2019 Browns Off Season/Roster Discussion

Still a bit early but by all accounts we have one of the best offensive line coaches in the league now. And if he thinks Kush > Corbett, he probably is.

DirtyDan said:

I was under the impression it was two separate trades.

Click to expand...

It was kind of weird timing, since they did originally make two trades, but it was before the league could make them official, so the Browns and Giants essentially made it into one trade and cancelled part of the Vernon for Zeitler move (aka the swapping of 4th and 5th round pick thing).

Now I personally was, iffy on the Vernon for Zeitler move since Zeitler was a very good guard on the field plus he is a very good person to have in the locker room as well when it comes to football. Eventually, once he puts up his helmet, he will have a coaching spot if he wants it somewhere in this league as an OLine coach if he so wishes.

We likely made the best starting DLine in the NFL, but will it effect the OLine too much? We will see, but if you didn't notice with how Kitchens coached last season, we didn't have good production at either T spot and had one of the best offenses in the league in the second half of last season. I have faith Kitchens and his staff can make an adequate enough OLine to make this offense work well.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

All good.

Next time, might wanna get your shit correct before you open up with "Are you drunk?"

Click to expand...

Maybe don't end your post with this next time?

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

And wtf is Dorsey "taking the L"? Are you saying that if RG is a position we try to improve that the OBJ trade is an "L"? Get the fuck out of here with that shit.

Click to expand...

You for some reason are one of the most aggressive posters on this board with name calling and insulting people and it's amazing no one has said anything to you about it.

Like you make good points in your posts but maybe leave the attacks out of it.

Snowblind said:

Maybe don't end your post with this next time?



You for some reason are one of the most aggressive posters on this board with name calling and insulting people and it's amazing no one has said anything to you about it.

Like you make good points in your posts but maybe leave the attacks out of it.

Click to expand...

Both valid points.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

You realize Zeitler was moved in the OBJ trade, right? (since it was executed as a single trade).

You're saying that if we choose to upgrade rg, that trade is a loss. That's asinine. It could very well still provide more value to this team than the negative impact of a hole at rg.

Click to expand...

That's kind of a disingenuous argument. They were absolutely originally completed as two separate deals. Zeitler for Vernon and a pick swap, and OBJ for Peppers a 1st and a 3rd. Just because they combined them into one deal later doesn't somehow make the OBJ deal contingent on trading Zeitler.

TopGun said:

That's kind of a disingenuous argument. They were absolutely originally completed as two separate deals. Zeitler for Vernon and a pick swap, and OBJ for Peppers a 1st and a 3rd. Just because they combined them into one deal later doesn't somehow make the OBJ deal contingent on trading Zeitler.

Click to expand...

It's not disingenuous--the pick swap in the Zeitler deal was removed. The deal was changed to allow the OBJ trade to happen.

Do you know they weren't contingent on each other? It wouldn't be surprising in the least for the Giants to not be ok moving OBJ with Vernon still on the books--or with the weak OL they had. Bringing in Zeitler helps them solidify an offensive line that, in its previous state, would not have been conducive to either a dinosaur QB back there (Eli) or a young franchise QB (Jones).

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

It's not disingenuous--the pick swap in the Zeitler deal was removed. The deal was changed to allow the OBJ trade to happen.

Do you know they weren't contingent on each other? It wouldn't be surprising in the least for the Giants to not be ok moving OBJ with Vernon still on the books--or with the weak OL they had. Bringing in Zeitler helps them solidify an offensive line that, in its previous state, would not have been conducive to either a dinosaur QB back there (Eli) or a young franchise QB (Jones).

Click to expand...

So the OBJ trade was contingent on the pick swap, and not Zeitler.

Your entire second paragraph is conjecture with no evidence to support it.

TopGun said:

So the OBJ trade was contingent on the pick swap, and not Zeitler.

Your entire second paragraph is conjecture with no evidence to support it.

Click to expand...

Of course the second paragraph is conjecture. "Do you know...?" and "It wouldn't be surprising..." aren't definitive statements.

Your declaration that the OBJ trade was not contingent on Zeitler, however, is purely conjecture that you're writing in a definitive way.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

Of course the second paragraph is conjecture. "Do you know...?" and "It wouldn't be surprising..." aren't definitive statements.

Your declaration that the OBJ trade was not contingent on Zeitler, however, is purely conjecture that you're writing in a definitive way.

Click to expand...

There's evidence to support my opinion though, like the fact that the two deals were announced independently on separate days.

TopGun said:

There's evidence to support my opinion though, like the fact that the two deals were announced independently on separate days.

Click to expand...

There's evidence to support that the Giants wouldn't deal OBJ without acquiring Zeitler/moving Vernon. The other trade chronologically was announced first.

We're both just guessing here, but I always took it as Gettleman having to make one move before he made the other. I think Dorsey was fine with each move independently, hence our ability to agree to one first while still working on the other.

If we're going to judge them independently, I'm fairly certain I expressed my concern with the Zeitler trade on here when it happened. I've also been critical of Dorsey's bias in resource allocation. I feel like in Cleveland as well as KC he spurns the offensive line and DT positions too much.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

There's evidence to support that the Giants wouldn't deal OBJ without acquiring Zeitler/moving Vernon. The other trade chronologically was announced first.

We're both just guessing here, but I always took it as Gettleman having to make one move before he made the other. I think Dorsey was fine with each move independently, hence our ability to agree to one first while still working on the other.

If we're going to judge them independently, I'm fairly certain I expressed my concern with the Zeitler trade on here when it happened. I've also been critical of Dorsey's bias in resource allocation. I feel like in Cleveland as well as KC he spurns the offensive line and DT positions too much.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I agree with your critique of Dorsey, although he did sign Richardson, which makes me hope that he can change. Still think he operates with a bit of my-guyism, where he falls in love with certain guys and doesn't make 100% rational decisions in regards to them.

In your opinion, if Zeitler had failed his physical, do you think the OBJ trade would have been scrapped?

TopGun said:

There's evidence to support my opinion though, like the fact that the two deals were announced independently on separate days.

Click to expand...

They were announced on two separate days, but if my memory is correct, each trade was made before it could become official with the league, so they merged it into one trade and modified it once they did that.

Teams can make deals and whatnot with each other, but cannot become official before a certain date. I don't remember the exact way it works, but thats how the deals ended up combined.

TopGun said:

Fair enough.

I agree with your critique of Dorsey, although he did sign Richardson, which makes me hope that he can change. Still think he operates with a bit of my-guyism, where he falls in love with certain guys and doesn't make 100% rational decisions in regards to them.

In your opinion, if Zeitler had failed his physical, do you think the OBJ trade would have been scrapped?

Click to expand...

Nope, the deal wouldn't have been merged into one deal, it would have stayed two separate deals and the Zeitler one would have been cancelled, but OBJ still would have happened.

TopGun said:

Fair enough.

I agree with your critique of Dorsey, although he did sign Richardson, which makes me hope that he can change. Still think he operates with a bit of my-guyism, where he falls in love with certain guys and doesn't make 100% rational decisions in regards to them.

In your opinion, if Zeitler had failed his physical, do you think the OBJ trade would have been scrapped?

Click to expand...

I believe that if Zeitler failed his physical, the OBJ trade wouldn't have been completed without us giving up Bitonio.

I'm fairly certain there's video out there talking about how the negotiations went down. Bitonio was an initial demand/request from Gettleman. We wouldn't budge off him, but we threw them Zeitler in the Vernon deal, so they moved off Bitonio (but still demanded Peppers) in the OBJ deal.

Honestly, the loss of Peppers hurt me more than the loss of Zeitler. I think that kid's gonna be special if a DC ever uses him correctly.

Edit: Just hunted a bit, couldn't find the clip. I swear there was someone out there who explained how the deal happened, going way back to Dorsey/Gettleman talking in the stands at the combine? (maybe senior bowl?) If anyone can find it, it'd help my sanity. Maybe it was Dorsey himself talking about it on one of the Cleveland Browns youtube videos?

sportscoach said:

They were announced on two separate days, but if my memory is correct, each trade was made before it could become official with the league, so they merged it into one trade and modified it once they did that.

Teams can make deals and whatnot with each other, but cannot become official before a certain date. I don't remember the exact way it works, but thats how the deals ended up combined.

Click to expand...

Media can announce that trades have been agreed upon in principle. That's different from the trade actually going through.

sportscoach said:

Nope, the deal wouldn't have been merged into one deal, it would have stayed two separate deals and the Zeitler one would have been cancelled, but OBJ still would have happened.

Click to expand...

I strongly disagree.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

Media can announce that trades have been agreed upon in principle. That's different from the trade actually going through.


I strongly disagree.

Click to expand...

OBJ was going to be traded to someone regardless and no one was willing to give up more than Browns did for him anyways otherwise OBJ wouldn't be a Brown. i still feel the deal would have gone through and it was 2 or 3 days in between the deals being officially announced by the media and then like a week later, they modified the trade and got rid of part of the Zeitler-Vernon swap part. It is hard to believe that amount of time between deals announced in the media and between changes being made to it, that it was originally ever one deal.