General discussion thread.

[Kiwibrown]

Having the problem of who to play at QB because they are both talented is  great problem to have. 

[Iamcanadian]

5 hours ago, H2ThaIzzo said:

It's hard for me to fathom us getting a 30 YO QB who in the last 3 years of being a full-time starter has gone for 81 td's to 36 int's and completed 67% of his pass attempts, and then spending a #1 pick on a QB. Kirk is literally top 10 in every statistical category, in most categories top 8, with a terrible running game, whose offensive weapons have gotten worse and worse each of those 3 years. 8 of the top ten QB's in passing yards this year are or will be turning 30 before a 2018 regular season game is played. in 2017 7 out of 10 were at that milestone. There would have been 8 but Brady had to miss 4 games due to being suspended. 

 

Does anyone really understand just how bad Washington is at running the football? They had nearly 300 fewer rushing yards than we did, on more carries, with a top 8 statistical QB in the game. Cousins led the team in rushing TD's. 

 

Let me lay it out for those who aren't following. We would have a chance to land a top 8 QB for the first time since Kosar, and have two picks in the top 4, as well as 5 total picks in the top 65 of the draft, plus about another 65-70 million to spend. 

Brady is 40

Rodgers is 34

Brees is getting ready to turn 40

Eli is 37

Peyton played until he was 39

Roethlisberger is 35

Rivers is 36

Matt Ryan is 32

Flacco is 33

The way the game is officiated today a QB can play until they are 40 years old, and not just play, but play well. IF we got a QB on Kirk Cousins level to sign with us, the future becomes now. Not next year, or in two years, or when our top draft pick QB actually develops, but Now. 

Except, he would demand a contract close to 40 million a year to come to Cleveland, so there goes our cap space and he would also want a 5 to 7 year contract or we can just draft Darnold or Rosen, both excellent prospects and still have an extra 39 million in cap space. Both Darnold and Rosen are going to be solid franchise QB's, with the potential to be top 5 types and because neither will be great their rookie year, we will also get to draft high in the 2019 draft.

I have to believe that paying a money hungrey QB like Cousins 40 million a year, will leave any team that signs him in cap hell for a very long time and that team is very unlikely to be a really competitive franchise!!!

[sdrawkcab321]

4 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

Except, he would demand a contract close to 40 million a year to come to Cleveland, so there goes our cap space and he would also want a 5 to 7 year contract or we can just draft Darnold or Rosen, both excellent prospects and still have an extra 39 million in cap space. Both Darnold and Rosen are going to be solid franchise QB's, with the potential to be top 5 types and because neither will be great their rookie year, we will also get to draft high in the 2019 draft.

I have to believe that paying a money hungrey QB like Cousins 40 million a year, will leave any team that signs him in cap hell for a very long time and that team is very unlikely to be a really competitive franchise!!!

Except we have plenty of cap this year to take on the majority of cousins cap hit. We could front load the deal this year to make his yearly salary between 15-20 a year. We wouldn’t be in a cap hell and at least we’d have a proven franchise QB who’s still relatively young. 

Its really mind boggling to me that after 20 years of crap qb play some people don’t want a proven guy. 

[dawgdish]

22 hours ago, buno67 said:

Browns could go full jags. Sign Cousin and draft Barkley and Chubb. Have that elite DL and a rushing attack that could take over a game. With a QB who can make plays when truly needed. Trust Cousins a lot more than Bortles. Got the rest of the draft and FA to add more pieces and part

I wouldn't be opposed to this. We'd also have to really upgrade the secondary - Jags are nasty in that department.

[dawgdish]

5 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

Except, he would demand a contract close to 40 million a year to come to Cleveland, so there goes our cap space and he would also want a 5 to 7 year contract or we can just draft Darnold or Rosen, both excellent prospects and still have an extra 39 million in cap space. Both Darnold and Rosen are going to be solid franchise QB's, with the potential to be top 5 types and because neither will be great their rookie year, we will also get to draft high in the 2019 draft.

I have to believe that paying a money hungrey QB like Cousins 40 million a year, will leave any team that signs him in cap hell for a very long time and that team is very unlikely to be a really competitive franchise!!!

Haven't we had record cap space the past 2 years while going 1-31? Maybe we should try spending money on talent instead. Not making an argument that we need to sign Cousins per se, but honestly, the way we've been doing it (being so far under the cap) isn't really proving to be the best way to go.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

43 minutes ago, dawgdish said:

Haven't we had record cap space the past 2 years while going 1-31? Maybe we should try spending money on talent instead. Not making an argument that we need to sign Cousins per se, but honestly, the way we've been doing it (being so far under the cap) isn't really proving to be the best way to go.

Seeing posts like this makes me question if you understood any part of the previous regime’s plan.

Are you under the impression that they were trying to win as many games as possible? You are aware this cap space rolls over, correct?

The previous regime was building draft assets and cap space as well as adding young talent.  The cap space they saved could then be used at a later date when the team was ready to compete.

[FGK]

3 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

Except we have plenty of cap this year to take on the majority of cousins cap hit. We could front load the deal this year to make his yearly salary between 15-20 a year. We wouldn’t be in a cap hell and at least we’d have a proven franchise QB who’s still relatively young. 

I'd be in on paying Cousins big money. But it wouldn't take 40M a year. Maybe 30M but that would be the absolute max, as that's the biggest QB contract by AAV right now.

But we also couldn't frontload it that much. I think the max for base salary shifting year to year in a contract is about 7-8%. So while, by the end of the contract, we could have that 30 down to around 24, we certainly couldn't get it below 20, let alone if it was 40M AAV.

[sdrawkcab321]

42 minutes ago, freakygeniuskid said:

I'd be in on paying Cousins big money. But it wouldn't take 40M a year. Maybe 30M but that would be the absolute max, as that's the biggest QB contract by AAV right now.

But we also couldn't frontload it that much. I think the max for base salary shifting year to year in a contract is about 7-8%. So while, by the end of the contract, we could have that 30 down to around 24, we certainly couldn't get it below 20, let alone if it was 40M AAV.

You can always renegotiate down the line and convert salary to bonuses. Teams are always doing it with their franchise QBs. Cap space shouldn’t be that big of an issue. At least we’d have our qb. 

[dawgdish]

4 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Seeing posts like this makes me question if you understood any part of the previous regime’s plan.

Are you under the impression that they were trying to win as many games as possible? You are aware this cap space rolls over, correct?

The previous regime was building draft assets and cap space as well as adding young talent.  The cap space they saved could then be used at a later date when the team was ready to compete.

I understood the plan just fine - if you'll recall, I argued we should give your boy Sashi another year to see if his plan pans out, because it clearly wasn't a 2 year rebuild. What I don't understand is people's aversion to signing a franchise QB because we would take a cap hit. If the Sashi attitude of the past 2 years (be massively under the cap and constantly trade away picks for the future) is the attitude we always have, then we'll never be ready to compete. This is the year we need to step up, shake off the learned helplessness, and start winning.

 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

10 minutes ago, dawgdish said:

I understood the plan just fine - if you'll recall, I argued we should give your boy Sashi another year to see if his plan pans out, because it clearly wasn't a 2 year rebuild. What I don't understand is people's aversion to signing a franchise QB because we would take a cap hit. If the Sashi attitude of the past 2 years (be massively under the cap and constantly trade away picks for the future) is the attitude we always have, then we'll never be ready to compete. This is the year we need to step up, shake off the learned helplessness, and start winning.

 

That’s not remotely close to what your previous post said.

That said, we are clearly in a “win now” mode and any way to improve should be considered.  Paying for a top 10 QB would be fine with me, it’s not my money.

[buno67]

1 hour ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

You can always renegotiate down the line and convert salary to bonuses. Teams are always doing it with their franchise QBs. Cap space shouldn’t be that big of an issue. At least we’d have our qb. 

Exactly. One of the big reasons the browns have always had cap space because they were never paying a QB franchise money. 

 

[FGK]

2 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

You can always renegotiate down the line and convert salary to bonuses. Teams are always doing it with their franchise QBs. Cap space shouldn’t be that big of an issue. At least we’d have our qb. 

Yeah, but those bonuses get pro-rated over the course of the contract. They actually end up reducing the one-year cap hit by making LARGER cap hits in future years.

I'm perfectly fine with signing Cousins for a Brinks truck of money. I'm just saying that the WAY you are suggesting doing so is not possible under current contract rules.

[Thomas5737]

1 hour ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Yeah, but those bonuses get pro-rated over the course of the contract. They actually end up reducing the one-year cap hit by making LARGER cap hits in future years.

I'm perfectly fine with signing Cousins for a Brinks truck of money. I'm just saying that the WAY you are suggesting doing so is not possible under current contract rules.

Yeah the cap hit isn't going to be 45 million year one, 32 year two, 26 year three etc.. It will have to remains somewhat steady. You'd throw on a huge signing bonus meaning Cousins takes home 60+ million year one but cap-wise that doesn't factor in much. If it is 5 years 125 million  year one cap hit could be like 28 million and year five down to 22 or something like that but the idea some people have that you can take a huge cap hit up front to significantly lower it in the future just isn't realistic, or within the rules.

Now his salary in year 5 would probably be like 11 million but really its more than that when speaking of the cap because of deferred bonus money he received up front.

[bruceb]

16 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

Whether we go with Cousins, Darnold or trade for Tom Brady we need to build on the defense. There is a reason that 4 of the top 5 defenses in points against and 3 of the top 4 in yards against are still playing. You usually need a good QB and a top tier defense to make the conference championship game. There are exceptions, whether it be any given Sunday, an elite defense or elite QB but if you want to be consistently good and a contender you need the defense whether you have an okay, good or great QB.

Sam Darnold isn't going to lead the 31st defense in points against anywhere whether he turns into Brady Quinn or Tom Brady.

I agree and have been preaching build out the D.

Only problem is that there don't seem to be any impact D players at the top of the draft, or O players for that matter except perhaps Barkley and 2-3 of the QBs.

The CB class seems deep and to have a few gems into R-2.

The RB class seems very deep, too.

And there seem to be some DL with a little sizzle.

After selecting Darnold at #1, I definitely would trade down from #4 to a QB-needy team, focus on those position groups in R-1 and R-2 of the draft and work FA to fill other gaps on both sides of the LOS.

The QB, a couple of CBs, a RB, a DL and I will be happy.

That is, of course, if they are good picks, which I am starting to believe most will be with Dorsey, Wolf and Highsmith at the talent acquisition helm.

 

[bruceb]

4 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

You can always renegotiate down the line and convert salary to bonuses. Teams are always doing it with their franchise QBs. Cap space shouldn’t be that big of an issue. At least we’d have our qb. 

No, we wouldn't.

We would have a QB better than what we have had.

And would have grossly overpaid for him.

Dumb poker, imho.