ET80 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 8 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: I'm just saying as a practical application of removing Watson from their roster how does that even work? If they cut him with a post June 1st designation they would have a negative $46 mil cap hit and $118.9 mil in dead cap space from the move. The cap was at $255.4 mil this year lets say its at $260ish next year. They'd only have 141ish mil to fill out their roster. The lowest cap spending team this year was the Broncos with $173.8 mil. How do the Browns even field a team if they cut him? If they can't cut him and have to carry him on the roster, what is the NFLPA going to think? He's never been actually charged with anything. The press will also be reporting for years about him sitting on the bench, and all the money he's getting paid. That's bad press for years for the league. How is that practical? This is the part where I don't fully understand the math, but my guess is that Watson stays on the roster with an administrative leave designation - sort of like how the Texans had him on roster but not in the building in 2021. Designated inactive for a year while the legal situation played out (people speculated he'd be placed on the Commissioner Exempt list while in Houston, that never happened). This is nearly identical to what the Texans had to do during the David Culley era. The team was fielding Deshaun Watson questions all year long - David Culley ran out of ways to say "he's not here right now". Yes, the contracts are different between his sabbatical in Houston and a hypothetical sabbatical in Cleveland - but the NFLPA had no issues with Houston telling him to stay at home while Tyrod Taylor took snaps. I can't see how anyone would want to support Watson right now, even if he's part of the union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 On 9/10/2024 at 6:53 PM, DawgX said: It was new, and we haven't seen a wave of guaranteed contracts since. The move reeked of our desperate owner, Jimmy Haslam, doing whatever it took to get his guy. OIt did, but it definitely has created more guaranteed years in deals beyond the first year and signing bonus. Rolling bonuses are now way more prevalent too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 1 minute ago, ET80 said: This is the part where I don't fully understand the math, but my guess is that Watson stays on the roster with an administrative leave designation - sort of like how the Texans had him on roster but not in the building in 2021. Designated inactive for a year while the legal situation played out (people speculated he'd be placed on the Commissioner Exempt list while in Houston, that never happened). Yes, the contracts are different between his sabbatical in Houston and a hypothetical sabbatical in Cleveland - but the NFLPA had no issues with Houston telling him to stay at home while Tyrod Taylor took snaps. I can't see how anyone would want to support Watson right now, even if he's part of the union. Ok so that's the other situation I presented, where Watson effectively stays on their books with his current contract situation almost like he's still on the roster. The issue with that is I can't imagine the NFLPA allows that to happen considering he's never actually been charged with a crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 1 minute ago, MKnight82 said: The issue with that is I can't imagine the NFLPA allows that to happen considering he's never actually been charged with a crime. Was he charged with a crime in Houston? Did the NFLPA step in then? Why would they now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jofos Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 14 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: I'm just saying as a practical application of removing Watson from their roster how does that even work? If they cut him with a post June 1st designation they would have a negative $46 mil cap hit and $118.9 mil in dead cap space from the move. The cap was at $255.4 mil this year lets say its at $260ish next year. They'd only have 141ish mil to fill out their roster. The lowest cap spending team this year was the Broncos with $173.8 mil. How do the Browns even field a team if they cut him? If they can't cut him and have to carry him on the roster, what is the NFLPA going to think? He's never been actually charged with anything. The press will also be reporting for years about him sitting on the bench, and all the money he's getting paid. That's bad press for years for the league. How is that practical? They would be able to field a team just a low paid team. The other teams didn't hand out the contract so the bad press would be for the Browns. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 2 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: The total is right he's $81MM in the red if he's cut at the end of the season, but I don't get how you'd designate a guy who is no longer on the team and has no contract as a post-June 1 cut. I think you'd be eating it all in 2025. Just leave him on the exempt list a year before banning him forever. Allows the remaining cap hit to be pushed a year, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 3 minutes ago, jofos said: They would be able to field a team just a low paid team. The other teams didn't hand out the contract so the bad press would be for the Browns. Bingo. Pretty much every single highly paid player is released (Myles Garrett Free Agency tour will be BONKERS!) and replaced with a practice squad player who is making league minimum. You'll likely have a team full rookies and UDFAs for two years while all the cap penalties subside. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 5 minutes ago, jofos said: They would be able to field a team just a low paid team. The other teams didn't hand out the contract so the bad press would be for the Browns. That's pretty naive to think the press will only go after the Browns and not the NFL as a whole for this. The NFL will see this as bad for business for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 Just now, ET80 said: Bingo. Pretty much every single highly paid player is released (Myles Garrett Free Agency tour will be BONKERS!) and replaced with a practice squad player who is making league minimum. You'll likely have a team full rookies and UDFAs for two years while all the cap penalties subside. Which is just idiotic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 The NFL is not going to give a crap about dealing out justice to the Browns or anyone else. They are going to want to do what is best for business, which is to make this go away as quickly and quietly as possible. Hammering the Browns and making them jump through hoops to even field a team is bad for business. It will hurt ticket sales, it will hurt TV ratings, it will hurt jersey sales. All the owners care about is making money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateDawg Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 I don’t care about the cap implications for the Browns. I do because I obviously want them to win, but that’s the secondary thing and my primary focus right now is a way for this guy not to be on the Browns anymore. I have been laser set on that since the day he arrived. It sucks that the collateral damage is possibly some of these really good players having their window wasted here in Cleveland. Watson is the ultimate Trojan horse. Our ownership is something else. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 14 hours ago, INbengalfan said: Just leave him on the exempt list a year before banning him forever. Allows the remaining cap hit to be pushed a year, no? If he has no contract (because he acted in a way they can immediately void it), how could they put him on any list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jofos Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 6 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: The NFL is not going to give a crap about dealing out justice to the Browns or anyone else. They are going to want to do what is best for business, which is to make this go away as quickly and quietly as possible. Hammering the Browns and making them jump through hoops to even field a team is bad for business. It will hurt ticket sales, it will hurt TV ratings, it will hurt jersey sales. All the owners care about is making money. The tickets for Atlanta -Carolina were selling for $1.80, that's a pretty bad look, are they going do something special to make the Panthers not suck? The Browns issues are self-inflicted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 33 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Which is just idiotic As is paying a guy like Watson a quarter of a billion dollars guaranteed with the possibility of something like this happening. 27 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: The NFL is not going to give a crap about dealing out justice to the Browns or anyone else. They are going to want to do what is best for business, which is to make this go away as quickly and quietly as possible. Hammering the Browns and making them jump through hoops to even field a team is bad for business. It will hurt ticket sales, it will hurt TV ratings, it will hurt jersey sales. All the owners care about is making money. Why wasn't this the case last time when Watson did this? Do you think the Texans were selling out on Rex Burkhead and Chris Moore jerseys? Were the Texans must see TV? Did the league revenue take a massive hit when the 4th largest city in the US collectively decided that its now a baseball city? If anything, the Texans proved you could get into this sort of purgatory, take your lumps, build up your capital and cap space and come back better than ever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 23 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: If he has no contract (because he acted in a way they can immediately void it), how could they put him on any list? Michael Thomas was just suspended a game and he’s not on a roster. I legitimately don’t know how these things work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.