After sitting back and watching the transactions the first two days of free agency, Cleveland Browns fans finally saw Mike Holmgren and company make their first two additions to the roster on Sunday. After hearing that Tony Pashos signed earlier in the day, it was reported soon after that LB Scott Fujita had signed as well.
One of the members from Canal Street Chronicles, our New Orleans Saints affiliate, weighed in on the type of player that Fujita is:
I think he’ll do great in Cleveland. He came to the Saints coming off of out 3-13 Katrina season, and has been a solid block in our 4 year rebuilding process culminating with a Superbowl. He’s certainly not afraid to step up as a leader on a rebuilding team, and should be a great player to help you guys turn it around.
He’s not the flashiest, highlight-reel player, but he gets the job done and gets it done well. Don’t assume “not flashy” is the same as “not good.” He rarely makes mistakes, and is almost never the reason a defensive play fails. He should be a starter for you guys for the next few years. I’m sure you guys will like him as much as we did. Kudos to you on getting a solid player!
So far, I see this year's free agency as being quite similar to last year's free agency period. We're signing veteran players who aren't superstars but can hold their own at their position. The only difference is that since Mangini drained the pool of Jets last year, we're actually looking around at other teams' rosters.
Fujita is expected to make the move from outside linebacker in the Saints' 4-3 defense to inside linebacker in the Browns' 3-4 defense. Fujita will help to strengthen the Browns' run defense, which has been pretty bad since the return to the league in 1999.
Based on how well David Bowens played last year, an early projection would have our starting linebacker unit consisting of Kamerion Wimbley, D'Qwell Jackson, Scott Fujita, and David Bowens. However, part of me wonders if there's an outside chance that Bowens stays on the inside (where he was at the end of last season) and we work Jackson out of the rotation. Eric Barton would likely be the odd man out, with Jason Trusnik and Matt Roth being the primary backup linebackers alongside last year's draft picks.
0 recs | 197 comments
Our linebacking crop is old, but surprisingly talented. With some smart additions, the regimes have really upgraded them over the past two season.
gahnki - March 7, 2010
Fujita, Bowens, and DQ should make a solid rotation to go along with wimbley and roth.
scc2o4 - March 7, 2010 via mobile
fixed.
Ryan Kelsey - March 8, 2010
This.
We are better but we still need a lot of help. Pass rush and middle thumper mainly.
I do like our depth though.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
I don’t fully agree.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
Talented depth matters. This is probably the best linebacking group the Browns have had since Butch Davis had a solid group of guys. Now, this is partially because of the lack of talent of previous years, but there is still progress being made.. Yes, they lack an impact, star type of guy, but the unit is far better than it has been it years.
gahnki - March 8, 2010
because of the addition of scott fujita? I mean he is a marginal guy, certainly not a star. The rest of the linebacking corps is the same as last year, and they were terrible last year. I don’t see how we got significantly better. Of the guys we have right now we could probably still stand to find a pass rushing LB at the very least. An elite ILB would help but I don’t think we’ll find our guy this year.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
There was no mention of Scott Fujita putting this corp over the top.
gahnki - March 8, 2010
I have heard that Fujita is a power LB and is great at shedding blockers. He could be a good compliment to Dqwell.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
Yea, that’s what I am reading as well. Seems like a big boy that is smart. I don’t see how Eric Barton fits anymore.
Roger Dorn - March 7, 2010
I said in another post. DQ, Roth, and Fujita. AWESOME.
Brownie's Year - March 7, 2010
If he can come back from his injury. It sounds more serious than I thought it was.
rufio - March 8, 2010
As long as you don’t try to use him in coverage. He’s not horrid at that, but he’s not very good either.
FriarBob - March 8, 2010
Very pleased with both signings. I really wanted to sign a run-blocking type for the right side and the scouting reports suggest that Pashos strengths are run-blocking.
Roger Dorn - March 7, 2010
I like what we are doing. If we swing a trade for donte whitner I’ll be grinning ear to ear. Then we are a corner and eric berry away from a totally rejuvinated defense.
jaws. - March 7, 2010
in your scenario witner is the corner we need, no? Witner, Wright, Elam, Berry as your listed starters
rockybrown - March 7, 2010
no whitner is a strong safety. Elam becomes a package player and we still need a CB to start opposite Eric Wright. Kareem Jackson or Kyle Wilson would be nice. I’d be happy if there was a trade possibility for Nnamdi Asomugha though too.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
OJ Atogwe
Free safety and RFA out of St. Louis. I guess the Rams offered him the lowest possible tender and I’ve heard some good rumblings about his play. Know anything about this guy?
Monsters of the Midway - March 8, 2010
He is interesting. many cities are blogging about how they hope their team looks at him and their team should look at him. however, Atogwe has only met with one team: the giants. however, this was before the giants signed Antrel Rolle. so any team that truly is a front runner for him now is just speculation.
bross09 - March 8, 2010
I think Roth either starts or plays more minutes a game then Bowens IMO.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
i agree. Wimbley, DQ, Fujita, Roth right to left . Good rotation players in Bowens, Maiva, Veikune, Hall, Benard
rockybrown - March 7, 2010
Trusnick, too. Wow, we are deep at LB. We have 10 LBs that can contribute.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
And obviously, Barton is the odd man out. With his back, I expect him to retire.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
I’ve thought that for a while now. He isn’t needed and has a good reason to quit.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
I think everyone’s being a little too optimistic at the moment. We’re overloaded at LB? Seriously? Usually I’m the most optimistic one here, but I’m not convinced.
I think we have a good servicable group sure, but unless we have depth like the Cowboys had, I wouldn’t say we’re overloaded at LB. I would like to be proven wrong, however.
For the record, I love the Fujita signing. But we still don’t have that star power at LB that so many other defenses have. I won’t be satisfied until Wimbley’s putting up DeMarcus Ware like numbers, and one of our inside guys starts hooting and hollering like Ray Lewis.
This leads me to believe that LB is still something of a key need. Below DB’s and OL for sure. Definetly below a power RB now. But we still need to get some guys who will be solid anchors for years to come.
BrownDawg1409 - March 7, 2010
We don’t have a star, but we have some guys that can be good and are very deep.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
I wouldn’t neccesarily call Maiva (though I love him) and Trusnik deep. But they still have another season to prove me wrong.
BrownDawg1409 - March 7, 2010
Maiva looked like a good backup last year.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
I thought Maiva had some really solid games. One bad game that I can remember. Trusnik was also fairly good both on special teams and as an occasional pass rusher.
Roger Dorn - March 7, 2010
I like Maiva too. I got nothing against him. Maybe it’d be more accurate of me to say that I’m skeptical about Bowens having a repeat year, Trusnik making an impact on defense, or Roth becoming that DeMarcus Ware kind of rusher that I want.
Key word is: skeptical. I’m open to the possiblitiy that things can work out, but I’d still prefer to work under the assumption that they won’t and try to find a few more gems in this year’s draft. After I’ve seen these guys go a year (with the preseason camp, most notably) with solid playing time, then I’ll be convinced.
BrownDawg1409 - March 8, 2010
Roth is not DeMarcus Ware. Nor are many others in the NFL.
Roger Dorn - March 8, 2010
Nor is anybody. DeMarcus Ware is easily one of the top 5 defensive players in the NFL. We could use a consistent pass rusher though.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
That doesn’t stop me from wanting one.
BrownDawg1409 - March 8, 2010
Believe me, I want a DeMarcus Ware.
Roger Dorn - March 8, 2010
Good luck with that.
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
That’s my point.
Roger Dorn - March 8, 2010
OK I get it now.
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
And I really don’t see a top tier pass rusher this year for a 3-4 defense.
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
I agree, but QB and pass rusher are the hardest things for me as an amateur to evaluate, so I tend to not make many predictions about them.
Roger Dorn - March 8, 2010
Good call. Pass rushers are very hard to evaluate for us because we require them to make a big switch.
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
A lot of people had huge questions about Merriman and Ware coming out.
rufio - March 8, 2010
Yep.
Vernon Gohlston looked like a lock. He is a physical freak of nature and was the only defensive player to beat Jake Long for a sack in his entire college career. And yet, he Busts.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
Vernon Gholston=Defensive Tony Mandarich of another generation
bross09 - March 8, 2010
Not even close.
Tony Mandarich started 63 games in the NFL.
Example A on why drafting OLineman is always a smart move.
Bernie19Kosar - March 9, 2010
Yup
Buckeye Brad - March 9, 2010
did you seriously just say that drafting mandarich was a smart move??
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Smart move, no.
But to say that Mandarich was a bust on the level of Gholston is foolish.
Mandarich played in the league for many years and was a starter for 63 games. He was good enough to start for four seasons in the NFL.
That isn’t a bust, it may be a disappointment, but not a bust.
Bernie19Kosar - March 9, 2010
When you consider the hype around him, where he was drafted, and players that could have been had, he is a definite bust.
Here is the short list of guys drafted after him:
Barry Sanders
Andre Rison
Eric Metcalf
Deion Sanders
Derrick Thomas
Steve Atwater.
guess what…by that logic, Michael Huff was not a bust b/c he started about 51 games, just a season less. he never produced on the field, but he cannot be a bust b/c the team kept him on the field.
Just b/c someone starts for a few seasons and is a high draft pick, doesn’t mean they aren’t a bust.
I am pretty sure at one point you referred to David Carr as being a bust…and he may be…in fact, he started more games in his career than Mandarich.
My point is this: just because a guy starts for 5 years or so doesn’t make him not a bust. Mandarich was horrible in Green Bay and the only reasons he wasn’t benched for so long were
a) Lack of a better replacement
b) the fact that he was such a high pick and oftentimes picks that high are played longer than they should b/c teams do not want to bench that sort of contract.
He was somewhat servicable for 3 years in Indy, but 3 years of being servicable does not make someone not a bust. Considering:
-The players drafted in that draft
-Where he was Drafted
-His production
-The Hype around him
He was clearly a bust…gholston is not yet even on the same level of bust.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
You are completely missing his point. His point was that if a guy busts as a WR or RB or DT or QB or almost any other position then he’s out of the league (or a backup) but an LT “bust” can usually be a servicable player at guard or RT so it’s not as bad as missing on someone from those other positions.
The hype around him is completely irrelevant. He’s looking at the return received by the team that drafted him.
Buckeye Brad - March 10, 2010
yes.
I guess in that sense you can maybe construe that he is just a very major disappointment.
IMO though, considering his draft position, other possible options (HOFers), and production, I would classify him as a bust. I would not even consider him a servicable player until he spent a couple years at the end of his career in indy…if that makes him not a bust in your eyes or his, then so be it. but his body of work with the packers was horrendous.
bross09 - March 10, 2010
So you want Ware and Lewis – like players? On the same team in the same era? At once?
Well. That’s reasonable.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
Darn straight it is.
BrownDawg1409 - March 7, 2010
We still need an elite pass rushing OLB.
I would love to take Spikes in round two as another ILB.
Bernie19Kosar - March 7, 2010
We have all the same linebackers we had last year + Fujita. all of a sudden one of our weakest positon groups is strong? I don’t buy it.
Roth and Wembley are serviceable but between our DL and rush linebackers we still don’t have anyone who consistently gets pressures and splash plays. If Shaun Rogers can make the transition to 5-tech and become a disruptive force like Haloti Ngata has (its actually very possible, if anyone has the skillset, Shaun Rogers does.) then maybe we will be getting somewhere.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
LB was far from our weakest position last year. CB and S were easily weaker. TE was easily weaker. QB and RT were easily weaker for large parts of the season. RB was weaker every game that Harrison didn’t play a large role in. WR2, 3, etc. were easily weaker.
rufio - March 8, 2010
I agree, we do not have a star pass rusher or inside guy. However, the talented depth that we do have will really make a difference over past years. One guy being injured will hopefully not derail the defense as it has in year’s past.
gahnki - March 7, 2010
Depth? What was the Browns defensive rank again? We need some standouts, I really don’t want to go thru a loser or mediocre season. Aren’t we tired of that????
kamasutraman_007 - March 7, 2010
I don’t know?? Do you??????
gahnki - March 7, 2010
I’m tired of getting Rich Gannon every other damn week.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
This.
danvail - March 8, 2010
towards the bottom!!! Can’t stop the run and suseptable to the big pass play. Everybody is afraid to spend money to try and put a winner on the field. If you’re still trying to build for the future, what future is that, mediocrity.
kamasutraman_007 - March 7, 2010
Haynesworth has done wonders for Washington.
I see where you’re getting at. Were you reading Cleveland.com before finding DBN?
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
Who exactly is afraid to spend money and put a winner on the field?
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
Wow.
rufio - March 8, 2010
yeah. lets overspend to put a mediocre product on the field…just like the chocago bears. gues how that will turn out for them?
bross09 - March 8, 2010
Charlie's Fryes? SCOTT'S FUHJITAS!
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
Rec. I litteraly laughed out loud at the stupidness.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
Hah
danvail - March 7, 2010
Ha!
emily522 - March 8, 2010
Just wondering, do we use need corners to play in zone or man?
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
Man?
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
Man coverage. I thought that was understood. my bad.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
No. I knew what it meant.
I was answering apprehensively.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
We play both. You can teach corners to play zone coverage, though; you can either play man or you can’t.
gahnki - March 7, 2010
But is there a certain type that we would be more likely to draft?
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
impact players. I want to draft some hitters. Some that can force some turnovers.
kamasutraman_007 - March 7, 2010
Well, that didn’t answer his question. At all.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
hahaha
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
he ask for a certain “TYPE”. We are in the AFC North, with Pittsburgh and the Ravens. Teams built around smashmouth defenses. To compete, the Browns have to get “impact” (hard-hitting ) players. Not one of the Browns defensive players are “feared” and thats what we have to become
kamasutraman_007 - March 7, 2010
I was talking about coverage style. And I would rather have my front 7 do the hitting. That’s how you have a good D.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
wait…so you want the CBs going after the back on every play?
bross09 - March 8, 2010
I’d rather have excellent coverage players rather than players that just want to hit people (though both qualities in a player would be good).
skipkirk - March 8, 2010
i’ll take the guy who has solid, fundamental tackling skills over the flashy “hitter” any day of the week.
Dawg Nuts - March 8, 2010
This.
Give me the player who makes 95% of his tackles, not the one who makes less than 50% but always gets the crowd going with the crack hit he gave.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
So it seems that you’re all about repeating mindless cliches with no actual analysis.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
I have noticed that. this man is very impatient.
bross09 - March 8, 2010
Rob Ryan wants guys who can play man coverage.
gahnki - March 7, 2010
OK thank you.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
Man coverage. Rob Ryan likes to pressure the QB and play man to man, much like Twin Brother Rex. Eric Berry would make a great fit (along with a good man to man corner) because it means leaving your defense in cover 1 or cover 0 presents less risk. In other words you can blitz more and not get burned as much.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
man is my preference too. That frees up the safeties for run support. There was a time when the Browns could play man. Defense was pretty solid then. That is why drafting or acquiring cb is so important.
kamasutraman_007 - March 7, 2010
Reply button.
SpecialBrownie - March 7, 2010
There was a time when the Browns could play man-0. It was this year against pittsburgh. There was another time when the Browns could play man, it was before the NFL rules changed to favor the WRs.
Playing man coverage in and of itself does not “free safeties up for run support”.
rufio - March 8, 2010
CPD is reporting that the Fujita deal is 3 years and 14 million.
Like that deal more and more.
Bernie19Kosar - March 7, 2010
8 Mill guaranteed.
Also can make the contract 16 million with incentives.
TheRealSlimShady - March 7, 2010
holy shit that’s a lot of frickin money for scott fujita
The Licensed Pessimist - March 8, 2010
Dude, you can’t say Holy shit for every contract you see. That’s actually fairly cheap.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
Dude, when I see a holy shit contract, I say holy shit.
I admit at first I read that as 18 mil for some reason. But almost 5 million a year for Scott Fujita is still a lot of money IMO. I definitely wouldn’t say its cheap
The Licensed Pessimist - March 8, 2010
Almost no player ever fulfills the incentives of a contract and for his skill, that’s a good contract. And also, the averages of contracts raise every year. We’ve ridden ourselves of some huge contracts in the last two years and along with having a ton of cap space last year, I think we can splurge a little per player; if they deserve it of course, which Fuji does.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
for his talent though, this is a very fair deal.
bross09 - March 8, 2010
Exactly.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
yep. that is why I like it. for a starter, this is a pretty moderate deal. he is starter quality.
bross09 - March 8, 2010
What is his talent level? Its seems to be average.
If you think 5 mil a year for average is a great deal, good for you
The Licensed Pessimist - March 8, 2010
I’ll bet if you analyze free agent signings over the past few years you’ll find that Fujita’s deal is pretty good for an average starting LB.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
yes. he is not going to wow you but he is a solid starter that does the job. in this day in age, that is a very fair price for that production.
bross09 - March 8, 2010
Here’s a link to 2009 NFL linebacker salaries from the USA Today. Fujita’s salary puts him near other average-to-good starting LB’s. Most of the really good LB’s on that list who make less than that are still on their rookie contract and haven’t hit the big payday yet.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
I like to call it, “not overpaying in comparison.”
Chris Pokorny - March 8, 2010
Good point.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
Perfect.
Dansby got 43MIL, while Fujita got 14MIL.
Sounds really good to me.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
yeah, dansby is probably the second or 3rd best ILB in the league and Fujita is just a fundamentally sound above average defender.
Thing is: while Dansby is elite, the difference between pretty good and elite isn’t as big at this position as some of the others.
Good deal for the browns, that money is better spent somewhere else.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
Lewis and Willis are elite. A healthy Urlacher 2-3 years ago was elite. Although Dansby very well may be the 3rdish best ILB in the league, he is not on their level. Point taken, though.
rufio - March 8, 2010
Disagree on him being the 3rdish.
There are a lot of ILBs I would rather have though many may be MLBs who have never played the 3-4 but might fit.
still at the 3-4 ILB position I can think of other players I like better and I think are better players.
DJ WIlliams
David Harris
While Dansby is not far behind, I still like these players better and this was Williams’ first year in the 3-4. was this the first year for arizona in the 3-4? I don’t remember them running it before. still, purely as a guy who plays ILB in a 3-4, don’t consider it a complete stretch to say 3rdish…however, you mentioned urlacher but he doesn’t play that position. he is a 4-3 MLB. if we are including those guys, then 3rdish is to me, not realistic.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Arizona has run a 3-4/4-3 hybrid for several years now.
Did you really think I didn’t know Urlacher plays in a 4-3?
I guess by “Dansby very well may be the 3rdish best ILB in the league” I was trying to say “Ok, let’s assume he is the 3rdish best ILB in the NFL”. Like I was willing to accept that as rational.
The points are still that Dansby is not in Lewis’ and Willis’ ballpark, and Fujita was the better value (more on-field production per dollar).
rufio - March 9, 2010
Agree with everything rufio said.
Keep in mind that comparing Dansby to Ray Lewis and Patrick Willis is sort of apples to oranges, however. Dansby isn’t the tremendous run stuffing force that those guys are but is very versatile and very good dropping into coverage. Perhaps not the same impact that Lewis or Willis bring to the table but definitely an elite player in his own way.
jaws. - March 9, 2010
Who doesn’t agree with whatever Ruf ever says?
SpecialBrownie - March 9, 2010
Villeslgr - March 9, 2010
I totally agree.
i agree with the accepting it as rational. It is not irrational to rank him the 3rdish best ILB in the league. I agree that he isn’t their ballpark and that we might have made the smarter move moneywise.
Thanks for clearing up arizona for me.
I figured you knew Urlacher was in a 4-3. It makes more sense now that I see what you were trying to say.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
I disagree on dansby though on bieng the 3rd best ILB in the league.
I might not consider him elite. while he is a great player, I do not feel comfortable calling him elite. he is close though.
that is the problem, the difference isn’t much, yet he is payed almost double the money per year.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
technically Dansby’s was for 2 more years…but still. I look at this in a VORP kind of way. (the value between them).
Dansby’s is 4.4 Mil a year guaranteed and 8.6 total per year
Fujita’s is 2.6 Mil Guaranteed and 4.6 total per year.
so that is 69% more guaranteed per year and 89% more per year total.
the question is: is value of Dansby’s production even 69% more than the value of Fujita’s? I don’t think so. Eve with the difference in guaranteed money, I think we got a great deal.
Granted, waltefootball had dansby’s move as one of their good moves this offseason. while he is a good player, they probably did overpay for him. in pserspective of this year, he is underpayed but everyone has been overpayed…
bross09 - March 8, 2010
I like the move. It upgrades a still-putrid unit.
Ryan Kelsey - March 8, 2010
Were the LBs really that bad? My biggest beef is secondary by far. I thought the LBs were adequate. Nothing more, nothing less. WE didn’t have one dominant pass rusher, but overall the pressure from the schemes was above average.
Roger Dorn - March 8, 2010
Agree. We can free up the LBs if we had anyone other than Wright who could cover (I like Elam too but he is best in run support.)
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
Yes, the secondary is far worse than our linebackers. We still need more pass rush, though.
emily522 - March 8, 2010
I agree. We’re going to be overloaded with LBs and I still think we pick up one in the draft. Maybe one or two will get cut.
skipkirk - March 8, 2010
I think that we will be missing some LB’s from last years team (Barton, DQ and possibly Alex Hall?)
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
I didn’t even think of Hall haha. Yeah I reckon he goes. And Bernard goes.
The only way I see DQ going is if someone trades for him. I don’t think he gets cut.
skipkirk - March 8, 2010
Neither do I, but I think someone comes calling for him.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
Agreed. The linebackers were much better last season.
gahnki - March 8, 2010
Speaking as somebody who got to see all his games last year, I can tell you that you’re either going to love Fujita or you’re going to hate him. There is very little in between.
He has a great sense of humor, good leadership skills, and he’s pretty solid in run support as long as he’s not trying to take on 300 LB linemen. If he just has to worry about the RB or the FB, he’s pretty good. These are all reasons to like him. But he needs a shield in front of him to work off of. When Charles Grant was in front of him he did a great job against the run but the pass rush suffered. When McCray was there the pass rush was there but the run defense suffered. Now part of that was McCray is too one-dimensional and Grant is a fat tub of lard who should either be out of the league entirely or is only qualified to play end in a 3-4.
But some of that is that Fujita is still an average LB. He’s not — as some morons on CSC and/or stats sites have claimed — “the worst linebacker in the league”. Not by a long shot. But he is fairly average. And this leads to reasons why you might end up hating him. Because if by any chance he ends up in coverage instead of in run support, cover your eyes and pray really really hard. OK he’s not really THAT bad at it, but he’s pretty poor. He’s also not in the least bit afraid to speak his mind in harsh terms, which means he can start a political firestorm by just opening his mouth. That could piss y’all off a bit.
Anyway, while we won’t actually miss him (much, at least) in NO, he should help you guys out. I think going back to a 3-4 will be good for him, and good for you as well.
FriarBob - March 8, 2010
Thanks FriarBob. It’s great to see informative posts from others around the SB Nation.
Monsters of the Midway - March 8, 2010
Well hopefully he can work off Rogers and Rubin shedding tackles.
skipkirk - March 8, 2010
It sounds like he will enjoy playing in our 3-4.
rufio - March 8, 2010
not trying to hijack the thread (trying to keep the momentum going on the site) but what would the community think of trading for denver TE tony scheffler? maybe a 4 or a pair of 5’s? i think we stand a good chance of a compensatory pick or 2 & i think we need to upgrade from steve heiden who i like but he’s getting older & has an injury history.
sleepy042 - March 8, 2010
I went to high school with Scheffler, and trust me when I say that the cry-baby act he pulled after Cutler was traded is totally in character. I think he could be an effective pass catching threat (as he was in his first couple of seasons in Denver), but he’s simply not a Mangini-type player. I’d much rather make a run at Greg Olsen, even if the Bears demand more in compensation.
jjfoosk - March 8, 2010
ahhh thank you for the info….
sleepy042 - March 8, 2010
We absolutely need someone who can get vertical in the middle of the field. If that is a TE who is fast with hands, great. If that is a WR who can go over the middle, great. We need somebody. Too many of our pass attempts were outside the numbers last year, IMO.
rufio - March 8, 2010
This. Rec.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
yes. He is a solid player. I might rather have olsen though too.
Which would you rather have, a guy who is more vertical based at TE, or a guy who is more consistent? I would rather have the guy with consistency. I like sheffler’s talent but he has been a little inconsistent. yes he is a great deep threat, but olson I feel has been more consistent and is more likely from what i have heard, available (which means it will be easier for his team to part ways with him, which means possibly giving up less)
Olson also from what I have seen has a little more consistent hands. while his targets % caught does not show that number this year, no one was good at catching the ball in chicago, partially maybe because of cutler. if you look at Olsen with Orton, he is better at % of targets caught at about 67% than sheffler with either Orton or Cutler.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Olson can stretch the middle of the field, so he fits the kind of guy I was talking about.
The Bears invested a 1st rounder in Olson not too long ago, I bet it would be harder to get him than Scheffler. But I really wasn’t arguing either way. We just need someone, anyone.
rufio - March 9, 2010
i agree. I just heard that olsen might be available so I thought it was possible they would take less value (compared to what the value of the player was) for him.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
http://www.cantonrep.com/browns/x1918405809/Sunday-Special-Troy-Smith-wants-to-be-a-Brown
I know that this is really just a repeat of what he has already said, but it sounds like there is some interest coming from Holmgren and co. What do you think the chances are that he’s a Brown for 2010 considering we would have to get him from one of our division rivals? Also, if it happens, is this a good or bad move?
I for one would be happy with the move if all we had to give up was a 5th, but since the Ravens can match any offer, I feel we may have to do more than that to get him.
Browns town - March 8, 2010
They can only match our first offer and Smith has to agree to it, it’s not like if they match, they automatically get him right? Or that could be how it works out and I have no clue.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
That’s how an RFA works. His original team can match to retain him. Automatically, if they match, he’s under contract and he stays there. The contract cannot be changed in any way, so basically its like their GM signs below the Browns’ signatures and his signature is already in place so he’s now under contract. And if they don’t match, then he’s already under contract to the Browns (because he basically was as soon as the original contract was signed) and the Ravens get the 5th (?) round pick for him.
Then again, the Ravens know he wants out. I highly doubt they gave him such a low tender unless they were expecting to move him.
FriarBob - March 8, 2010
Got it and agreed.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
I agree as well about them expecting to move him. However, I worry that maybe they hope that he accepts an offer with an inexpensive contract. They match it and they get to keep their backup on the cheap. Therein lies the problem: On top of a 5th round pick , if the Browns really want Smith, they’re going to have to give him a contract that they know the Ravens won’t match, which will likely be more than what he is worth at this point in time.
With only 2 NFL starts, I ask the question how much is too much for Smith? He made less than 400k last season, will the Ravens match an offer around 1 million per season?
We could also try to swing a trade for him, though I’m not sure how likely that will be.
Browns town - March 8, 2010
If money is the issue, it shouldn’t stop us. Ceding a 5th rounder is a low risk move and the payback could turn out to be substantial. I doubt that the Ratbirds would match a $2M /yr guaranteed plus incentives. Even if they match, it’s certainly worth a shot as it’s low risk for Cleveland.
elsandito - March 8, 2010
Offer him a contract to be slightly higher than the highest paid back-up QB in the league. Either the Ravens concede him and we have a steal, or the Ravens are now paying a premium and a good portion of their salary cap for the quarterback position (Flacco + Smith.)
gahnki - March 8, 2010
We could also do the douchey thing and drop a Poison pill in there.
If Troy Smith is listed on the active roster 5 times in a season in the state of Maryland, this act will trigger a bonus that will make him the highest paid QB in the NFL for that season.
Boom.
Enjoy your 5th rounder A-Holes.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
Can you put a poison pill like that in any free agents contract?
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
I believe so. Discussion below about how the new CBA (whenever it happens) will probably change this.
Browns town - March 8, 2010
Actually, it’s not clear. Holmgren put one of those in Burleson’s offer sheet (five games in Minnesota and the contract would be guaranteed) forcing the VIkings not to accept. HOWEVER, he also put in another, more-neutral sounding one that would stipulate that his contract would be guaranteed unless he was the X-highest paid player, or something like that, while knowing that the Vikings could not accept due to the way their roster worked. It was the second one of these — not the can’t play in Minnesota condition — that I think was upheld.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 8, 2010
Yes, but it isn’t needed.
If a player is a UFA, then his former team wouldn’t have the chance to “match” the contract.
But RFA’s have to give their current team a chance to match the contract. If the team passes, then they get the pick back.
So if you drop a poison pill into the contract, the current team won’t match the contract.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
Normally I would say to hell with the whole douchey thing (Karma’s a b), but this is the Ravens we’re talking about…to hell with ethics!
Browns town - March 8, 2010
agree. Loved Troy Smith since I saw that 2007 run in person. Good Character guy, thought he would catch on in the NFL all along. He might not ever be an elite QB but i think he could be more than Adequate.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
That was in 2006, not 2007.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
2006 season, 2007 title game, my bad.
jaws. - March 9, 2010
Did the NFL close the loophole that allowed the Vikings to steal Hutchinson from Seattle? The one where they made city-specific escalators that would have made the contract impossible to carry for the original team, and therefore unmatchable.
danvail - March 8, 2010
That’s dirty.
SpecialBrownie - March 8, 2010
Yes, but it also very valuable at times.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
That’s not what the Vikings did. They said that Hutchinson had to be the highest paid O-lineman on the team. They knew that Seattle had a higher paid O-lineman. It was Seattle that did the state-specific thing, but in combo with something else, and it’s not clear to me that the city-specific thing would work. There was at least a plausible, neutral-sounding reason for including a guarantee that a person be the highest paid at their position. The city specific thing wreaks of a pretext to get around the right of the other team to match.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 8, 2010
Your right, but the point remains.
As for Hutchinson, it was if he was not the highest paid offensive lineman in the first season of his deal, his entire contract would become guaranteed. Since the ’Hawks already had Walter Jones making more, it in essence was a fully guaranteed contract for the Seahawks, but not the Vikings.
With the Steve Hutchinson deal, the Seahawks went to an arbiter, and he ruled that the contract was just and allowed the deal to pass.
The Seahawks then did the same back, signing Burelson to a contract for the same amount of money but with two different pills.
1. If Burelson played in more than 5 or more games in the state of Minnesota in any given season of his contract, his contract would become fully guaranteed.
2. The entire contract will become guaranteed if Burelson is paid MORE than the total lump sum of the teams running backs combined in the first season.
Burelson’s contract never had a problem being passed.
Since the two previous contracts that contained poison pills were passed, I don’t think there would be any reason for the NFL to start disallowing them now.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
Yeah it was dirty. I’ll bet some lawyer got a heaping helping of slaps on the back for coming up with it though.
danvail - March 8, 2010
rufio - March 8, 2010
Nope.
Poison pills are still allowed.
Expect that loophole to be closed in the next CBA though.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
Ahh loopholes. Scott Boras made his living on them.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
I think it would be best if the next CBA banned Scott Boras.
danvail - March 8, 2010
Does Scott Boras represent any NFL players? I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure he only works for baseball players.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
I just interchange Boras and Rosenhaus. In my mind, they’re the exact same, awful person.
danvail - March 8, 2010
actually i like Drew Rosenhaus. He gets his clients big money but I don’t think he deserves to nearly be in the realm of Scott Boras. I actually like what Rosenhaus did for Willis McGahee.
Yes Scott Boras is exclusive to baseball (thankfully) i just threw his name out there because I hate him and all that he represents.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
Drew Rosenhaus is a snake.
He is a massive POS.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
rec
North Coast Flea - March 8, 2010
I still think boras is more of a POS and more of a snake…but I am not denying this.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Not even Drew Rosenhaus is in Scott Boras land yet. Scott Boras singlehandedly is fighting a war to destroy the competitive balance in Major League Baseball.
Drew Rosenhaus might be a slimy character, but hes doesn’t have that kind of power… yet.
jaws. - March 9, 2010
I totally agree. Rosenhaus is an agent which means he ends up being a slimy character. however, I don’t even think he is officially the slimiest agent that works in the NFL. the case can be made for Condon but its just that rosenhaus represents guys like OchoCinco and TO that he gets the reputation.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Same type of person. Not necessarily on the same scale.
danvail - March 9, 2010
condon? yeah. I was just maybe biased b/c at one point he represented K2, but when K2 got really bad with PR stuff and started calling out ppl, Rosenhaus was his agent. Rosenhaus is more visible so people criticize him more…but its for good reason. he does have some of the flashier more me-first clients (OchoCinco, Plaxico, K2, TO, Shockey, Stallworth)
A couple things I just found out…maybe we should stay away from thomas jones…Rosenhaus is his agent and he will cost WAY too much.
In general though, Condon represents a lot of quieter stars that aren’t flashy such as:
LT
Marvin Harrison
Peyton and Eli
Steve Hutchinson
Bob Sanders
Marc Bulger
Antonio Gates
Drew Brees (he seems like a QB agent)
the Referees Association
and BE (this one pains me to write b/c condon is a fairly respectable agent)
bross09 - March 9, 2010
Marvin Harrison is not a good guy. At all.
Bernie19Kosar - March 9, 2010
I am talking about on the field kind of stuff. I know he had the shooting incident but
a) He never had significant off the field problems before that
b) he was the consummate teammate and never was a distraction.
yes, you cna find one guy, but the point of all of these names is he represents a lot of elite players, but guys who are quieter and have less off the field notoriety like an OchoCinco, or a TO.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
I just kind of like the Story about Drew Rosenhaus and what he did for Willis McGahee.
jaws. - March 9, 2010
Yeah, well Stallworth wasn’t that bad until he killed someone
TheRealSlimShady - March 9, 2010
Thank you.
Harrison is the prominent figure in a murder case. You cannot just gloss over that.
Bernie19Kosar - March 12, 2010
Considering the man was glassed after having called out Harrison in interviews, pretty much seals the deal.
SpecialBrownie - March 12, 2010
We signed a classy guy.
emily522 - March 8, 2010
I was just reading that. I’m liking him more all the time!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - March 8, 2010
That is really really classy.
Likeable guy. Hopefully just as likeable on the field.
skipkirk - March 8, 2010
Will I be the only one who would be crazy exctited if we signed Watson?
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
I know I won’t be. Questionable Effort. Only showed up in contract year. History of drops.
jaws. - March 8, 2010
Ben Watson’s best years were his second and third years.
I don’t understand the contract year thinking.
Bernie19Kosar - March 8, 2010
I don’t understand most of what jaws says.
Buckeye Brad - March 8, 2010
I’m not a fan. I could go for Olsen, but probably not for the second that the Bears would be asking for.
BrownDawg1409 - March 8, 2010
Watson is a massive improvement over anyone we have now.
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
Unless Moore can stay healthy and capitalize on his talent, our TEs might be the worst in the league. Even if he were to stay healthy, we still might have the worst TEs in the league.
rufio - March 8, 2010
And that is especially bad since TE is one of Quinns favorite targets
TheRealSlimShady - March 8, 2010
Absolutely.
rufio - March 9, 2010
That’s because they can’t get too far downfield before he runs into a linebacker.
danvail - March 9, 2010
definitely could use a couple of TEs I wouldn’t mind taking in Ben Watson and then drafting a blocking TE in the 5th round. Could re-vitalize the whole position.
jaws. - March 9, 2010
yes. He is much more reliable.
bross09 - March 9, 2010
From a tearful Saint
A sad day in the WhoDat Nation! Congratulations, Browns Fans, on your signing of Scott Fugita. All Saints fans are truly sad to see him go. The Browns have acquired a good, strong linebacker who will give you 100% every game; a positive lockerroom leader and a REAL CLASS ACT in your community. Listening to our local sports radio yesterday, there were no negatives from the callers on Scott. Everyone wished him well…hated to see him go and understood the business aspect of the game. We will miss him as a Saint and as a New Orleanian. I must admit he received a “healthy” contract from the Browns. I will bet when the Browns come to N.O., Fugita will receive a standing O from us WhoDats. Again, Brownies, you just signed a good linebacker; a strong leader and a classy man!!
MrSaints - March 9, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.