Sheldon Richardson released
-
All to do with rolling over some cash to next year to pay for Baker, Ward and Chubb ....would you rather keep the money for Richardson for 1 year and not extend one of the three I just mentioned ? Maybe we sign Maurice Hurst for a lot less..... and he had a similar PFF rating to Richardson ....I mentioned on here recently that Sheldon would be cut ......really good player but thats business.
-
There is an argument for moving S.R. based upon his contract, although they could have waited a year. Plus we don't know if he refused to restructure or not. The other interesting question is the timing. If the Browns are going after a DT in the draft, why couldn't they wait until after the draft to do this, instead of telegraphing their need now? That's the head-scratching part for me.
-
Im totally feeling it was a restructure thing between berry and the agent.
Berry is playing hardball, he knows Richardson won't get a contract offer as high as he was due.
I'd be highly thinking berry cut just ahead of the draft to let the draft play out then re sign him if needed at 60% or something.
-
Jackson and Elliott should be able to fill his role and we save a good amount of money.
Elliott played some last season. I didn't see much out of him. I'm sure, as gumby and others said, it's a restructure discussion that did not come to the correct conclusion, from Berry's perspective.
I don't see us drafting a DT in round 1 however.
Elliott played some last season. I didn't see much out of him. I'm sure, as gumby and others said, it's a restructure discussion that did not come to the correct conclusion, from Berry's perspective.
I don't see us drafting a DT in round 1 however.
Yeah, gun to my head I still think they go either DE or CB.
-
We now have Billings, Jackson, Elliott and Day ....Clowney can play inside too as a run stopper ..... draft needs as things stand DT x 2, DE, CB, LB, WR .... developmental QB and a TE if Njoku is traded ....
-
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or both are heavily involved in the the rotation.
Elliot and Day based on what I’ve seen should play very sparingly barring any major improvement.
I hope we bring S. Rich back...he might not be worth 12M but he plays every week and makes some plays each game.
-
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or both are heavily involved in the the rotation.
Elliot and Day based on what I’ve seen should play very sparingly barring any major improvement.
I hope we bring S. Rich back...he might not be worth 12M but he plays every week and makes some plays each game.
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or both are heavily involved in the the rotation.
Elliot and Day based on what I’ve seen should play very sparingly barring any major improvement.
I hope we bring S. Rich back...he might not be worth 12M but he plays every week and makes some plays each game.
Baring SR returning I see the same thing, two DTs in the 1st 3 rounds depending upon how they fall.
-
So, I ask myself, Are we better with Clowney and no Richardson? Or were we better with Richardson and no Clowney?
We were only truly better for a couple of days. Perhaps they're asking Clowney to put on about 50 pounds.
So, I ask myself, Are we better with Clowney and no Richardson? Or were we better with Richardson and no Clowney?
We were only truly better for a couple of days. Perhaps they're asking Clowney to put on about 50 pounds.
Or perhaps Jackson is Richardsons' replacement and Clowney has nothing to do with Richardsons release? Perhaps we had been talking to Richardsons camp for a month or so about a restructure to no avail and now he simply gets cut because we are close on money? Perhaps we viewed Richardson as being over paid? Perhaps between the players we now have on board in addition to someone we plan on drafting, we felt cutting Richardson now was better than waiting until some time during camp?
Perhaps we best wait and see what all Berry has in store before we jump off a bridge?
-
So, I ask myself, Are we better with Clowney and no Richardson? Or were we better with Richardson and no Clowney?
We were only truly better for a couple of days. Perhaps they're asking Clowney to put on about 50 pounds.
Or perhaps Jackson is Richardsons' replacement and Clowney has nothing to do with Richardsons release? Perhaps we had been talking to Richardsons camp for a month or so about a restructure to no avail and now he simply gets cut because we are close on money? Perhaps we viewed Richardson as being over paid? Perhaps between the players we now have on board in addition to someone we plan on drafting, we felt cutting Richardson now was better than waiting until some time during camp?
Perhaps we best wait and see what all Berry has in store before we jump off a bridge?
Or perhaps Jackson is Richardsons' replacement and Clowney has nothing to do with Richardsons release? Perhaps we had been talking to Richardsons camp for a month or so about a restructure to no avail and now he simply gets cut because we are close on money? Perhaps we viewed Richardson as being over paid? Perhaps between the players we now have on board in addition to someone we plan on drafting, we felt cutting Richardson now was better than waiting until some time during camp?
All quite possibly true.
And we're all not going to agree with every move a coach or GM makes. Currently, I personally, don't agree with the move.
-
And no problem with your being in disagreement. We all have our own ideas and opinions.
I guess my bottom line position is I liked Richardson and wished we could have kept him. I just know that as we get better, tough decisions sometimes have to be made, and as you said, it isn't always going to be popular. He was the odd man out in this case. Last year of a contract, making big money, and a player we very probably weren't going to bring back next year.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or both are heavily involved in the the rotation.
Elliot and Day based on what I’ve seen should play very sparingly barring any major improvement.
I hope we bring S. Rich back...he might not be worth 12M but he plays every week and makes some plays each game.
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft.
Agree... there are some very interesting Day 2 values... especially in Round 3.
Terry's take on the move(s)...
One football man was explaining it to me this way: The Browns could go with three defensive ends at times – Myles Garrett, Takk McKinley and Clowney. They signed Malik Jackson, a defensive tackle who has played like a defensive end in certain formations.
His point was to stop thinking the Browns have the standard 4-3 defense. They will have two linebackers and three safeties on the field most of the time. It’s why the front office put big money ($37 million over three years) into safety John Johnson III. It’s why they made Grant Delpit a second-round pick last year.
It’s also why I wouldn’t be surprised if the Browns draft a safety somewhere in the middle rounds.
"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 -
And no problem with your being in disagreement. We all have our own ideas and opinions.
I guess my bottom line position is I liked Richardson and wished we could have kept him. I just know that as we get better, tough decisions sometimes have to be made, and as you said, it isn't always going to be popular. He was the odd man out in this case. Last year of a contract, making big money, and a player we very probably weren't going to bring back next year.
tough decisions sometimes have to be made,
Right. And I can only see it from a fan's perspective. And I see a good football player, not great but better than most...and he plays every week...and to my knowledge we're not 'up against it' with the cap. He was a dependable solid player.
-
I’m pretty confident we are taking a DT maybe 2 in this draft.
Agree... there are some very interesting Day 2 values... especially in Round 3.
Terry's take on the move(s)...
One football man was explaining it to me this way: The Browns could go with three defensive ends at times – Myles Garrett, Takk McKinley and Clowney. They signed Malik Jackson, a defensive tackle who has played like a defensive end in certain formations.
His point was to stop thinking the Browns have the standard 4-3 defense. They will have two linebackers and three safeties on the field most of the time. It’s why the front office put big money ($37 million over three years) into safety John Johnson III. It’s why they made Grant Delpit a second-round pick last year.
It’s also why I wouldn’t be surprised if the Browns draft a safety somewhere in the middle rounds.
Terry's take on the move(s)...
and to my knowledge we're not 'up against it' with the cap.
...OK, so according to Terry, after signing upcoming draft picks the team would be about 2 mil under the cap. So, a hit was put out on Richardson. He was an upcoming cap hit.
But he's a good player and we ain't won any super bowls yet.
-
Cap update
In my prior posts I didn't incorporate the concept that every rookie that makes the final roster would decrease the number of vets who made it.. i just added the rookie pool on the top. Backing out those salaries.. changes things. A lot, as it turns out!
65 who make the roster [53 active, 12 practice squad] will charge against the cap. Rookies can be either active or PS. Say all 9 rookies make some part of the roster – thus 56 veterans will make the roster.
Also assume the ones who make the roster are the highest-paid. This isn’t always the case - if JoJo Natson [874,265] gets cut and Montrel Meander [850k] makes the roster, that's 25k lower salary expense.
Rookie pool is 8,931,008.. so top 56 plus the rookies. Or, to be exact, top 55 plus DPJ because DPJ's salary as a 7th rounder is 826 while the vet minimum is 850. On OTC, the top 55 is OBJ down to and including Cameron Malveaux. These will be on the roster, either active or PS.
Current total given above assumptions for 65 for the 2021 season is 200,658,119. Dead is 2,681,770. That’s 203,339,889 for our 2021 total.
Assume OTC is correct with the amount of one-year cap we have at 20,935,462. 2021 cap is 182.5.
So our cap space remaining in 2021 after releasing Richardson is… 95,573.
Yes, we're under the cap.. but now next season instead of that 20.9m one-year space, our rollover cap will be all of 95k. And we have a QB, CB, RB, and RG to resign.
-
You also have to factor we won't keep 9 rookies because we won't draft 9 players. A few picks are going to be used to move up, or trade back to gain for next year.
-
This was a good read for me
-
Andrew Berry sends message to Cleveland Browns veterans: Let’s restructure
Cleveland Browns GM Andrew Berry sent a simple message to veteran players — you must play ball with us and restructure or play ball elsewhere.
By cutting a star Cleveland Browns defensive tackle and mainstay on the defensive line in Sheldon Richardson, Andrew Berry has sent a message not only to Richardson and his agent, Ben Dogra of Relativity Sports, but also to other Browns players in a similar salary situation.
Evidently, Berry is very, very serious about the need to restructure in order to fit salaries within the salary cap.
If Berry was willing to cut Sheldon Richardson, he’s very likely taking a similar position with other high-salaried players on the Browns roster, including Jarvis Landry, Odell Beckham, Jr., Joel Bitonio, Chris Hubbard, and others.
Make no mistake, Richardson was not cut due to a lack of ability. He was a legitimate star, with 64 tackles last season and 4.5 sacks for the team. The former Pro Bowler and 2013 NFL Defensive Rookie of the Year has been absolutely as solid as a rock for the Browns the past two seasons, and there can be no complaint about the level of his play.
However, general manager Andrew Berry decided that the team would rather clear $11.5 million worth of cap space, and for that reason, the 6-foot-3, 293-pound Richardson, who will turn 31 this November, was given his release. In effect, Berry is saying that the Browns do not believe that the Ravens or Steelers are going to offer $11.5 million, either...
... The Browns might even be willing to re-sign him back but at a much lower rate. One way or the other, Richardson is going to restructure, whether it is with the Browns or some other team.
Would be nice to bring him back.
-
-
If he was willing to take a discount, he would have already done it. You know it had to be offered already.
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