Browns trade for BROCK OSWEILER
-
Well he will likely be here during preseason atleast... hearing some rumbling that the nfl is not happy with the browns making this trade and will implement measures for this kind of trade to not happen again. makes sense the browns basically bought a draft pick... unfortunately to save some face i would bet money that brock slides into RG's role 2017 which is an upgrade at worst to be honest.
Why the hell would the NFL have a problem with this?
Why the hell would the NFL have a problem with this?
They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
well we can avoid being docked those picks or facing fines......if we keep Brock on our roster for the 2017 season
Can't use cap space to buy picks AND we totally just did that... even if we didn't technically do that. you can make the arguement that we violated the spirit of the bylaw.
The way i look at it. We have replaced RG3 with a better QB and gained a high draft pick in the process.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
-
The rules are about receiving something of value in return for your traded asset - surely that applies to the texans who received only a compensatory fourth round pick, in exchange for a high 6th (they moved up about 45 places) and also gave up a second and their de facto starting QB?
-
Why the hell would the NFL have a problem with this?
They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
well we can avoid being docked those picks or facing fines......if we keep Brock on our roster for the 2017 season
Can't use cap space to buy picks AND we totally just did that... even if we didn't technically do that. you can make the arguement that we violated the spirit of the bylaw.
The way i look at it. We have replaced RG3 with a better QB and gained a high draft pick in the process.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
NFL Sirius postured that if the Browns cut Osweiler it would likely violate the rules. If they retain or get some value from him it would not.They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
-
The trade has officially been approved by the NFL now, if they don't like it they will try and change the rules going forward but it's all gone through for now.
-
I wonder who started all the "Brock won't play a down for the Browns, etc" business.
Pretty shrewd, bold move by the Browns.
Personally, I would much rather see Osweiler as the Browns qb than RGIII.
He should be able to stay on the field most of the season. That's an upside right there.
and surely he sees the field at least a little bit better....
Here's a good analysis of the whole deal:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18865828/making-sense-unprecedented-brock-osweiler-trade-nfl
-
Why the hell would the NFL have a problem with this?
They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
well we can avoid being docked those picks or facing fines......if we keep Brock on our roster for the 2017 season
Can't use cap space to buy picks AND we totally just did that... even if we didn't technically do that. you can make the arguement that we violated the spirit of the bylaw.
The way i look at it. We have replaced RG3 with a better QB and gained a high draft pick in the process.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
Is any of this legal?
It's unclear. The NFL doesn't allow teams to trade players for cash, defining it as conduct detrimental to the league and subject to disciplinary action. Teams are not allowed to make trades for past, future or nominal considerations, although future draft selections are obviously allowed.
This trade falls into a gray area. Precedent suggests that NFL teams are allowed to make trades that are lopsided on their face by virtue of the discount many teams place on future selections. The 49ers couldn't trade the 66th pick in this year's draft to the Buccaneers for the 50th selection, as it would obviously look fishy, but nobody would raise an eyebrow if San Francisco traded the 66th pick to the Bucs for a 2018 second-rounder. Tampa's second-rounder obviously can't fall any lower than 64th even if they win the Super Bowl, so the 49ers are guaranteed to get a superior pick, but the 2018 pick is seen as less valuable because the 49ers won't get it for 12 months.
this is from the article that cal posted
-
They have a pretty hard line stance on not paying for draft picks, which on paper this certainly looks that way. The Browns brass seemingly exploited a loophole to not by rule be against this policy. The NFL hates being shown up and that's why they are fussing about it. It makes me laugh out loud though anytime the NFL gets fucked like this.
As I understand none of what you're saying is correct. By the technicality of the nature of the trade means we could cut Brock this morning and we didn't break the rule on buying draft picks.
Is any of this legal?
It's unclear. The NFL doesn't allow teams to trade players for cash, defining it as conduct detrimental to the league and subject to disciplinary action. Teams are not allowed to make trades for past, future or nominal considerations, although future draft selections are obviously allowed.
This trade falls into a gray area. Precedent suggests that NFL teams are allowed to make trades that are lopsided on their face by virtue of the discount many teams place on future selections. The 49ers couldn't trade the 66th pick in this year's draft to the Buccaneers for the 50th selection, as it would obviously look fishy, but nobody would raise an eyebrow if San Francisco traded the 66th pick to the Bucs for a 2018 second-rounder. Tampa's second-rounder obviously can't fall any lower than 64th even if they win the Super Bowl, so the 49ers are guaranteed to get a superior pick, but the 2018 pick is seen as less valuable because the 49ers won't get it for 12 months.
this is from the article that cal posted
Is any of this legal?
It's unclear. The NFL doesn't allow teams to trade players for cash, defining it as conduct detrimental to the league and subject to disciplinary action. Teams are not allowed to make trades for past, future or nominal considerations, although future draft selections are obviously allowed.
This trade falls into a gray area. Precedent suggests that NFL teams are allowed to make trades that are lopsided on their face by virtue of the discount many teams place on future selections. The 49ers couldn't trade the 66th pick in this year's draft to the Buccaneers for the 50th selection, as it would obviously look fishy, but nobody would raise an eyebrow if San Francisco traded the 66th pick to the Bucs for a 2018 second-rounder. Tampa's second-rounder obviously can't fall any lower than 64th even if they win the Super Bowl, so the 49ers are guaranteed to get a superior pick, but the 2018 pick is seen as less valuable because the 49ers won't get it for 12 months.
this is from the article that cal posted
That was from last night. The NFL approved the deal so as I understand there's nothing else the NFL can legally do based on the rules based on what we now do with Osweiler.
Looks like the Browns pulled a fast one based on a loophole that will definitely get closed in the coming years. I imagine it will be something along the lines of "if a player makes more the $X amount of money, they cannot be released or traded the following season". But for now, we pulled a fast one that stands to benefit the team.
-
Hahahahahaha! Funny.
I have to admit, when I first read the report I almost turned green, grew 4 feet, gained 300 pounds, and went about demolishing the entire city. However, when I calmed down and thought about the deal, I was grinning ear to ear. Having three second round picks is almost unheard of, and while second round picks certainly offer no guarantees on success, they are nice to have. The picks are nothing more than bullets in a gun, and we're trying to load up with as much ammo as possible so we can pull the trigger on a giant deal.
Many people, myself included, were enamored with the Garoppolo idea, but I don't think that's the only game in town. I think there's another veteran QB we're targeting, and we're going to offer a shitload of picks to someone who wants to rebuild in exchange for their QB. If Teddy Twatwater was healthy, I'd say make a play for him, but apparently he suffered the worst injury on earth. How about Alex Smith? Andy Dalton? Someone like that.
-
So we just paid $16 million for a 2nd round pick.
I don't know if that's a good deal or not.
Not really.
His contract has offset language, so if we cut him and another team signs him, we are only on the hook for a portion of that $16 million. If we trade him, we are on the hook for none of it.
The only way we paid $16 million is if he stays on the roster. The only way he stays on the roster is if we believe he's a franchise QB who just was in a bad fit in Houston. So then we're really paying $16 million for a franchise QB with experience.
His contract has offset language, so if we cut him and another team signs him, we are only on the hook for a portion of that $16 million. If we trade him, we are on the hook for none of it.
We'll eat a serious chunk of the $16mm to trade him. Simple conversion of salary to bonus...
@boo-fagley said:
Patriots
... and the "Patriots" offense is?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
@Spotrac tweeted that after 2017 we have no guaranteed money or dead cap associated with Brock
-
Man I've been telling everyone since the purge that Sashi and this FO are smart guys who are setting this team up for big things and you all just bitched and moaned about analytics and how you wanted "football guys" and not Harvard guys. Well this is what Harvard guys brought you: Coaches Jackson and Williams, Zeitler, Tretter, Britt, Collins, and a shitload of draft picks.
NEWSFLASH! Being smart is GOOD! America used to celebrate that, not mock it. Here is intelligence in all its glory. Love it, embrace it, because it's going to end 18 seasons of sucking.
GREAT POST!!!
I have also defended Jimmy, Dee & this FO for their passion & determination to create a WINNER in Cleveland. I had said before that we, as Fans, had to accept sweeping (and possibly uncomfortable) change in order to change the losing culture which had taken hold.
Jimmy, Sashi, & this FO brought what the Browns have needed for years.....Intelligence, passion, change, & the willingness to learn from & grow from their own mistakes.
The roots of this plan are growing deeper & stronger....where are all the naysayers now?
Mike
The roots of this plan are growing deeper & stronger....where are all the naysayers now?
Jumping on the bandwagon...
well we can avoid being docked those picks or facing fines......if we keep Brock on our roster for the 2017 season
Can't use cap space to buy picks AND we totally just did that... even if we didn't technically do that. you can make the arguement that we violated the spirit of the bylaw.
The way i look at it. We have replaced RG3 with a better QB and gained a high draft pick in the process.
Too bad Brock's not PS eligible...
Once the deal is approved, HTF could we get fined, etc. for a league approved deal?
I think we most likely eat salary and trade him, but I sure can't see keeping him an entire season. At most look at him in OTA's... say he's not the player we thought he was... put him by the curb.
-
it actually got approved in official capacity at around 8 something this morning.
-
The people on this board who are routinely wrong about things tend to be in unanimous decision that this was a bad move....so now I feel even better about it.
The people on this board who are routinely wrong about things tend to be in unanimous decision that this was a bad move....so now I feel even better about it.
There's no way anyone with any objectivity can look at this as a bad deal. It's not any of our money, who cares how they spend it. We have plenty of cap space, acquired a 2nd round pick for a guy who we probably will just release anyways. He's not going to be the QB of the Browns anyways so who cares about Oswelter....he sucks and we will still either draft or trade for the future QB.
-
browns still have 49.5m in cap space remaining
-
His contract has offset language, so if we cut him and another team signs him, we are only on the hook for a portion of that $16 million. If we trade him, we are on the hook for none of it.
We'll eat a serious chunk of the $16mm to trade him. Simple conversion of salary to bonus...
@boo-fagley said:
Patriots
... and the "Patriots" offense is?
We'll eat a serious chunk of the $16mm to trade him. Simple conversion of salary to bonus...
... and the "Patriots" offense is?
I assumed we would, but technically we wouldn't HAVE to.
If we can convert, say, $10m - that leaves him with $6m guaranteed remaining and likely makes him a very interesting trade piece.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
Browns actually doing something smart!
Good for them! They get a cookie!
Now let's get Garoppolo and the rest will fall into place..
-
Man I've been telling everyone since the purge that Sashi and this FO are smart guys who are setting this team up for big things and you all just bitched and moaned about analytics and how you wanted "football guys" and not Harvard guys. Well this is what Harvard guys brought you: Coaches Jackson and Williams, Zeitler, Tretter, Britt, Collins, and a shitload of draft picks.
NEWSFLASH! Being smart is GOOD! America used to celebrate that, not mock it. Here is intelligence in all its glory. Love it, embrace it, because it's going to end 18 seasons of sucking.
Man I've been telling everyone since the purge that Sashi and this FO are smart guys who are setting this team up for big things and you all just bitched and moaned about analytics and how you wanted "football guys" and not Harvard guys. Well this is what Harvard guys brought you: Coaches Jackson and Williams, Zeitler, Tretter, Britt, Collins, and a shitload of draft picks.
NEWSFLASH! Being smart is GOOD! America used to celebrate that, not mock it. Here is intelligence in all its glory. Love it, embrace it, because it's going to end 18 seasons of sucking.
Has there been any movement on Donta Hightower? Is it inconceivable that the Browns could sign him?
-
We are not getting Garoppolo.
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 💗
Register Login