Browns the new Redskins

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Campbell17

Except the Browns don't win...SKINS!

I hate to break the news to you but Clev had a better record than we did and I would say right now they are a better team than we are.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

that 49er team added a no. of players, but I can't remember, did they pay big $ for them? That was also in the very early years of unrestricted free agency & the good teams like the 49ers still had their core intact.

I agree though, I can't think of any team that's paid that kind of money for free agents in one year & been successful. The difference between what the Jets are doing & what the pats did last year is the high salaires iMO. Yes, the Pats got Moss, Stallworth et al, but they didn't spend huge sums on them. Just as Banks points out, the salaries also impact team chemistry, as we know as skins fans.

pats got:
ad thomas (BIG money)
randy moss (SUPER cheap - 3mill)
donte stallworth (fairly cheap)
wes welker (somewhat cheap)
kyle brady (not that cheap for a TE that didn't play much)
D edwards (cheap)
j gaffney (cheap)
other less important players (super cheap to ultra cheap)

still, that's a TON of FA adds, even if they got good values, that's the whole point - maximize production/talent per dollar, and there's no arguing they did that. now, they didn't win the superbowl, but they had plenty of chances - no arguing they bought 16-0 though.

the eagles had it work for a year after TO and kearse came in that FA class, the long term benefits may actually be negative, but it almost got them a super bowl.


I think it works for the browns and dolphins, but that just means the browns make the playoffs (10-6 +/- 2) and the dolphins win 5 games (+/-2). the browns went with big money big talent, and the dolphins went the economy route (which is smarter for them, since big money would just be wasted there with the lackluster talent and lack of youth).

[prinzeofmoval]

Originally Posted by That Guy

well, honestly, they've chosen far better talent overall than some of our recent FA classes (arch, lloyd, duckett, etc).

i doubt they would have done better than what they got in the draft, though it is a lot more expensive.

yeah to play opposite of Edwards,Stallworth and Winslow after the year they had..thats pretty scary especially their division with an older ravens squad, a crappy bengals secondary and a Steelers (when Polamalu is out) questionable defense..I like where they're going so far.

[SFREDSKIN]

The Browns fell a game short of the playoffs and have picked up some great talent. Their OL is pretty damn good, DL with those pick-ups (try running up the middle, you'll get stuffed) WR are great, TE, etc. overall they are a pretty solid team and I would pick them to challenge for the AFC crown next year. Phil Savage is a pretty smart GM and has done an excellent job, that's why he's getting an extension.

[prinzeofmoval]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

The Browns fell a game short of the playoffs and have picked up some great talent. Their OL is pretty damn good, DL with those pick-ups (try running up the middle, you'll get stuffed) WR are great, TE, etc. overall they are a pretty solid team and I would pick them to challenge for the AFC crown next year. Phil Savage is a pretty smart GM and has done an excellent job, that's why he's getting an extension.

Glad you see things my way

[SKINSnCANES]

Originally Posted by That Guy

pats got:
ad thomas (BIG money)
randy moss (SUPER cheap - 3mill)
donte stallworth (fairly cheap)
wes welker (somewhat cheap)
kyle brady (not that cheap for a TE that didn't play much)
D edwards (cheap)
j gaffney (cheap)
other less important players (super cheap to ultra cheap)

still, that's a TON of FA adds, even if they got good values, that's the whole point - maximize production/talent per dollar, and there's no arguing they did that. now, they didn't win the superbowl, but they had plenty of chances - no arguing they bought 16-0 though.

the eagles had it work for a year after TO and kearse came in that FA class, the long term benefits may actually be negative, but it almost got them a super bowl.


I think it works for the browns and dolphins, but that just means the browns make the playoffs (10-6 +/- 2) and the dolphins win 5 games (+/-2). the browns went with big money big talent, and the dolphins went the economy route (which is smarter for them, since big money would just be wasted there with the lackluster talent and lack of youth).

man I wasnt even thinking about the patriots, they definitly added a ton of key pieces through free agency, great post! They built through the draft and got key free agent signings...You have the luxury of singing 35 year olds for a year or two when thats the only piece you need ina puzzzle ya know

[NYCskinfan82]

Brown's made some nice moves but please never compare any team to the All mighty REDSKINS!

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by That Guy

pats got:
ad thomas (BIG money)
randy moss (SUPER cheap - 3mill)
donte stallworth (fairly cheap)
wes welker (somewhat cheap)
kyle brady (not that cheap for a TE that didn't play much)
D edwards (cheap)
j gaffney (cheap)
other less important players (super cheap to ultra cheap)

still, that's a TON of FA adds, even if they got good values, that's the whole point - maximize production/talent per dollar, and there's no arguing they did that. now, they didn't win the superbowl, but they had plenty of chances - no arguing they bought 16-0 though.

the eagles had it work for a year after TO and kearse came in that FA class, the long term benefits may actually be negative, but it almost got them a super bowl.


I think it works for the browns and dolphins, but that just means the browns make the playoffs (10-6 +/- 2) and the dolphins win 5 games (+/-2). the browns went with big money big talent, and the dolphins went the economy route (which is smarter for them, since big money would just be wasted there with the lackluster talent and lack of youth).

I think you could argue that had the pats paid all those guys big $, or at least substantial deals, like the Skins of 2000 or the jets of today, that it would'n't have worked. Plus, the Pats were already a really good team, they just needed a few pieces to put them over the top.

[SKINSnCANES]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

I think you could argue that had the pats paid all those guys big $, or at least substantial deals, like the Skins of 2000 or the jets of today, that it would'n't have worked. Plus, the Pats were already a really good team, they just needed a few pieces to put them over the top.

What do you mean by it wouldnt work if they paid the players big deals?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

I think you could argue that had the pats paid all those guys big $, or at least substantial deals, like the Skins of 2000 or the jets of today, that it would'n't have worked. Plus, the Pats were already a really good team, they just needed a few pieces to put them over the top.

if you've got cap space and talent available to sign at fair market, why not use it? i mean, randy moss was only 3 times cheaper than he should have been.

the only trick is picking the right people to give money to. you can't hit 50% and win with the FA approach. which is why, although some of our signings were good, enough were bad (enough) to destroy any possible success with that way of doing business. if you can't hit 90%-100% of big money deals, it's probably going to cost you wins (due to less available cap for worthwhile players, wasted roster spots, possible locker room issues, etc).

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by prinzeofmoval

yeah to play opposite of Edwards,Stallworth and Winslow after the year they had..thats pretty scary especially their division with an older ravens squad, a crappy bengals secondary and a Steelers (when Polamalu is out) questionable defense..I like where they're going so far.

Don't forget about Jamal Lewis.

[Stuck in TX]

I agree that the Browns will be a force next season. Its so funny how they have been bad for so long and even with a 10-6 record, they did not appear in the playoffs and over 85% of people (IMO, not scientific by any means) will laugh when you say the Browns are a good team or even that they had a good season last year. The Browns will seemingly come from nowhere next year. I do not know what qualifies as a "comeback team" but I would not consider the Browns one based on last season, however, based on their current image, a playoff berth would merit the "comeback team" status. ramble ramble ramble........

ANYWAYS, to say the Browns are the new Redskins is a complement IMO, but I think they are not the next anyone else... they are the next Browns, simple as that.

[Ruhskins]

The 49ers and the Jets can build all they want, but they will never succeed (sp?) without a good QB. People tend to overlook that when they were calling the Niners a contender last year. Cleveland has a good QB and they've made some good moves in free agency. The patriots have an elite QB and their many moves in free agency worked because of that. Unless Alex Smith and whoever the Jets QB is play well, their FA additions won't pay out.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

The 49ers and the Jets can build all they want, but they will never succeed (sp?) without a good QB. People tend to overlook that when they were calling the Niners a contender last year. Cleveland has a good QB and they've made some good moves in free agency. The patriots have an elite QB and their many moves in free agency worked because of that. Unless Alex Smith and whoever the Jets QB is play well, their FA additions won't pay out.

which is a very good point.