That loud noise you're hearing that sounds like air blowing out of a giant tractor tire...
That's AJ's sigh of relief. It still hasn't ended.
That's AJ's sigh of relief. It still hasn't ended.
Browns botched trade for McCarron??
- Thread starter dieterbrock
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Cinn should get on the phone to all the other teams, tell them they are releasing AJ and please dont claim him off waivers so the Browns can get him
Hue Jackson wanted Jared Goff or Jimmy Garoppolo. Garoppolo refused to negotiate with the Browns because... well duh. The dysfunction continues to grow. Why would any coach ever go to Cleveland? Seriously such a screwed up organization.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/hue-jackson-puts-word-wanted-123510565.html
Hue Jackson puts out the word that he wanted Jimmy Garoppolo in Cleveland
Michael David Smith,ProFootball Talk on NBC SportsTue, Oct 31 7:35 AM CDT
Jimmy Garoppolohas been traded from New England to San Francisco, and the implications are being felt in Cleveland.
Browns coach Hue Jackson wanted Garoppolomore than any other quarterbackaside from possiblyJared Goff(who wasn’t available to Cleveland because the Rams took him with the first overall pick last year), according to Mike Silver of NFL Media.
Although Silver did not attribute that information to any particular source, Silver and Jackson have a close relationship, so when Silver reports that Jackson wanted Garoppolo, suffice to say that it came straight from the horse’s mouth. In 2016, when the Browns first hired Jackson,Silver was the first reporterJackson confirmed his hiring to.
That suggests Jackson and the Browns’ front office don’t see eye to eye: Jackson wanted Garoppolo, and the Browns could have acquired Garoppolo because they have two first-round picks and three second-round picks in the 2018 NFL draft, and all it took the 49ers to get Garoppolo was one second-round pick. The Browns didn’t get Jackson’s guy, and Jackson wants everyone to know that.
Whatever the reasons that the Browns didn’t trade for Garoppolo (and there have been some reports that Garoppolo and his agent didn’t want to go to Cleveland and wouldn’t have been cooperative in contract negotiations), the front office didn’t land the guy Jackson wanted. Bill Parcells liked to say that if he’s going to be told to cook the meal, he ought to have some input into buying the groceries. A lot of coaches feel that way. And Jackson is letting his feelings be known.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/hue-jackson-puts-word-wanted-123510565.html
Hue Jackson puts out the word that he wanted Jimmy Garoppolo in Cleveland
Michael David Smith,ProFootball Talk on NBC SportsTue, Oct 31 7:35 AM CDT
Jimmy Garoppolohas been traded from New England to San Francisco, and the implications are being felt in Cleveland.
Browns coach Hue Jackson wanted Garoppolomore than any other quarterbackaside from possiblyJared Goff(who wasn’t available to Cleveland because the Rams took him with the first overall pick last year), according to Mike Silver of NFL Media.
Although Silver did not attribute that information to any particular source, Silver and Jackson have a close relationship, so when Silver reports that Jackson wanted Garoppolo, suffice to say that it came straight from the horse’s mouth. In 2016, when the Browns first hired Jackson,Silver was the first reporterJackson confirmed his hiring to.
That suggests Jackson and the Browns’ front office don’t see eye to eye: Jackson wanted Garoppolo, and the Browns could have acquired Garoppolo because they have two first-round picks and three second-round picks in the 2018 NFL draft, and all it took the 49ers to get Garoppolo was one second-round pick. The Browns didn’t get Jackson’s guy, and Jackson wants everyone to know that.
Whatever the reasons that the Browns didn’t trade for Garoppolo (and there have been some reports that Garoppolo and his agent didn’t want to go to Cleveland and wouldn’t have been cooperative in contract negotiations), the front office didn’t land the guy Jackson wanted. Bill Parcells liked to say that if he’s going to be told to cook the meal, he ought to have some input into buying the groceries. A lot of coaches feel that way. And Jackson is letting his feelings be known.
shaunpinney
Hall of Fame
I wouldn't shop Mannion, he's got to be developing at the same rate as Goff is, there are so many injuries around the league at the moment I'd rather our backup was fully up to speed with the playbook. McVay isn't giving him mop-up duties for nothing, he's making sure that IF he's called upon, he can step right in and we can still win.
Not sure who has first dibs on released players, but Browns should be in that mix. That might actually be doable if they do.
Bad sign for the Browns. Their owner is probably too stupid to side with Hue over the clown show he hired in the front office. IMO we might see Hue kicked to the curb here by the end of the season.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #68
Except Cincinnati doesn't get a 2nd and 3rd round pick while Cleveland gets their guy. Not sure thats fair
The NFL should make an exception for a very minor paperwork error.
It's really a bad reflection on them , one in the ongoing series I should say.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...oth-clubs-to-notify-league-office-of-a-trade/
NFL requires “both clubs” to notify league office of a trade
Posted by Mike Florio on November 1, 2017
One day after the Browns bungled a trade with the Bengals for quarterback A.J. McCarron, the Browns continue to stick to the story that they sent the appropriate signed documentation to the Bengals with the understanding that the Bengals would sign the documentation and then send it to the league. But league policies and procedures continue to say that’s not how it works.
Sources from five different teams (not the Bengals or the Browns) have informed PFT that, for years if not decades, trades are finalized only when the two teams involved independently notify the league of the deal.
Here’s some language from the relevant policy, as it appears in the Player Personnel Handbook: “Upon agreeing to a trade, clubs shall exchange written messages of the terms and conditions, after which both clubs are required to notify the Commissioner in writing of such terms and conditions.” (Emphasis added.)
This isn’t the first time a question has emerged regarding the procedures for properly communicating a trade to the league. In 2011, the Ravens and Bears had a deal during the first round of the draft. But because both teams didn’t independently inform the league office of the deal, the deal wasn’t done. (The Ravens were upset about it, but there was nothing they could do because the deal wasn’t a deal until the Ravens and the Bears informed the league of the transaction.)
Whatever the explanation or excuse, the Browns failed to consummate the trade. As a result, ownership should immediately convene a meeting of all persons whose fingerprints are in any way on the fiasco. Ownership should explain that everyone will be interviewed separately, and that all relevant documents will be reviewed, in order to determine how accountability should be apportioned. And that accountability will then be imposed.
The accountability should be serious if anyone lies about what they did or why they did it, especially in light of the possibility that coach Hue Jackson wanted McCarron in order to enhance Hue’s chances of winning enough games over the balance of the season to get a third year and someone else wanted to keep the picks and seal Hue’s fate, resulting in an “accidental” failure to finalize the agreement.
The Browns have done a decent job of keeping dysfunction between the front office and the coaching staff under wraps through the last year and a half. But the brown stuff is finally hitting the fan, and ownership should use this incident as a vehicle for determining who needs to stay, and who needs to go.
Maybe the right answer is everyone.
NFL requires “both clubs” to notify league office of a trade
Posted by Mike Florio on November 1, 2017
One day after the Browns bungled a trade with the Bengals for quarterback A.J. McCarron, the Browns continue to stick to the story that they sent the appropriate signed documentation to the Bengals with the understanding that the Bengals would sign the documentation and then send it to the league. But league policies and procedures continue to say that’s not how it works.
Sources from five different teams (not the Bengals or the Browns) have informed PFT that, for years if not decades, trades are finalized only when the two teams involved independently notify the league of the deal.
Here’s some language from the relevant policy, as it appears in the Player Personnel Handbook: “Upon agreeing to a trade, clubs shall exchange written messages of the terms and conditions, after which both clubs are required to notify the Commissioner in writing of such terms and conditions.” (Emphasis added.)
This isn’t the first time a question has emerged regarding the procedures for properly communicating a trade to the league. In 2011, the Ravens and Bears had a deal during the first round of the draft. But because both teams didn’t independently inform the league office of the deal, the deal wasn’t done. (The Ravens were upset about it, but there was nothing they could do because the deal wasn’t a deal until the Ravens and the Bears informed the league of the transaction.)
Whatever the explanation or excuse, the Browns failed to consummate the trade. As a result, ownership should immediately convene a meeting of all persons whose fingerprints are in any way on the fiasco. Ownership should explain that everyone will be interviewed separately, and that all relevant documents will be reviewed, in order to determine how accountability should be apportioned. And that accountability will then be imposed.
The accountability should be serious if anyone lies about what they did or why they did it, especially in light of the possibility that coach Hue Jackson wanted McCarron in order to enhance Hue’s chances of winning enough games over the balance of the season to get a third year and someone else wanted to keep the picks and seal Hue’s fate, resulting in an “accidental” failure to finalize the agreement.
The Browns have done a decent job of keeping dysfunction between the front office and the coaching staff under wraps through the last year and a half. But the brown stuff is finally hitting the fan, and ownership should use this incident as a vehicle for determining who needs to stay, and who needs to go.
Maybe the right answer is everyone.
Not sure whether the league would allow the surrendering of pick/s. That would be required of course.
.
It seems hue Jackson was the driving force behind the botched trade. The front office played dumb and saved the browns bacon.
So after trading 2 1sts for Palmer you'd think hue would have a clue that he has no idea about trade value for qbs. Nah, he offers a 2nd and 3rd for mccarron. Stick a fork in this guy as a hc.
.
It seems hue Jackson was the driving force behind the botched trade. The front office played dumb and saved the browns bacon.
So after trading 2 1sts for Palmer you'd think hue would have a clue that he has no idea about trade value for qbs. Nah, he offers a 2nd and 3rd for mccarron. Stick a fork in this guy as a hc.
.
Well, I can't blame Hue for wanting Jared Goff. Glad we were able to deny him. The fact that the Browns traded out so quickly after we traded up for Goff should indicate that we knew exactly who we were trading for the second we made that deal.
And if you gentlemen are patient, I think you'll grow to love Jared Manning . . . errr, sorry, Peyton Goff . . . damn it, Jared Goff . . . there we go.
interesting, cuz rotoworld claims the opposite:
Profootballtalk.com reports Browns co-owner Dee Haslam went "nuclear" on the team's front office after it nixed Tuesday's failed A.J. McCarron trade.
Based on a collection of national and local reports on the topic, it appears as if Browns ownership has taken the side of Hue Jackson over the front office. Jackson spent time with McCarron in Cincinnati and was the driving force behind Tuesday's trade talks. Multiple reports also indicate the front office -- known to be at odds with Jackson -- was the driving force behind the trade not going through. Ownership will ultimately decide the front office's fate. At present, it's not looking good for Sashi Brown, Paul DePodesta, and company. Jackson appears to have won the power struggle, for better or (more likely) worse.
Id imagine Hue wanted McCarron since hes the one that would know him best, but hey, who knows
Yeah, I worded it poorly. Hue wanted to give the picks to the Bengals but the front office played dumb so the trade would be botched. Can't blame them either.
.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #77
Why would the league allow it? All they need to do is allow the trade since it was initiated prior to the deadline.
Yes, it was quite obvious that Jackson wanted Goff and IMO, in order to secure that selection should have traded up to ensure they got him. Also shocked he was not sold on Wentz because Wentz seemed like a much better fit in Cleveland with the weather and the winds off of Lake Erie. Shocking, but that does happen with teams when they are sold on one guy and then he's off the board.
Overall, it just keeps going from bad to worse in Cleveland and passing on Watson was another decision they will look back on with great disdain. Quite possible come 2018 there will be a new regime in Cleveland.
He has been to a couple NFC West Championships & was seconds from winning a Super Bowl?
He isn’t one of the best QB’s , but sure has the talent to do enough to get a team to the show.
