ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football Deshaun Watson to Browns (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=343027)

wazu 06-27-2022 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlphg9 (Post 16349725)
Is this a serious question? Why does a business think it's their business of what's going on in their business?

So you're a hotel manager. Your hotel has reserved a full-time room for the star QB of your local NFL team. Different women join him in that room on a very frequent basis. And you think it's so strange you actually complain to the NFL team about it?

This sounds like the mind of a person who would screw up the Week 3 game thread.

Wisconsin_Chief 06-27-2022 12:21 PM

I never in my wildest dreams would have pegged Watson as being such a freak. I just don't understand it, dude could have had any chick he wanted in the Houston area and he's pulling stuff like this.

The guy is clearly just messed up in the head. As a football player I don't know how you'd go into a huddle with him and have any shred of respect for him. The Browns are goddamn morons, this entire situation is truly mind boggling on all levels.

Rain Man 06-27-2022 12:24 PM

Those tweets reaffirm that there's some information out there in the world that I don't want to know.

Regarding the hotel asking about women, I've always wondered about how hotels think about visitors to a room. If a low-rent woman comes in and goes to a room, do they care as long as there's no fuss? If a normal looking woman comes in, are they suspicious? She might be there for a job interview or she's a friend or something. You can't assume that a non-guest woman going into a hotel room is there for reasons of ill repute.

And then you get into the whole trafficking discussion. If a woman comes in who looks really prostitute-y (however you define that), is the hotel supposed to call it in as suspected human trafficking? I've always had a hunch that trafficking is far overestimated, and that in reality a huge majority of prostitute-y looking women are merely entrepreneurs who have discovered a relatively easy way to make money.

And what is prostitute-y looking? We're not supposed to judge a woman on what she wears, so maybe a woman in hot pants and fishnets just likes the look.

The whole thing is confusing to me.

Kman34 06-27-2022 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 16349830)
Those tweets reaffirm that there's some information out there in the world that I don't want to know.

Regarding the hotel asking about women, I've always wondered about how hotels think about visitors to a room. If a low-rent woman comes in and goes to a room, do they care as long as there's no fuss? If a normal looking woman comes in, are they suspicious? She might be there for a job interview or she's a friend or something. You can't assume that a non-guest woman going into a hotel room is there for reasons of ill repute.

And then you get into the whole trafficking discussion. If a woman comes in who looks really prostitute-y (however you define that), is the hotel supposed to call it in as suspected human trafficking? I've always had a hunch that trafficking is far overestimated, and that in reality a huge majority of prostitute-y looking women are merely entrepreneurs who have discovered a relatively easy way to make money.

And what is prostitute-y looking? We're not supposed to judge a woman on what she wears, so maybe a woman in hot pants and fishnets just likes the look.

The whole thing is confusing to me.

https://media.vogue.fr/photos/5c3620...7.jpg?lang=eng

frozenchief 06-27-2022 02:57 PM

I'm reading the lawsuit and if these allegations are true, this lawsuit against the Texans is more than justified.

Red Dawg 06-27-2022 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 16349554)
Wait a minute. The manager of the hotel was actually complaining because too many women were visiting Watson at their hotel, one at a time? Why would that be any of the hotel's business?

Because it's their hotel and not a whore house. It definitely their business. It's not pay your money then smoke crack if you want.

Skyy God 06-28-2022 03:18 AM

Of course God Boy helped facilitate Watson’s assaults.

“The lawsuit also says that Ramirez told HPD that he and Texans executive vice president Jack Easterby helped set up an account for Watson at the Houstonian.”

TEX 06-28-2022 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief (Post 16349825)
I never in my wildest dreams would have pegged Watson as being such a freak. I just don't understand it, dude could have had any chick he wanted in the Houston area and he's pulling stuff like this.

The guy is clearly just messed up in the head. As a football player I don't know how you'd go into a huddle with him and have any shred of respect for him. The Browns are goddamn morons, this entire situation is truly mind boggling on all levels.

Because Browns...

irafreak 06-28-2022 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief (Post 16349825)
I never in my wildest dreams would have pegged Watson as being such a freak. I just don't understand it, dude could have had any chick he wanted in the Houston area and he's pulling stuff like this.

The guy is clearly just messed up in the head. As a football player I don't know how you'd go into a huddle with him and have any shred of respect for him. The Browns are goddamn morons, this entire situation is truly mind boggling on all levels.

It's usually more boredom for people like this. He probably has had women available on command so he needed something new.

Marcellus 06-28-2022 08:27 AM

I remember back in the day when Kapernick wore a Dolphins hat on the beach right after signing his contract extension with SF. Then he got into an argument with SF fans on line that called him out on it.

I got into a few arguments with people here because I said no way anyone that stupid is going to be a good QB long term.

Take that x 50 with Watson. Dude has to be ****ed in the head and now its never going to go away.

jettio 06-28-2022 01:49 PM

Not sure how the Texans would be liable for Watson's misconduct.

Seems like the massage therapists in Houston would have more of a duty to warn other massage therapists.

When did the lawyer first learn about Watson? Is his law firm liable for any of Watson's misconduct after their first massage therapist plaintiff signed up.

Not sure what "tort" the Texans are responsible for.

Weird story, There are not that many cities where a guy could be that big a problem for one group of licensed professionals and there be no grapevine where those licensed professionals say watch out for this creep.

BWillie 06-28-2022 05:34 PM

So certainly the massage therapists the Texans used have a rightful grievance....even though at least one of them was voluntarily ****ing him. He was definitely being a creep there but boo hoo about the sluts he met on Instagram. I'm sure it was pretty obvious what he was looking for there.

Chief Pagan 06-28-2022 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jettio (Post 16351326)
Not sure how the Texans would be liable for Watson's misconduct.

Seems like the massage therapists in Houston would have more of a duty to warn other massage therapists.

When did the lawyer first learn about Watson? Is his law firm liable for any of Watson's misconduct after their first massage therapist plaintiff signed up.

Not sure what "tort" the Texans are responsible for.

Weird story, There are not that many cities where a guy could be that big a problem for one group of licensed professionals and there be no grapevine where those licensed professionals say watch out for this creep.

If it was criminal law, I would start with aiding and abetting, but for tort law the standards of proof are generally lower.

jettio 06-28-2022 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 16351763)
If it was criminal law, I would start with aiding and abetting, but for tort law the standards of proof are generally lower.

It looks like a case of a publicity seeking attorney trying to stay in the papers after settling most of the cases against the asshole creep.

Texans should not settle this case or any others based on the same weak legal premise.

chiefzilla1501 06-29-2022 05:39 AM

I wanted to give Watson the benefit of the doubt but all of this is messed up and he deserves it.

Now can we talk about Daniel snyder? What a diseased league when owners are not only not held to the same standards, they’re not held to any standard at all.

Rainbarrel 06-29-2022 05:59 AM

Watson on the shelf, Mayfield on the block, Jimmy G trade rumors. THE Cleveland Browns

Eleazar 06-29-2022 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbarrel (Post 16352127)
Watson on the shelf, Mayfield on the block, Jimmy G trade rumors. THE Cleveland Browns

Jacoby Brissett leads your Cleveland Browns to another last place finish! Get your tickets now! Oh, and please come back ODB!

dirk digler 06-29-2022 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jettio (Post 16351326)
Not sure how the Texans would be liable for Watson's misconduct.

Seems like the massage therapists in Houston would have more of a duty to warn other massage therapists.

When did the lawyer first learn about Watson? Is his law firm liable for any of Watson's misconduct after their first massage therapist plaintiff signed up.

Not sure what "tort" the Texans are responsible for.

Weird story, There are not that many cities where a guy could be that big a problem for one group of licensed professionals and there be no grapevine where those licensed professionals say watch out for this creep.

Watson was their employee and they provided him a NDA form to give to massage therapists.

Eleazar 06-29-2022 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 16352150)
Watson was their employee and they provided him a NDA form to give to massage therapists.

In what way is asking someone to sign an NDA illegal or even wrong? I would guess that a lot of people who deal professionally with athletes and celebrities are asked to do this.

dirk digler 06-29-2022 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razaele (Post 16352153)
In what way is asking someone to sign an NDA illegal or even wrong? I would guess that a lot of people who deal professionally with athletes and celebrities are asked to do this.

Their contention is because they provided the NDA form they knew about his behavior and since he is their employee they are liable civilly.

chiefzilla1501 06-29-2022 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 16349830)
Those tweets reaffirm that there's some information out there in the world that I don't want to know.

Regarding the hotel asking about women, I've always wondered about how hotels think about visitors to a room. If a low-rent woman comes in and goes to a room, do they care as long as there's no fuss? If a normal looking woman comes in, are they suspicious? She might be there for a job interview or she's a friend or something. You can't assume that a non-guest woman going into a hotel room is there for reasons of ill repute.

And then you get into the whole trafficking discussion. If a woman comes in who looks really prostitute-y (however you define that), is the hotel supposed to call it in as suspected human trafficking? I've always had a hunch that trafficking is far overestimated, and that in reality a huge majority of prostitute-y looking women are merely entrepreneurs who have discovered a relatively easy way to make money.

And what is prostitute-y looking? We're not supposed to judge a woman on what she wears, so maybe a woman in hot pants and fishnets just likes the look.

The whole thing is confusing to me.

I imagine the nfls slow response was knowing they’d be opening up Pandora’s box. Not just for them. But for all leagues. A lot of airing out of dirty laundry.

Chief Pagan 06-29-2022 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 16352122)
I wanted to give Watson the benefit of the doubt but all of this is messed up and he deserves it.

Now can we talk about Daniel snyder? What a diseased league when owners are not only not held to the same standards, they’re not held to any standard at all.

I'm with you on this.

Chief Pagan 06-29-2022 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razaele (Post 16352153)
In what way is asking someone to sign an NDA illegal or even wrong? I would guess that a lot of people who deal professionally with athletes and celebrities are asked to do this.

In criminal law, I can't see you would get anywhere.

But for civil suits, the standard for getting a jury to award damages is lower.

It appears to me that the Texans knew Watson was engaged in egregious behavior and was covering for him to the point where I could see a jury awarding damages.

For civil suits, you don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

And of course, the Texans may prefer a settlement to a long drawn out trial.

Flying High D 06-29-2022 11:13 AM

I knew it was a bad idea giving both those city’s teams.

jettio 06-29-2022 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 16352403)
In criminal law, I can't see you would get anywhere.

But for civil suits, the standard for getting a jury to award damages is lower.

It appears to me that the Texans knew Watson was engaged in egregious behavior and was covering for him to the point where I could see a jury awarding damages.

For civil suits, you don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

And of course, the Texans may prefer a settlement to a long drawn out trial.

The quantum of proof can be preponderance of the evidence in a civil case which is not as hard to reach as beyond a reasonable doubt, but you have to have a cause of action based on a recognized legal theory.

KChiefs1 06-29-2022 07:20 PM

Worst trade in NFL history?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BWillie 06-29-2022 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1 (Post 16353056)
Worst trade in NFL history?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are the browns. Who is the best QB they've had in the last 20 years?

Rainbarrel 06-29-2022 08:13 PM

Sloths fart more often than the Browns have a full season above average QB

ArrowHeader 06-29-2022 08:42 PM

If Watson is suspended the 2022 season it actually helps save the Browns $45MM in 2023 salary cap, since his contract just shifts a year. They were gonna be way over the cap. Now they’ll be able to re-sign some guys and makes the opt-outs like Chubb and Myles Garret easier to rework. It’s like a ****ed up blessing in disguise.

wazu 06-29-2022 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowHeader (Post 16353118)
If Watson is suspended the 2022 season it actually helps save the Browns $45MM in 2023 salary cap, since his contract just shifts a year. They were gonna be way over the cap. Now they’ll be able to re-sign some guys and makes the opt-outs like Chubb and Myles Garret easier to rework. It’s like a ****ed up blessing in disguise.

Except for a shit-ton of picks they gave up, plus the possibility of the suspension increasing as more comes to light. Plus tying their franchise to a serial creep who will be reviled by NFL fans. And that contract isn't going away, they made sure of that.

jettio 06-30-2022 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowHeader (Post 16353118)
If Watson is suspended the 2022 season it actually helps save the Browns $45MM in 2023 salary cap, since his contract just shifts a year. They were gonna be way over the cap. Now they’ll be able to re-sign some guys and makes the opt-outs like Chubb and Myles Garret easier to rework. It’s like a ****ed up blessing in disguise.

Link?

I believe Watson was paid his signing bonus when he signed. He would be paid $1 million for this season if not suspended. He will be paid pro rata of $1million for each game he plays this year.

He gets paid his full 2023 salary per game for each game he is not suspended in 2023.

The idea that contracts "shift a year" if a player is suspended by league seems wacky, do you have a good source for your explanation?

Red Dawg 06-30-2022 11:13 AM

A year suspension makes 2022 a waste of time for them and their fan's. Baker should tell them to shove it up their ass but he's a pussy. He will choose not to lose money but he may just show up and do nothing. Thats his best chance to **** them over.

Hoover 06-30-2022 11:18 AM

If I'm the NFL I'm only wanting to suspend Watson for 8-10 games. I think they will want to punish the Browns too, otherwise this could become a trend.

ThaVirus 06-30-2022 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Dawg (Post 16353604)
Baker should tell them to shove it up their ass but he's a pussy. He will choose not to lose money but he may just show up and do nothing. Thats his best chance to **** them over.

His salary is $18m next year. He'd be dumb not to make that money if called upon.

Plus, imagine if he stepped in and kept the Brown in playoff contention. He'd be a ****ing hero while earning himself a much larger contract.

Red Dawg 06-30-2022 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 16353672)
His salary is $18m next year. He'd be dumb not to make that money if called upon.

Plus, imagine if he stepped in and kept the Brown in playoff contention. He'd be a ****ing hero while earning himself a much larger contract.

Maybe or he plays like shit and gets cut anyway. They can't get rid of Watson so either way he's out. Show up and do shit and still get paid his 18. The team doesn't want him and players don't either. None of them have come to his defense at all.

ThaVirus 06-30-2022 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Dawg (Post 16353708)
Maybe or he plays like shit and gets cut anyway. They can't get rid of Watson so either way he's out. Show up and do shit and still get paid his 18. The team doesn't want him and players don't either. None of them have come to his defense at all.

He's playing for his next contract. Bombing or outright refusing to play because he's butthurt would be the dumbest thing ever.

mabbott 06-30-2022 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 16353672)
His salary is $18m next year. He'd be dumb not to make that money if called upon.

Plus, imagine if he stepped in and kept the Brown in playoff contention. He'd be a ****ing hero while earning himself a much larger contract.

Baker is who he is. He is not going to miraculously become an excellent QB. There is a reason they would be interested in improving their QB position. He couldn't get them further with a stacked team than he did.

ThaVirus 06-30-2022 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mabbott (Post 16353736)
Baker is who he is. He is not going to miraculously become an excellent QB. There is a reason they would be interested in improving their QB position. He couldn't get them further with a stacked team than he did.

It's the Browns and he's a QB. He doesn't have to be excellent.

They've got a solid roster. If he can just recapture that 2020 magic, the city of Cleveland will love him, he goes out the hero, and some garbage team will sign him to a huge contract. Hell, look at that bum Carson Wentz.

Kiimo 06-30-2022 01:01 PM

I keep hearing about Baker going to Seattle

Nickhead 06-30-2022 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jettio (Post 16353552)
Link?

I believe Watson was paid his signing bonus when he signed. He would be paid $1 million for this season if not suspended. He will be paid pro rata of $1million for each game he plays this year.

He gets paid his full 2023 salary per game for each game he is not suspended in 2023.

The idea that contracts "shift a year" if a player is suspended by league seems wacky, do you have a good source for your explanation?

there is talk that a full year suspension pushes his contract numbers back a year. it turns into a six year deal.

Sassy Squatch 06-30-2022 04:12 PM

Where? I've never seen that before. So does Ridley tick a year as well?

Pasta Little Brioni 06-30-2022 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowHeader (Post 16353118)
If Watson is suspended the 2022 season it actually helps save the Browns $45MM in 2023 salary cap, since his contract just shifts a year. They were gonna be way over the cap. Now they’ll be able to re-sign some guys and makes the opt-outs like Chubb and Myles Garret easier to rework. It’s like a ****ed up blessing in disguise.

Bullshit. They gave up a ton of draft capital they couldn't afford to lose and got nothing for it. How is that a blessing?

Pasta Little Brioni 06-30-2022 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 16353720)
He's playing for his next contract. Bombing or outright refusing to play because he's butthurt would be the dumbest thing ever.

Faker is a lost cause

Pasta Little Brioni 06-30-2022 05:17 PM

Now punish owners like Kraft

Sassy Squatch 08-29-2024 07:34 AM

LMAO Good Lord.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Browns have restructured the contract of QB Deshaun Watson, converting $44.79M of his 2024 base salary into a signing bonus and creating $35.832M in cap space, per source. <br><br>Cleveland now has over $62M in cap space, the most in the entire NFL. <a href="https://t.co/KC9hLWQDT8">pic.twitter.com/KC9hLWQDT8</a></p>&mdash; Field Yates (@FieldYates) <a href="https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1829126529479033188?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 29, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Couch-Potato 08-29-2024 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch (Post 17652388)
LMAO Good Lord.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Browns have restructured the contract of QB Deshaun Watson, converting $44.79M of his 2024 base salary into a signing bonus and creating $35.832M in cap space, per source. <br><br>Cleveland now has over $62M in cap space, the most in the entire NFL. <a href="https://t.co/KC9hLWQDT8">pic.twitter.com/KC9hLWQDT8</a></p>&mdash; Field Yates (@FieldYates) <a href="https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1829126529479033188?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 29, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

For what. Aiyuk?

TLO 08-29-2024 08:28 AM

That's a lot of coin butthole massages.

myselff77 08-29-2024 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch (Post 17652388)
LMAO Good Lord.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Browns have restructured the contract of QB Deshaun Watson, converting $44.79M of his 2024 base salary into a signing bonus and creating $35.832M in cap space, per source. <br><br>Cleveland now has over $62M in cap space, the most in the entire NFL. <a href="https://t.co/KC9hLWQDT8">pic.twitter.com/KC9hLWQDT8</a></p>&mdash; Field Yates (@FieldYates) <a href="https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1829126529479033188?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 29, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I don't understand the timing of this. Are they going to trade for Aiyuk or some other high priced malcontent? Otherwise, since they already had cap space this year wouldn't they be better not restructuring and taking that $44M cap hit this season? If I understand correctly they now will be spreading the $44M cap hit over the remainder of the contract. Seems like that just wastes cap space in future years?

Bowser 08-29-2024 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17652435)
For what. Aiyuk?

A treasure chest for the Cleveland masseuses, obviously.

https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.4e4316b9...pid=ImgRaw&r=0

Bowser 08-29-2024 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myselff77 (Post 17652448)
I don't understand the timing of this. Are they going to trade for Aiyuk or some other high priced malcontent? Otherwise, since they already had cap space this year wouldn't they be better not restructuring and taking that $44M cap hit this season? If I understand correctly they now will be spreading the $44M cap hit over the remainder of the contract. Seems like that just wastes cap space in future years?

Wasn't it reported that they were offering not only Amari Cooper but TWO second round picks for Aiyuk to the 9ers? Who else could it be that would demand such a cap hit in their first year with the Browns?

Bowser 08-29-2024 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 17652451)
Wasn't it reported that they were offering not only Amari Cooper but TWO second round picks for Aiyuk to the 9ers? Who else could it be that would demand such a cap hit in their first year with the Browns?

Hold up. What if....

https://brobible.com/wp-content/uplo...se-bengals.jpg


No way that would happen, right?

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17652435)
For what. Aiyuk?

Because why not?

If they don't spend it, they bank the rollover and it applies to next season's cap and the money they converted to signing bonus that pushed into next season gets covered by the rollover.

Teams should be willing to convert as much salary into signing bonus as possible for guys they're married to. And the player should be happy to do so as well.

Then the issue becomes simply being savvy with the freed space. You can't burn it all up (Because then you don't have the rollover for the following season and that's how the Saints happen).

But there's literally zero reason NOT to do this for either party to the transaction here.

Couch-Potato 08-29-2024 08:37 AM

"Watson will have cap hits of $72.9 million each in the 2025 and 2026 seasons, with $172 million and $99 million dead cap hits, respectively." - ESPN

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 08:39 AM

And hell, it may have just been a favor to Watson.

It's guaranteed money so the Browns have already paid it - it's sitting in escrow per NFLPA rules.

So rather than just have it sitting in escrow, might as well let Watson have it. You ain't gonna get him traded so there's no avoiding him EVENTUALLY getting that money. And cutting him won't change anything. It's going to be his by the end of the year so you might as well give it to him now as signing bonus.

Again - literally zero reason NOT to. And while the benefits may be de minimis, there are some even if it's nothing more than creating more angst in the Aiyuk camp that could cause him to push harder for a move. Could be pure optics to him and his agent.

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17652469)
"Watson will have cap hits of $72.9 million each in the 2025 and 2026 seasons, with $172 million and $99 million dead cap hits, respectively." - ESPN

Sure. But the Browns now have $60 million in cap space in 2024. The projected 2025 cap is about $260 million.

So the Browns adjusted Cap, if they don't burn that $60 million, will actually be $320 million.

Again, everything changed with the 1 for 1 rollover. There's no rollover penalty anymore so all of this stuff becomes a LOT more fluid.

RunKC 08-29-2024 08:45 AM

If your owner has money, then the salary cap is a myth. This Watson deal was supposed to destroy this team and yet they’ve redone it twice and now have the most cap room in the NFL

O.city 08-29-2024 08:48 AM

They're also stuck with Watson, who isn't good.

RealSNR 08-29-2024 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17652435)
For what. Aiyuk?


Another cap busting QB trade!

Hey Cleveland, if you want Wentz, the bidding starts at 2 1st rounders! You want to get the QB position right, don’t you?

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17652487)
If your owner has money, then the salary cap is a myth. This Watson deal was supposed to destroy this team and yet they’ve redone it twice and now have the most cap room in the NFL

Yes and no.

They still have $145 million in salary cap obligations over the next 3 years and have to keep an eye on that horizon with how they SPEND that money. Because if they turn around and spend that $60 million now (which, honestly, is virtually impossible for them) and enter the 2025 season with the 'regular' $260 million cap while Watson accounts for $72 million of it, that's no bueno.

And where it's REALLY an issue, is if they approach Watson at all for a restructure next season or the season after. His leverage is MASSIVE. And it's a headache of Cleveland's own making.

The cap is something that can always be shirked for 2-3 years. And every time you kick the can, things get just a little tighter.

Cap Hell is a real thing. It's gonna eventually happen to you. But where the 'myth' comes is that Cap Hell should destroy a team for a sustained period of time. It doesn't.

One year of slash and burn can almost always clean a cap sheet. I wouldn't have been opposed to us being more aggressive this season with an eye on just such a season in/around 2027. We just go scorched earth that season and hack away at everyone we can. Accelerate a bunch of shit onto the cap, win 6 games and then jam the accelerator again in 2028.

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17652487)
If your owner has money, then the salary cap is a myth. This Watson deal was supposed to destroy this team and yet they’ve redone it twice and now have the most cap room in the NFL

Additionally, this wasn't about the Browns owner 'having money'.

Remember that this money was already spent. His salary was guaranteed and all guaranteed contracts must be paid up front and placed in escrow. All this did was take Watson's money out of hock.

Mecca 08-29-2024 09:01 AM

The Browns actually have a really good roster so I don't fault them for making moves.

Mecca 08-29-2024 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17652505)
Yes and no.

They still have $145 million in salary cap obligations over the next 3 years and have to keep an eye on that horizon with how they SPEND that money. Because if they turn around and spend that $60 million now (which, honestly, is virtually impossible for them) and enter the 2025 season with the 'regular' $260 million cap while Watson accounts for $72 million of it, that's no bueno.

And where it's REALLY an issue, is if they approach Watson at all for a restructure next season or the season after. His leverage is MASSIVE. And it's a headache of Cleveland's own making.

The cap is something that can always be shirked for 2-3 years. And every time you kick the can, things get just a little tighter.

Cap Hell is a real thing. It's gonna eventually happen to you. But where the 'myth' comes is that Cap Hell should destroy a team for a sustained period of time. It doesn't.

One year of slash and burn can almost always clean a cap sheet. I wouldn't have been opposed to us being more aggressive this season with an eye on just such a season in/around 2027. We just go scorched earth that season and hack away at everyone we can. Accelerate a bunch of shit onto the cap, win 6 games and then jam the accelerator again in 2028.

The only team that doesn't understand the start over year idea is the Saints.

Garcia Bronco 08-29-2024 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17652456)
Because why not?

If they don't spend it, they bank the rollover and it applies to next season's cap and the money they converted to signing bonus that pushed into next season gets covered by the rollover.

Teams should be willing to convert as much salary into signing bonus as possible for guys they're married to. And the player should be happy to do so as well.

Then the issue becomes simply being savvy with the freed space. You can't burn it all up (Because then you don't have the rollover for the following season and that's how the Saints happen).

But there's literally zero reason NOT to do this for either party to the transaction here.

Signing bonus is taxed differently vs regular pay.

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 17652513)
Signing bonus is taxed differently vs regular pay.

Depends on the state, but yeah - could be.

In some ways it could be detrimental. All depends on how Ohio's taxes compare with the other states Watson would play in.

TLO 08-29-2024 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 17652511)
The Browns actually have a really good roster so I don't fault them for making moves.

They don't have the QB though and that's what truly matters.

Bowser 08-29-2024 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17652505)
Yes and no.

They still have $145 million in salary cap obligations over the next 3 years and have to keep an eye on that horizon with how they SPEND that money. Because if they turn around and spend that $60 million now (which, honestly, is virtually impossible for them) and enter the 2025 season with the 'regular' $260 million cap while Watson accounts for $72 million of it, that's no bueno.

And where it's REALLY an issue, is if they approach Watson at all for a restructure next season or the season after. His leverage is MASSIVE. And it's a headache of Cleveland's own making.

The cap is something that can always be shirked for 2-3 years. And every time you kick the can, things get just a little tighter.

Cap Hell is a real thing. It's gonna eventually happen to you. But where the 'myth' comes is that Cap Hell should destroy a team for a sustained period of time. It doesn't.

One year of slash and burn can almost always clean a cap sheet. I wouldn't have been opposed to us being more aggressive this season with an eye on just such a season in/around 2027. We just go scorched earth that season and hack away at everyone we can. Accelerate a bunch of shit onto the cap, win 6 games and then jam the accelerator again in 2028.

So is Cleveland setting itself up to be able to release Watson in the next season or two and not be absolutely decimated by the move?

chiefzilla1501 08-29-2024 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17652487)
If your owner has money, then the salary cap is a myth. This Watson deal was supposed to destroy this team and yet they’ve redone it twice and now have the most cap room in the NFL

Nah, the cap still applies. They’re just backdating it. If anything they got away with offering a blockbuster contract before gambling revenue. These new qb contracts on the other hand are gonna make it really hard for teams to keep their loaded rosters.

I kind of wonder if this is a desperation move because watsons arm looks like it’s falling apart and stefanski and a lot of the browns regime are starting to face the pressure of justifying this cursed move

ThaVirus 08-29-2024 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 17652551)
So is Cleveland setting itself up to be able to release Watson in the next season or two and not be absolutely decimated by the move?

Wasn’t his contract fully guaranteed? I don’t think any amount of finessing can really mitigate a fully guaranteed contract like that.

I think that’s why the owners most definitely colluded afterward in declining to give Lamar a fully guaranteed contract.

chiefzilla1501 08-29-2024 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 17652551)
So is Cleveland setting itself up to be able to release Watson in the next season or two and not be absolutely decimated by the move?

I would think the main move was turning guaranteed 2024 money into signing and roster bonus which means the cap obligation gets pushed back to the back end of the contract. Their dead cap the next 2 years is obscene and I’d imagine this just makes the back 2 years of the contract obscene too. I think this just basically guarantees they have to keep him for the rest of his contract

Deshaun still gets paid the same so it doesn’t affect him. Cap wise they just take the hit for that money later

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 17652551)
So is Cleveland setting itself up to be able to release Watson in the next season or two and not be absolutely decimated by the move?

No, because the salary is guaranteed.

I mean, in theory they could trade him if they attached a 1st rounder or something to him, but they'd take an $80 million dead cap charge to do it. They haven't really done anything to make that any more or less manageable.

No, they'd pretty much have to eat giant buckets of shit to get him moved. Which they really shouldn't be doing at/near the back end of Garrett's prime years.

They seem to be setting themselves up to push in over the next 2-3 seasons rather than get out of Watson's deal. Then bottom out in 2027.

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 17652595)
I would think the main move was turning guaranteed 2024 movie into signing and roster bonus which means the cap obligation gets pushed back to the back end of the contract. Their dead cap the next 2 years is obscene and I’d imagine this just makes the back 2 years of the contract obscene too. I think this just basically guarantees they have to keep him for the rest of his contract

Which, realistically, they already had to do.

This looks to me like an effort to push as much of his money as possible into his void years in 2027 and 2028 before having to take their medicine then while trying to open their window as wide as possible from '24 through '26.

I mean they have a $37 million cap charge for a 32 year old Myles Garrett on a void year in '27. They're looking at a complete tear down in 2 seasons anyway. Might as well do what you can before that time gets here.

seamonster 08-29-2024 11:18 AM

Wasn't long ago this moran was demanding to be some hybrid player\GM for the Texans.

Dante84 08-29-2024 11:30 AM

Mahomes broke him during the 2nd quarter comeback.

Mahomes broke Josh Allen during the 13 second game.

Mahomes probably broke Lamar during the AFCCG (we'll see).

Mahomes probably broke Glass Joe Burrow during the '22 playoffs.

TEX 08-29-2024 11:45 AM

The Mistake by the Lake keeps mistaking...

chiefzilla1501 08-29-2024 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17652608)
Which, realistically, they already had to do.

This looks to me like an effort to push as much of his money as possible into his void years in 2027 and 2028 before having to take their medicine then while trying to open their window as wide as possible from '24 through '26.

I mean they have a $37 million cap charge for a 32 year old Myles Garrett on a void year in '27. They're looking at a complete tear down in 2 seasons anyway. Might as well do what you can before that time gets here.

Oh holy shit. I just saw the numbers on over the cap. I don’t know if it’s updated or not. But basically have $99m dead money in 2025 (so he will be impossible to cut). But he’s due $72 million of base salary in 2025 AND 2026. At best they have an out in a few years assuming they eat 2 years of absurd contract. But they can’t do that without cutting their entire team. im guessing they’ll be restructuring throughout the contract and each time they do that the back years become guaranteed.

This contract is so rough that they’ll probably have to either take a year or 2 where they pay him record high money. Or is it possible by the end of the contract they’ll be forced to extend the contract a few more years just so they can spread the cap charge out even more.

All for a guy whose arm may be too dead to even make it through this year let alone for 4+ years

Pasta Little Brioni 08-29-2024 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante84 (Post 17652831)
Mahomes broke him during the 2nd quarter comeback.

Mahomes broke Josh Allen during the 13 second game.

Mahomes probably broke Lamar during the AFCCG (we'll see).

Mahomes probably broke Glass Joe Burrow during the '22 playoffs.

Allen hasn't been the same since he hurt his elbow against the Jets. Joe's wrist will be a similar thing.

It's entirely possible they're both cooked within a few years

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 17652861)
Oh holy shit. I just saw the numbers on over the cap. I don’t know if it’s updated or not. But basically have $99m dead money in 2025 (so he will be impossible to cut). But he’s due $72 million of base salary in 2025 AND 2026. At best they have an out in a few years assuming they eat 2 years of absurd contract. But they can’t do that without cutting their entire team. im guessing they’ll be restructuring throughout the contract and each time they do that the back years become guaranteed.

This contract is so rough that they’ll probably have to either take a year or 2 where they pay him record high money. Or is it possible by the end of the contract they’ll be forced to extend the contract a few more years just so they can spread the cap charge out even more.

All for a guy whose arm may be too dead to even make it through this year let alone for 4+ years

Again, they're looking at eating shit in 2027. Nothing else makes sense.

Garret, Watson and Delpit will be responsible for $80 million in cap charges ON VOID YEARS. Denzel Ward will be cut for a $20 million cap savings but still carry $9 million in dead money. And that's without getting into the smaller deals.

Za'Darius Smith, Dalvin Tomlinson, Njoku, Bitonio, Teller, Conklin, Thornhill, Wills, Okoronkwo and Pocic will all be in ther early/mid 30s (so long gone) and between those guys they'll suck up ANOTHER $40 million in dead cap on void years.

$120 million in dead cap charges on void years in 2027. Yeah - that's real.

And they have no business extending a single one of those players I named. So that money is all but locked in. Even if the cap continues to rise at a solid clip, that's likely to be 1/3 of their entire cap allocated to void seasons for guys that aren't likely to be on the roster.

So let's say the cap is $300 million by then, they're going to start at $180 million BEFORE they absorb the dead money from Denzel Ward. If they don't have substantial carry-over, they'll be looking at needing to build a roster on about $3.5 million/player at a time when the minimum NFL salary is likely to be approaching $2 million. Made all the more difficult by the fact that Jerry Jeudy and JOK will take up another $20 million between the two of them. So they'll have $160 million to pay for 51 guys on the roster.

They're ****ed in 2027. So they have to make things happen now.

scho63 08-29-2024 12:54 PM

Dumb franchises do dumb things. :doh!:

DJ's left nut 08-29-2024 12:58 PM

They're already over the projected 2026 cap with all of 26 guys signed to contracts for 2026. So they're almost certainly cutting Ward in 2026 just to get themselves a little breathing room. They'll cut Dalvin Tomlinson and Jack Conklin by then as well. Those are fake figures so that'll get free up $40 million but they'll still need to come up with 30 more dudes to even put together an NFL roster.

They're heading into Saints territory.

The more I look at this, the more I think they almost have to get an Aiyuk trade made and essentially move heaven and earth to try to win this year or next. Because things are going to get nasty in '26 and completely untenable by '27.

chiefzilla1501 08-29-2024 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scho63 (Post 17653002)
Dumb franchises do dumb things. :doh!:

I mean, I credit them for taking a big swing and not just trying to Ryan Tannehill their way to a Super Bowl. It’s weird they didn’t take a sexual predator discount on the contract. But what really ****ed them and had to be unexpected was that he doesnt look like he really wants to play and more unexpectedly his arm just completely fell off his body.

If Watson was the qb they traded for in Houston, the browns with that defense and run game would have been tough. I think it’s more a sign of how absurdly cursed that team is.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.