Myles Garrett Requests Trade
-
-
I'm glad we keep Myles. It was always about money the whole time. What Super Bowl contender could afford his salary or the trade capital to get him.
When isn't it about the money though?  Myles is heading into his 9th season here and do the Browns even have a QB yet? The last time they won 11 games they had to recycle an older QB that was unemployed to do so. Having said all that - he became the 1st player to have 14 or more sacks 4 consecutive seasons (some of that involved playing through a shoulder injury and/or a foot injury). One could argue others have done it way back before they started keeping track of sacks; but Myles trains his ass off year round to accomplish this stuff.Â
How many of us thought - "man, they never even got Joe Thomas a decent QB to protect all 10 years he played at a Pro Bowl caliber/effort." Inexcusable! Anyone think LeBron James would put up with what's gone on here if his game was football? Didn't he leave the Cavs twice? Is it any coincidence he wanted to play in one of the largest tv markets in sports? But he's from Ohio so I'll get the "don't you dare compare the 2." And how many times did he get to handpick most of the starting 5 before signing a contract? Â
Not for nothing, Jim Brown left the NFL for a different career that paid bigger $ after his 9th season. When he got an ultimatum to get to training camp or get a fine (as a player that never missed a game) - it turned into "I think I'd rather make more $ doing bedroom gymnastics with Raquel Welch naked." It's always about the $ (especially at some point further on in the career).Â
When isn't it about the money though?  Myles is heading into his 9th season here and do the Browns even have a QB yet? The last time they won 11 games they had to recycle an older QB that was unemployed to do so. Having said all that - he became the 1st player to have 14 or more sacks 4 consecutive seasons (some of that involved playing through a shoulder injury and/or a foot injury). One could argue others have done it way back before they started keeping track of sacks; but Myles trains his ass off year round to accomplish this stuff.Â
How many of us thought - "man, they never even got Joe Thomas a decent QB to protect all 10 years he played at a Pro Bowl caliber/effort." Inexcusable! Anyone think LeBron James would put up with what's gone on here if his game was football? Didn't he leave the Cavs twice? Is it any coincidence he wanted to play in one of the largest tv markets in sports? But he's from Ohio so I'll get the "don't you dare compare the 2." And how many times did he get to handpick most of the starting 5 before signing a contract? Â
Not for nothing, Jim Brown left the NFL for a different career that paid bigger $ after his 9th season. When he got an ultimatum to get to training camp or get a fine (as a player that never missed a game) - it turned into "I think I'd rather make more $ doing bedroom gymnastics with Raquel Welch naked." It's always about the $ (especially at some point further on in the career).Â
The vast majority of the time it is about the money, which is why I knew he was never leaving. You only see guys take pay cuts in the last 1-2 years of their career trying to get a ring. Like Shaq playing for the Cavs.
I don't blame Myles for wanting to win a Super Bowl and it sucks what happened to Joe Thomas. This is a QB driven league and until we land a top 10-12ish QB, we'll never be real contenders.Â
-
I'm glad we keep Myles. It was always about money the whole time. What Super Bowl contender could afford his salary or the trade capital to get him.
When isn't it about the money though?  Myles is heading into his 9th season here and do the Browns even have a QB yet? The last time they won 11 games they had to recycle an older QB that was unemployed to do so. Having said all that - he became the 1st player to have 14 or more sacks 4 consecutive seasons (some of that involved playing through a shoulder injury and/or a foot injury). One could argue others have done it way back before they started keeping track of sacks; but Myles trains his ass off year round to accomplish this stuff.Â
How many of us thought - "man, they never even got Joe Thomas a decent QB to protect all 10 years he played at a Pro Bowl caliber/effort." Inexcusable! Anyone think LeBron James would put up with what's gone on here if his game was football? Didn't he leave the Cavs twice? Is it any coincidence he wanted to play in one of the largest tv markets in sports? But he's from Ohio so I'll get the "don't you dare compare the 2." And how many times did he get to handpick most of the starting 5 before signing a contract? Â
Not for nothing, Jim Brown left the NFL for a different career that paid bigger $ after his 9th season. When he got an ultimatum to get to training camp or get a fine (as a player that never missed a game) - it turned into "I think I'd rather make more $ doing bedroom gymnastics with Raquel Welch naked." It's always about the $ (especially at some point further on in the career).Â
How many of us thought - "man, they never even got Joe Thomas a decent QB to protect all 10 years he played at a Pro Bowl caliber/effort."Â Inexcusable!
Yeah...but it wasn't for lack of trying. They wasted many a draft pick on QBs during his tenure. - There isn't a pedestal high enough for Joe Thomas.
-
I still think long-term it would have been best for Myles and the Browns if he would have been traded, but I'm happy that he'll be in Cleveland for most likely the rest of his career, or damn close to it.
-
Iâm curious what will come of all this. Garrettâs a driven dude, so l donât think a bigger payday is going to decrease his goal of being the best. But itâs a brutal game and wear and tear is what it is. He hasnât missed a lot of games iirc, but weâve seen him play hurt and heâs not the same game wrecker as when healthy.Â
-
I still think long-term it would have been best for Myles and the Browns if he would have been traded, but I'm happy that he'll be in Cleveland for most likely the rest of his career, or damn close to it.
I still think long-term it would have been best for Myles and the Browns if he would have been traded, but I'm happy that he'll be in Cleveland for most likely the rest of his career, or damn close to it.
It would have been very harmful to the Browns with his cap hit if he had been traded.
-
I still think long-term it would have been best for Myles and the Browns if he would have been traded, but I'm happy that he'll be in Cleveland for most likely the rest of his career, or damn close to it.
It would have been very harmful to the Browns with his cap hit if he had been traded.
-
I read that this actually obligates him to 6 years total to the Browns with a no trade clause.
-
I read that this actually obligates him to 6 years total to the Browns with a no trade clause.
I read that this actually obligates him to 6 years total to the Browns with a no trade clause.
So this extension carries him through the 2030 season?
-
I read that this actually obligates him to 6 years total to the Browns with a no trade clause.
So this extension carries him through the 2030 season?
So this extension carries him through the 2030 season?
According to Fox Sports, that is correct.
-
Thinking about Garrettâs prospects at the NFL career sacks record, currently held by Bruce Smith with 200. That guy played for 19 seasons!
Garrett has played 8 seasons so far and has 102.5 sacks. Bruce Smith had 92 in his first 8 seasons. If Garrett can endure heâs got a shot.
-
Thereâs a recent Jason Lloyd article in The Athletic titled âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â It has some good observations, gonna link and paste it below.
Myles Garrett is the most feared and ferocious pass rusher of his generation. No one in the NFL was double-teamed more last year and he still managed 14 sacks while working into the Defensive Player of the Year conversation on a three-win team.
Garrett is the type of player who makes offensive line coaches â not to mention tackles and guards â tremble. Teams build their blocking schemes every week around accounting for him at all times. If he stays healthy, Garrettâs retirement will most certainly reside with a bust inside the Hall of Fame.
None of that can be disputed and all of it is important context.
Yet I still believe the Browns should have traded Garrett rather than signing him to a historic extension. Not because of Garrettâs trade request, but rather because it was in the best interest of the franchise given the intersection where this team resides and Garrettâs career timeline.
Iâm fully aware of the cap complications a Garrett trade presented. The line of suitors would have been just as long in June when a trade wouldâve been a bit more manageable than it is now.
All of that is irrelevant following Garrettâs mammoth extension that will earn him $40 million per season and guarantees him $123 million. He is a Cleveland Brown for the foreseeable future and perhaps for the rest of his career, and thatâs not necessarily a bad thing.
Nevertheless, the Browns are not close to a Super Bowl. The Deshaun Watson trade wrecked the contention window with this group of veterans. The Browns are in denial to believe otherwise.
Can they find a veteran quarterback this month and maybe scrape into the playoffs next year as a seventh seed? Sure. This is the NFL and the teams at the bottom of the playoffs rotate annually. But there is a wide gap between playoff contender and viable Super Bowl contender. The Browns are not realistically contending for a Super Bowl in 2025. The list of things that have to go right for this team to be a Super Bowl contender in 2026 is longer than the number of things that have gone right for this franchise in the last 25 years.
Garrett seemed to realize that when he initially made his trade request known, and nothing has changed in the weeks since, other than the amount of zeroes Jimmy Haslam put in front of him.
Thatâs how Haslam solves all of his problems: by throwing money at them.
For the record, spending money is obviously paramount to winning in any league. Iâve known executives in various sports who have passed on jobs as a general manager because of an ownerâs lack of spending.
Haslamâs biggest hammer as an NFL owner is his checkbook. The Browns spent more money last year than any other team in league history. Theyâve spent more than $1 billion in cash over the past four years, far more than any other team. The Browns restructure contracts to create cap space as well as any team in the league, but they donât have one playoff victory to show for all that spending since 2021 because check writing is Haslamâs only tool in the bag.
Watson says, no, he wonât come to Cleveland?
Give him the largest guaranteed contract in NFL history.
Garrett says he wants out?
Give him the largest non-quarterback contract in NFL history.
The Haslams have owned the Browns for more than a decade and still canât seem to get the culture part right. At times under Andrew Berry and Kevin Stefanski, it appeared the organization was finally figuring out how to operate like an actual NFL franchise. Then came the Watson debacle and everything that has followed, and itâs fair to wonder if anything has changed.
Haslam did exactly what he shouldâve done when Garrett asked for a meeting. He told him to talk to Berry. Perfect response. The problem was Garrettâs side more than likely leaked publicly that Haslam wouldnât meet with his best player and it was framed as if Haslam somehow did something wrong. He didnât. But Garrettâs excellent negotiating team threw the perfect punch at the perfect time. Within days, Garrett had a new deal.
I was having dinner at the combine a couple of weeks ago with an assistant coach on what would widely be viewed as a successful NFL franchise.
âIf Jimmy Haslam spent two weeks with us, heâd throw up at the amount of money he wastes,â the coach told me. His point was that while money is important, it takes a lot more than just throwing cash at head wounds to win in this league.
As for Garrett, at which point was he being truthful? When he said his plan was never to go from Cleveland to Canton, it has always been to compete for a Super Bowl? When he said on the âRich Eisen Showâ that it wasnât about the money, that he just wanted to win a championship? When he was aggravated two years ago with all the losing and close to going public with his unhappiness?
Garrett had no leverage in this. The Browns controlled his rights for the next four seasons, counting franchise tags. Yet Garrett and his representatives still managed a no-trade clause in his new deal, giving him all the leverage and power in this relationship from this day forward, just as Watson had all the power with his massive, fully guaranteed deal.
Garrett will make an average of $40 million a season into his early 30s. Bruce Smith and Reggie White, two players Garrett is most often compared to, were still highly productive into their late 30s. So thereâs reason to believe Garrett can still produce at a high level deep into his career. But itâs easy to see the risk in this, too.
For as dominant as Garrett has been throughout his first eight years, the Browns have won nothing with him on the roster. Trading him while his value was at its peak couldâve netted the type of return necessary to maximize the search yet again for a franchise quarterback. This organization isnât winning anything substantive at a high level without one.
I hope, at the very least, this contract brings a sense of responsibility rather than entitlement for Garrett.
Itâs well known within the Browns that Garrett is frequently late to the facility. He has skipped mandatory team activities on multiple occasions. Veterans typically police the locker room on those types of things and create the culture of accountability, but here, itâs the best player breaking the rules. That has to change now.
Elite performers earn more forgiveness than anyone. Thatâs true in any business. But thereâs a certain level of responsibility that comes with a contract of this magnitude.
If Garrett truly wanted out of Cleveland, if he really wanted to prioritize winning at this stage of life, those feelings wonât dissipate because of a few extra zeroes on his checks.
Itâs clear by now that Watson never wanted to be in Cleveland. He took the money and we know how it ended.
Now itâs Garrettâs turn. The money is generational wealth for whatever he wants to accomplish in life.
But it wonât buy him a Lombardi Trophy.
-
Thereâs a recent Jason Lloyd article in The Athletic titled âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â It has some good observations, gonna link and paste it below.
Myles Garrett is the most feared and ferocious pass rusher of his generation. No one in the NFL was double-teamed more last year and he still managed 14 sacks while working into the Defensive Player of the Year conversation on a three-win team.
Garrett is the type of player who makes offensive line coaches â not to mention tackles and guards â tremble. Teams build their blocking schemes every week around accounting for him at all times. If he stays healthy, Garrettâs retirement will most certainly reside with a bust inside the Hall of Fame.
None of that can be disputed and all of it is important context.
Yet I still believe the Browns should have traded Garrett rather than signing him to a historic extension. Not because of Garrettâs trade request, but rather because it was in the best interest of the franchise given the intersection where this team resides and Garrettâs career timeline.
Iâm fully aware of the cap complications a Garrett trade presented. The line of suitors would have been just as long in June when a trade wouldâve been a bit more manageable than it is now.
All of that is irrelevant following Garrettâs mammoth extension that will earn him $40 million per season and guarantees him $123 million. He is a Cleveland Brown for the foreseeable future and perhaps for the rest of his career, and thatâs not necessarily a bad thing.
Nevertheless, the Browns are not close to a Super Bowl. The Deshaun Watson trade wrecked the contention window with this group of veterans. The Browns are in denial to believe otherwise.
Can they find a veteran quarterback this month and maybe scrape into the playoffs next year as a seventh seed? Sure. This is the NFL and the teams at the bottom of the playoffs rotate annually. But there is a wide gap between playoff contender and viable Super Bowl contender. The Browns are not realistically contending for a Super Bowl in 2025. The list of things that have to go right for this team to be a Super Bowl contender in 2026 is longer than the number of things that have gone right for this franchise in the last 25 years.
Garrett seemed to realize that when he initially made his trade request known, and nothing has changed in the weeks since, other than the amount of zeroes Jimmy Haslam put in front of him.
Thatâs how Haslam solves all of his problems: by throwing money at them.
For the record, spending money is obviously paramount to winning in any league. Iâve known executives in various sports who have passed on jobs as a general manager because of an ownerâs lack of spending.
Haslamâs biggest hammer as an NFL owner is his checkbook. The Browns spent more money last year than any other team in league history. Theyâve spent more than $1 billion in cash over the past four years, far more than any other team. The Browns restructure contracts to create cap space as well as any team in the league, but they donât have one playoff victory to show for all that spending since 2021 because check writing is Haslamâs only tool in the bag.
Watson says, no, he wonât come to Cleveland?
Give him the largest guaranteed contract in NFL history.
Garrett says he wants out?
Give him the largest non-quarterback contract in NFL history.
The Haslams have owned the Browns for more than a decade and still canât seem to get the culture part right. At times under Andrew Berry and Kevin Stefanski, it appeared the organization was finally figuring out how to operate like an actual NFL franchise. Then came the Watson debacle and everything that has followed, and itâs fair to wonder if anything has changed.
Haslam did exactly what he shouldâve done when Garrett asked for a meeting. He told him to talk to Berry. Perfect response. The problem was Garrettâs side more than likely leaked publicly that Haslam wouldnât meet with his best player and it was framed as if Haslam somehow did something wrong. He didnât. But Garrettâs excellent negotiating team threw the perfect punch at the perfect time. Within days, Garrett had a new deal.
I was having dinner at the combine a couple of weeks ago with an assistant coach on what would widely be viewed as a successful NFL franchise.
âIf Jimmy Haslam spent two weeks with us, heâd throw up at the amount of money he wastes,â the coach told me. His point was that while money is important, it takes a lot more than just throwing cash at head wounds to win in this league.
As for Garrett, at which point was he being truthful? When he said his plan was never to go from Cleveland to Canton, it has always been to compete for a Super Bowl? When he said on the âRich Eisen Showâ that it wasnât about the money, that he just wanted to win a championship? When he was aggravated two years ago with all the losing and close to going public with his unhappiness?
Garrett had no leverage in this. The Browns controlled his rights for the next four seasons, counting franchise tags. Yet Garrett and his representatives still managed a no-trade clause in his new deal, giving him all the leverage and power in this relationship from this day forward, just as Watson had all the power with his massive, fully guaranteed deal.
Garrett will make an average of $40 million a season into his early 30s. Bruce Smith and Reggie White, two players Garrett is most often compared to, were still highly productive into their late 30s. So thereâs reason to believe Garrett can still produce at a high level deep into his career. But itâs easy to see the risk in this, too.
For as dominant as Garrett has been throughout his first eight years, the Browns have won nothing with him on the roster. Trading him while his value was at its peak couldâve netted the type of return necessary to maximize the search yet again for a franchise quarterback. This organization isnât winning anything substantive at a high level without one.
I hope, at the very least, this contract brings a sense of responsibility rather than entitlement for Garrett.
Itâs well known within the Browns that Garrett is frequently late to the facility. He has skipped mandatory team activities on multiple occasions. Veterans typically police the locker room on those types of things and create the culture of accountability, but here, itâs the best player breaking the rules. That has to change now.
Elite performers earn more forgiveness than anyone. Thatâs true in any business. But thereâs a certain level of responsibility that comes with a contract of this magnitude.
If Garrett truly wanted out of Cleveland, if he really wanted to prioritize winning at this stage of life, those feelings wonât dissipate because of a few extra zeroes on his checks.
Itâs clear by now that Watson never wanted to be in Cleveland. He took the money and we know how it ended.
Now itâs Garrettâs turn. The money is generational wealth for whatever he wants to accomplish in life.
But it wonât buy him a Lombardi Trophy.
Now itâs Garrettâs turn. The money is generational wealth for whatever he wants to accomplish in life.
But it wonât buy him a Lombardi Trophy.
Nope, but now he gets his own successful dinosaur museum in College Station if he so chooses. Hell even JFF is still treated as a legendary hero there despite trashing an NFL career. Von Miller runs a successful real chicken ranch with real chickens (too bad cause I really liked the original in La Grange).?
-
Thereâs a recent Jason Lloyd article in The Athletic titled âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â It has some good observations, gonna link and paste it below.
Myles Garrett is the most feared and ferocious pass rusher of his generation. No one in the NFL was double-teamed more last year and he still managed 14 sacks while working into the Defensive Player of the Year conversation on a three-win team.
Garrett is the type of player who makes offensive line coaches â not to mention tackles and guards â tremble. Teams build their blocking schemes every week around accounting for him at all times. If he stays healthy, Garrettâs retirement will most certainly reside with a bust inside the Hall of Fame.
None of that can be disputed and all of it is important context.
Yet I still believe the Browns should have traded Garrett rather than signing him to a historic extension. Not because of Garrettâs trade request, but rather because it was in the best interest of the franchise given the intersection where this team resides and Garrettâs career timeline.
Iâm fully aware of the cap complications a Garrett trade presented. The line of suitors would have been just as long in June when a trade wouldâve been a bit more manageable than it is now.
All of that is irrelevant following Garrettâs mammoth extension that will earn him $40 million per season and guarantees him $123 million. He is a Cleveland Brown for the foreseeable future and perhaps for the rest of his career, and thatâs not necessarily a bad thing.
Nevertheless, the Browns are not close to a Super Bowl. The Deshaun Watson trade wrecked the contention window with this group of veterans. The Browns are in denial to believe otherwise.
Can they find a veteran quarterback this month and maybe scrape into the playoffs next year as a seventh seed? Sure. This is the NFL and the teams at the bottom of the playoffs rotate annually. But there is a wide gap between playoff contender and viable Super Bowl contender. The Browns are not realistically contending for a Super Bowl in 2025. The list of things that have to go right for this team to be a Super Bowl contender in 2026 is longer than the number of things that have gone right for this franchise in the last 25 years.
Garrett seemed to realize that when he initially made his trade request known, and nothing has changed in the weeks since, other than the amount of zeroes Jimmy Haslam put in front of him.
Thatâs how Haslam solves all of his problems: by throwing money at them.
For the record, spending money is obviously paramount to winning in any league. Iâve known executives in various sports who have passed on jobs as a general manager because of an ownerâs lack of spending.
Haslamâs biggest hammer as an NFL owner is his checkbook. The Browns spent more money last year than any other team in league history. Theyâve spent more than $1 billion in cash over the past four years, far more than any other team. The Browns restructure contracts to create cap space as well as any team in the league, but they donât have one playoff victory to show for all that spending since 2021 because check writing is Haslamâs only tool in the bag.
Watson says, no, he wonât come to Cleveland?
Give him the largest guaranteed contract in NFL history.
Garrett says he wants out?
Give him the largest non-quarterback contract in NFL history.
The Haslams have owned the Browns for more than a decade and still canât seem to get the culture part right. At times under Andrew Berry and Kevin Stefanski, it appeared the organization was finally figuring out how to operate like an actual NFL franchise. Then came the Watson debacle and everything that has followed, and itâs fair to wonder if anything has changed.
Haslam did exactly what he shouldâve done when Garrett asked for a meeting. He told him to talk to Berry. Perfect response. The problem was Garrettâs side more than likely leaked publicly that Haslam wouldnât meet with his best player and it was framed as if Haslam somehow did something wrong. He didnât. But Garrettâs excellent negotiating team threw the perfect punch at the perfect time. Within days, Garrett had a new deal.
I was having dinner at the combine a couple of weeks ago with an assistant coach on what would widely be viewed as a successful NFL franchise.
âIf Jimmy Haslam spent two weeks with us, heâd throw up at the amount of money he wastes,â the coach told me. His point was that while money is important, it takes a lot more than just throwing cash at head wounds to win in this league.
As for Garrett, at which point was he being truthful? When he said his plan was never to go from Cleveland to Canton, it has always been to compete for a Super Bowl? When he said on the âRich Eisen Showâ that it wasnât about the money, that he just wanted to win a championship? When he was aggravated two years ago with all the losing and close to going public with his unhappiness?
Garrett had no leverage in this. The Browns controlled his rights for the next four seasons, counting franchise tags. Yet Garrett and his representatives still managed a no-trade clause in his new deal, giving him all the leverage and power in this relationship from this day forward, just as Watson had all the power with his massive, fully guaranteed deal.
Garrett will make an average of $40 million a season into his early 30s. Bruce Smith and Reggie White, two players Garrett is most often compared to, were still highly productive into their late 30s. So thereâs reason to believe Garrett can still produce at a high level deep into his career. But itâs easy to see the risk in this, too.
For as dominant as Garrett has been throughout his first eight years, the Browns have won nothing with him on the roster. Trading him while his value was at its peak couldâve netted the type of return necessary to maximize the search yet again for a franchise quarterback. This organization isnât winning anything substantive at a high level without one.
I hope, at the very least, this contract brings a sense of responsibility rather than entitlement for Garrett.
Itâs well known within the Browns that Garrett is frequently late to the facility. He has skipped mandatory team activities on multiple occasions. Veterans typically police the locker room on those types of things and create the culture of accountability, but here, itâs the best player breaking the rules. That has to change now.
Elite performers earn more forgiveness than anyone. Thatâs true in any business. But thereâs a certain level of responsibility that comes with a contract of this magnitude.
If Garrett truly wanted out of Cleveland, if he really wanted to prioritize winning at this stage of life, those feelings wonât dissipate because of a few extra zeroes on his checks.
Itâs clear by now that Watson never wanted to be in Cleveland. He took the money and we know how it ended.
Now itâs Garrettâs turn. The money is generational wealth for whatever he wants to accomplish in life.
But it wonât buy him a Lombardi Trophy.
âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
As often as I agree with Dutch - I couldn't get cozy with the idea of trading Myles with an idea of drafting Abdul Carter at #2 overall (currently sporting a shoulder and a lower extremity injury). During the college football season how often was Carter even brought up? 12 sacks in 15 college games (against many LTs that won't be playing in the NFL) is good but not other worldly enough to justify spinning our wheels. Adding the injuries + Rosenhaus could be a bigger headache than people think. I'm not saying I'm right - I'm just giving why I'm thinking the way I am about it. Â
-
âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
It was less the idea of trading Garrett than it was certain points in the article that l thought made it a good read. Iâll footnote it for you lazy asses.
1) Haslam spends money, itâs his solution to everything, but he doesnât spend it well. Weâre basically the Dodgers of the NFL without the postseason success.Â
2) Haslam didnât have to extend Garrett. Garrett had no leverage in this ordeal other than the leverage Haslam gave him, which was significant, but unnecessary.Â
3) I didnât realize Garrett was lacking in certain âgood veteranâ qualities. The article mentions heâs frequently late and has skipped mandatory team activities in the past.Â
Itâs actually great that we have an owner willing to write big checks, but if those big paydays are misdirected then you can see how it leads to a culture problem.Â
-
âBrowns should have traded Myles Garrett Instead of signing him to historic extension.â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
That is true, and I definitely agree with Jason Lloyd, this team is not built for anything beyond a fluke wild card appearance. The roster needs to be rebuilt imo, and it makes you wonder how good Myles would be by the time the Browns would be a real contender.
-
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
It was less the idea of trading Garrett than it was certain points in the article that l thought made it a good read. Iâll footnote it for you lazy asses.
1) Haslam spends money, itâs his solution to everything, but he doesnât spend it well. Weâre basically the Dodgers of the NFL without the postseason success.Â
2) Haslam didnât have to extend Garrett. Garrett had no leverage in this ordeal other than the leverage Haslam gave him, which was significant, but unnecessary.Â
3) I didnât realize Garrett was lacking in certain âgood veteranâ qualities. The article mentions heâs frequently late and has skipped mandatory team activities in the past.Â
Itâs actually great that we have an owner willing to write big checks, but if those big paydays are misdirected then you can see how it leads to a culture problem.Â
Iâll footnote it for you lazy asses.
1) Haslam spends money, itâs his solution to everything, but he doesnât spend it well. Weâre basically the Dodgers of the NFL without the postseason success.Â
2) Haslam didnât have to extend Garrett. Garrett had no leverage in this ordeal other than the leverage Haslam gave him, which was significant, but unnecessary.Â
3) I didnât realize Garrett was lacking in certain âgood veteranâ qualities. The article mentions heâs frequently late and has skipped mandatory team activities in the past.Â
Itâs actually great that we have an owner willing to write big checks, but if those big paydays are misdirected then you can see how it leads to a culture problem.Â
I'm not one to give the Haslem's any credit, but I think he handled the turning down of a meeting with Myles properly. Myles is one of the players. You definitely cannot allow players to go 'over the heads' of their supervisors (HC, GM, Player Personnel Director, etc.).
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
Yeah, I ain't reading the article. I don't want the only guy that puts us on the map traded.Â
This has been Dutch's position all along. And I understand the logic. And I'm certain that Schwartz understands the logic....but if they traded Myles can you even imagine all of the swear words that would've emanated from Schwatrz's mouth?Â
 Â
That is true, and I definitely agree with Jason Lloyd, this team is not built for anything beyond a fluke wild card appearance. The roster needs to be rebuilt imo, and it makes you wonder how good Myles would be by the time the Browns would be a real contender.
I definitely agree with Jason Lloyd, this team is not built for anything beyond a fluke wild card appearance.
Right. Because we don't have a QB. (having Picket as your starter is as close to not having one as it gets - until proven otherwise) But Berry has started addressing the OL. He's added to the DL. We do have a fairly good D that's not far off from being really good again.  On offense, the OL is in process....RB needs addressing (which a draft pick 'could' actually fix as they can start day 1)...the TE position needs help for Stef's offense....the WR position has been addressed and will probably be addressed again in the draft. I don't see the Offense being very far off.......if it weren't for the QB position.....because without one, you actually are - very far off. Â
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đ
Register Login