during one of the various editions of Football Night in America last season, former Browns coach Eric Mangini will tell anyone who asks that Hillis is a great kid and a great player and would be a great addition to the team.

The Browns nevertheless should maintain an attitude of nonchalance. Hillis plays the most fungible position in football that doesn’t involve long-snapping, kicking, holding for kicks, or punting. The Browns will find someone else who can move the chains and compile yards and score touchdowns and strike a chord with the fan base and infatuate fantasy owners and maybe even end up on the cover of Madden.

Seems about right. Zurella is reporting this morning they are working on a 3yr deal with Hillis. Lots of incentives, something like 3yr/10m.
Link to post
Share on other sites

No tag for Hillis?

link

Report: Browns won’t use franchise tag on Hillis

Posted by Mike Florio on February 28, 2012, 7:17 AM EST

Getty Images

Now that the Browns have worked out a new contract with linebacker D’Qwell Jackson, they won’t have to use the franchise tag to keep him on the team.

But that doesn’t mean the Browns will use the franchise tag on someone else.

The two prime candidates are running back Peyton Hillis and kicker Phil Dawson, recipient of the team’s tag in 2011. According to Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, however, the Browns remain disinclined to use the tag on Hillis.

Though Hillis finally got his head pointed in the right direction late in the season, his unexpected 1,177-yard performance in 2010 coupled with his appearance on the cover of the Madden game caused him to have an overly high opinion of his value. And when he didn’t get the kind of contract he thought he should get from the Browns, he started behaving a bit bizarrely. Eventually, Hillis acquired some humility, and he put together strong performances against the Cardinals and Ravens in Weeks 15 and 16.

With the franchise tender for running backs expected to be at $7.7 million for 2012, applying the tag to Hillis would potentially rekindle his ego and dust off those moon-shot monetary demands. And so the Browns will allow him to hit the open market. Once he sees what his value is (and via the pre-free agency negotiations that inevitably occur, he possibly already has), Hillis could be in position to work out a long-term deal that would have an annual value far less than $7.7 million.

The risk for the Browns is that someone else could offer Hillis more than the Browns will pay. As Peter King explained during one of the various editions of Football Night in America last season, former Browns coach Eric Mangini will tell anyone who asks that Hillis is a great kid and a great player and would be a great addition to the team.

The Browns nevertheless should maintain an attitude of nonchalance. Hillis plays the most fungible position in football that doesn’t involve long-snapping, kicking, holding for kicks, or punting. The Browns will find someone else who can move the chains and compile yards and score touchdowns and strike a chord with the fan base and infatuate fantasy owners and maybe even end up on the cover of Madden.

Seems about right. Zurella is reporting this morning they are working on a 3yr deal with Hillis. Lots of incentives, something like 3yr/10m.
I'd have no problem with that either. definitely not worth 7.7M kind of money with all the issues from last year. Lets let him earn it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bolded the part that bothers me the most.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/27/reports-suggest-browns-cautious-about-griffin-trade-thus-far/

Reports: Browns cautious about potential Griffin trade:

Its late February, which means the rumors and speculation surrounding St. Louis No. 2 overall pick have only just begun. In this infant stage, the Browns arent showing their hand by showing great interest in the pick.

John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com reports the Browns have been showing weird, uninterested signals in the pick. Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com reports that Washington, Miami and Seattle have shown more interest in trading up for Robert Griffin III.

Were not sure this means a lot at this point. Perhaps the Browns really would prefer to go after Matt Flynn in free agency. Or perhaps they just dont want to show their intentions this early in the process, which makes a lot more sense.

Czarnecki, however, writes the Browns coaching staff remains confused on what to do with RGIII.

If thats true, it says more about the Browns coaching staff than it does Griffin.

I love how a sportswriter nobody knows can write that the coaching staff is confused & people believe him. It's very unlikely that any sportwriter spends enough time with the group of coaches to know what they discuss privately.
He's just saying what a lot of people hear have been saying as well. I'm not saying he's right or wrong just passing info along. I don't think they are getting feet though. I don't think you can believe a word of what any GM says at this point. Especially a team sitting at 4 who might really want RG3. From some initial reports on the Rams it sounds like their asking price for the 2 is pretty steep.

FWIW:

I wouldn't say he's a guy that nobody knows. :shrug:

FOXSports.com Senior NFL Writer

John Czarnecki has been the editorial consultant for "FOX NFL Sunday" since its 1994 inception. This season marks Czarnecki's 32nd year covering the NFL. He is one of 44 selectors to the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Agreed. He's not "nobody". I guess the part I don't like is his being remote from the situation and calling the people he didn't interface with "confused" when, in fact, it is he himself who is confused. And, he didn't just say confused, he said "remain confused", as if they know nothing about football. It would have been more accurate if he had said, "I remain confused" about their intentions, or "the things I am hearing from people do not clarify the speculation any", but that wouldn't be incendiary.

Edit for spelling

Edited by daveR
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on board with trading up for RGIII as long as they spend a little more in FA. Think they'll go after Pierre Garcon, DeSean Jackson, Stevie Johnson or Mario Manningham.

RGIII, Hillis (& Hardesty), Little and one of those WRs is a nice young foundation of talent.

Add some other FAs and draft choices based on need (OL, DE, CB, OLB) and I'll be very happy looking forward for once.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on board with trading up for RGIII as long as they spend a little more in FA. Think they'll go after Pierre Garcon, DeSean Jackson, Stevie Johnson or Mario Manningham.RGIII, Hillis (& Hardesty), Little and one of those WRs is a nice young foundation of talent.Add some other FAs and draft choices based on need (OL, DE, CB, OLB) and I'll be very happy looking forward for once.

I'd be absolutely fine with that. Having a guy like RG3 there would have to make it a more desirable place for FA's to want to come as well.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 100% against going after our top WR in free agency. It’s a strategy proven to fail for losing teams. The free agent WR route is the last piece of the puzzle a team goes after, not when rebuilding.

We must leave this draft with either Blackmon, Wright, or Floyd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...