Browner Signs With NO

[Corsi]

Mike Garafolo ‏@MikeGarafolo  5s6 seconds ago
Patriots have not informed CB Brandon Browner they will exercise his option, therefore he's a free agent, source says.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Ok so Revis? Otherwise, an interesting move to say the least. We'll see what they do with the money.

 

[IdiotKicker]

This does now open up Andre Johnson while keeping Revis.

 

[Pxer]

Yeah, there is NO reason this should be happening given his contract unless Revis is back.
 
Butler/Arrington/Ryan/Dennard? No. McCourty at CB? No.
 
Unless they're clearing space for AP.

 

[DJnVa]

Sooooo, I'm confused. This doesn't make sense with the Revis to NYJ rumors...

 

[Mooch]

Expect lots of Cover 2 next season.  Yuck.

 

[Foxy42]

Browners impact was underrated. I hate this move for the short money he was making.

 

[Shelterdog]

The most logical answer is they don't think he's going to be a good enough player to justify his salary next year.  I hope they're right because I liked the guy--and wasn't one of the many fans complaining all season about how he was a stiff old penalty machine.

 

[loshjott]

Any confirmation other than Garafolo's tweet about this? 

 

[BigJimEd]

Not a fan of this move. I said before I didn't understand the point of trying to renegotiate or let him talk to other teams.
Not with the contacts that have been reported this week.

Hopefully they just need the room for Revis.

I don't think Browner was great but he was solid and on a cheap deal.

Had to make a decision today though and couldn't trade him without picking up the option first and taking a $2M cap hit.

 

[Pxer]

Hard to believe they didn't prepare for this and shop him around on the trade market on what HAS to be a below-market deal, even with the incentives and cap hit for the Pats.

 

[Corsi]

Josina Anderson ‏@JosinaAnderson  7m7 minutes ago
On reports #Pats want to rework his deal, Browner to me: "I like to let the business play out first." Browner wants to focus on his sit'n.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Would not at all be surprised to see the Jets reach out and go after Browner, as well. Go for the secondary sweep.
 
Oops, they just signed Skrine, so probably not.

 

[Stitch01]

Sounds like they wanted to rework his deal, he wanted to see what the market bears out first.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

If this is a cap decision, so be it.  I'm not sure how the team got into position to not have enough cap space to keep an undervalued player at a highly compensated position given all of Brady's restructuring and the Wilfork release, but if that's the case, so be it.  But if this is a player value decision, in that they didn't think Browner was worth his option price, then I'm really really surprised.  There is just no sense in which I can see Brandon Browner not being a $5.5 million player on a short, no dead money deal.

 

[Corsi]

Jeff Howe ‏@jeffphowe  10s11 seconds ago
Brandon Browner is receiving plenty of interest as a free agent, but a reunion with the Patriots remains a possibility, per source.

 

[Corsi]

Mark Daniels ‏@MarkDanielsPJ  1m1 minute ago
I've been told Browner isn't necessarily done in New England. There's still a chance he comes back.

 

[DJnVa]

 
Jeff Howe ‏@jeffphowe  10s11 seconds ago
Brandon Browner is receiving plenty of interest as a free agent, but a reunion with the Patriots remains a possibility, per source.
 

 
 
He's waiting on Revis.
 

 

[RedOctober3829]

 
 
He's waiting on Revis.
 

Exactly. 

 

[MillarTime]

Maybe an extension/restructure for more 2015 room if Revis is back?

 

[Stitch01]

Players on the 2014 Pats with a $5.5MM or more cap hit: Brady, Wilfork, Revis, Mayo.  Gronk and McCourty were close.  Hernandez counted more against the cap
Players on the 2015 Pats currently scheduled to have a $5.5MM cap hit: Brady, Mayo (likely restructure), Gronk, Solder (possibly lower if extended), Vollmer, McCourty, Amendola (likely restructure)
 
$5.5MM salary for Browner (if that is accurate, thought he was a little lower) is below market, but the cap number really isn't a bargain.  Its not a bad deal or anything, but its not some major below market asset.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Anyway, to do the math, this should mean 13,846,000 is currently the Patriots amount under the cap.
 
Showing my work:
 
Miguel's cap room pre-Browner departure:  9.5566m
Miguel's non-dead money attributed to Browner for 2015: $4.8m
9.5566m plus 4.8m = $14,356,600
Subtract out league minimum for next man up off the 51 = 14,356,600 minus 510,000 = $13,846,600

 

[DJnVa]

Anyway, to do the math, this should mean 13,846,000 is currently the Patriots amount under the cap.
 
Showing my work:
 
Miguel's cap room pre-Browner departure:  9.5566m
Miguel's non-dead money attributed to Browner for 2015: $4.8m
9.5566m plus 4.8m = $14,356,600
Subtract out league minimum for next man up off the 51 = 14,356,600 minus 510,000 = $13,846,600

 
Hey, what's $13.8 times 3? Just a shade over $40.
 
Let's roll.
 

 

[tims4wins]

$13.8 should be enough to get both Revis and Browner back with the right structuring. Then work on Solder Amendola and eventually Mayo to pay draft picks.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

$13.8 should be enough to get both Revis and Browner back with the right structuring. Then work on Solder Amendola and eventually Mayo to pay draft picks.

 
Actually, they have as much as $14.8m, because when you add a new player you drop someone back off the top 51, so adding Revis and Browner back drop Boyce and Butler off the top 51 (just going alphabetically) and reduce the cap by another $1,020,000.
 
Edit:  And they non-tendered Tyms.  That's another $75,000!  Hopefully, the $75,000 that gets us over the finish line with Revis.   :nsmith:

 

[Shelterdog]

If this is a cap decision, so be it.  I'm not sure how the team got into position to not have enough cap space to keep an undervalued player at a highly compensated position given all of Brady's restructuring and the Wilfork release, but if that's the case, so be it.  But if this is a player value decision, in that they didn't think Browner was worth his option price, then I'm really really surprised.  There is just no sense in which I can see Brandon Browner not being a $5.5 million player on a short, no dead money deal.

 
It happens to every good team.  We can disagree with the choices (I would have let Ghost go, for example) but when you have a perpetual playoff team with a lot of good players you're just going to lose some good players ever year.

 

[RIrooter09]

 
It happens to every good team.  We can disagree with the choices (I would have let Ghost go, for example) but when you have a perpetual playoff team with a lot of good players you're just going to lose some good players ever year.

 
Which makes their consistent success over the past 15 years even more remarkable.

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Mike Garafolo ‏@MikeGarafolo  6s6 seconds ago
Early entrant into the Brandon Browner chase: Saints. They're interested. They have company
 

.

 

[Norm Siebern]

I don't know. When Browner came back after his 4 game suspension the secondary (and defense) stabilized itself. This is a great gamble, one that may not be worth it. Of course, so much of this depends on Revis.

 

[Old Fart Tree]

Browners impact was underrated. I hate this move for the short money he was making.

 
Ditto. Oh well, I guess I'll just focus on the penalties and pretend I think it's a good move.

 

[Super Nomario]

I don't know. When Browner came back after his 4 game suspension the secondary (and defense) stabilized itself. This is a great gamble, one that may not be worth it. Of course, so much of this depends on Revis.

I think there's been a revisionist history around Browner's role and quality. He had highs (shutting down Megatron, a strong Super Bowl) but lows, too (torched by Coby Fleener and Martellus Bennett, getting benched in the AFCCG). He's a useful role player with a unique skill set; he's not a 1A corner. 

 

[bsj]

I'd wager a lot Browner stays in the AFC East

 

[Shelterdog]

I think there's been a revisionist history around Browner's role and quality. He had highs (shutting down Megatron, a strong Super Bowl) but lows, too (torched by Coby Fleener and Martellus Bennett, getting benched in the AFCCG). He's a useful role player with a unique skill set; he's not a 1A corner. 

 
It's hard to tell if it's the same people talking about him--I'm not saying anyone is a hypocrite or anything--but he got a shitload of flak over the course of the season for being a penalty machine who gets torched a lot and now all of the sudden there are a lot of people lamenting the loss of a good player and no one claiming that we lost a stiff and we'll get by.

 

[Gunfighter 09]

It is probably not going to matter (other than driving the price up) but Oakland is in on Browner as well. Raider DC Ken Norton Jr was with Browner in Seattle. 

 

[Reverend]

It's hard to tell if it's the same people talking about him--I'm not saying anyone is a hypocrite or anything--but he got a shitload of flak over the course of the season for being a penalty machine who gets torched a lot and now all of the sudden there are a lot of people lamenting the loss of a good player and no one claiming that we lost a stiff and we'll get by.

He's the girl with the curl, then?

I can see that.

 

[Corsi]

Former Patriots CB Brandon Browner is in New Orleans visiting Saints. Also scheduled to visit Redskins next.

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/575626742154575873
link to tweet

 

[TheoShmeo]

I think there's been a revisionist history around Browner's role and quality. He had highs (shutting down Megatron, a strong Super Bowl) but lows, too (torched by Coby Fleener and Martellus Bennett, getting benched in the AFCCG). He's a useful role player with a unique skill set; he's not a 1A corner. 

As to the bolded partt, for sure.
 
But if he was on the Pats right now (and they were playing a game this Sunday, which they of course are not), he'd be a starting corner.  At least, I think he would be and I'd prefer him to most if not all of the other existing alternatives (except Malcom Go).  
 
Two possibilities emerge.  One, he's gone because the Pats did not think we was worth the coin, regardless of Revis.  Two, he's gone because the Pats needed his salary to pay for Revis and they thought that was possible when they made their decision.  
 
Having let him go, they can't just press a button to bring him back if the only reason he is a free agent today is possibility number two.  I have trouble believing possibility number one reflects the reality but I hope it does.  The thought that the Pats lost him only because they were playing the Revis option out and ended up with neither of them makes me throw up in my mouth.

 

[Shelterdog]

He's the girl with the curl, then?

I can see that.

 
No, Revis is the transcendental corner.  

 

[Corsi]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk  14s14 seconds ago
Brandon Browner is in New Orleans for a visit. Washington, Baltimore, Cleveland, Jacksonville also interested.

 

[dcmissle]

As to the bolded partt, for sure.
 
But if he was on the Pats right now (and they were playing a game this Sunday, which they of course are not), he'd be a starting corner.  At least, I think he would be and I'd prefer him to most if not all of the other existing alternatives (except Malcom Go).  
 
Two possibilities emerge.  One, he's gone because the Pats did not think we was worth the coin, regardless of Revis.  Two, he's gone because the Pats needed his salary to pay for Revis and they thought that was possible when they made their decision.  
 
Having let him go, they can't just press a button to bring him back if the only reason he is a free agent today is possibility number two.  I have trouble believing possibility number one reflects the reality but I hope it does.  The thought that the Pats lost him only because they were playing the Revis option out and ended up with neither of them makes me throw up in my mouth.

Or, 3, they thought Browner was worth bringing back only with Revis and decided to let him go when it became apparent to them that Revis was not coming back. If you buy the report that they spent yesterday allowing the Jets to bid against themselves, the chronology lines up for that interpretation.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Or, 3, they thought Browner was worth bringing back only with Revis and decided to let him go when it became apparent to them that Revis was not coming back. If you buy the report that they spent yesterday allowing the Jets to bid against themselves, the chronology lines up for that interpretation.

Why would Browner only have use with Revis?
 
Browner is larger than any other corner they have and can cover big TEs and other larger WRs.  Browner is a physical presence.  Hopefully, the Pats will find a "replacement" for Revis of sorts, and I don't understand why Browner is only useful if he is playing opposite one of the best corners in the NFL.
 
We may be splitting hairs because my number one may not be all that different than your number three.

 

[dcmissle]

Why would Browner only have use with Revis?
 
Browner is larger than any other corner they have and can cover big TEs and other larger WRs.  Browner is a physical presence.  Hopefully, the Pats will find a "replacement" for Revis of sorts, and I don't understand why Browner is only useful if he is playing opposite one of the best corners in the NFL.
 
We may be splitting hairs because my number one may not be all that different than your number three.

Because man-to-man is going out the window?

 

[ivanvamp]

I want Browner back.  I thought he was pretty effective this past year.  Obviously Revis helps the entire defense, but over his career Browner has been a pretty good CB.  I'd like him and I'd like to take a chance on Culliver.  The rest of the guys provide solid depth.  Add a DL, Sheard, a playmaker, use the draft to add OL, and away we go right back to the AFCCG.

 

[jsinger121]

Because man-to-man is going out the window?

 
My thought as well. 

 

[dcmissle]

I want Browner back.  I thought he was pretty effective this past year.  Obviously Revis helps the entire defense, but over his career Browner has been a pretty good CB.  I'd like him and I'd like to take a chance on Culliver.  The rest of the guys provide solid depth.  Add a DL, Sheard, a playmaker, use the draft to add OL, and away we go right back to the AFCCG.

Ship probably sailed. Recent signings had him favorably valued to the Pats at the number they had him. Some posters made good points that market value is not identical to Pats' value and pointed out cap situation as a whole. But now MV is the only thing that matters, right? Why would the Pats bring him back on a more expensive deal than the one they had with him two days ago?

 

[ivanvamp]

Ship probably sailed. Recent signings had him favorably valued to the Pats at the number they had him. Some posters made good points that market value is not identical to Pats' value and pointed out cap situation as a whole. But now MV is the only thing that matters, right? Why would the Pats bring him back on a more expensive deal than the one they had with him two days ago?

 
Because it's possible they took a risk, letting him go in order to free up space to sign Revis.  Hoping that would work out.  But when it didn't, and the risk didn't pay off, they now need him again.  Sometimes you gamble and lose and it costs you a little more in the end.  That might happen here.  We'll see.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Because man-to-man is going out the window?

Perhaps I am wrong, but I doubt it's ever as binary as all that.  And Browner's skill set wouldn't have a place in a mostly zone defense?  Part of his value is in his toughness, and that translates to any system.
 
Regardless, as has been pointed out, it seems as if Browner is gone so we are likely now talking about yesterday's news.

 

[Reverend]

Because man-to-man is going out the window?

Cover-1 especially.

 

[wibi]

I posted this in the other thread but Browner is going to go find the largest paycheck he can for this deal.  He's got two Super Bowl rings but has made less than $5M in total NFL earnings.  Given what Maxwell and other corners have earned this off season he is going to ensure he gets the most money he can.  I'd bet we see a 3/4 year deal as $6M per with $8M guaranteed before this FA period is over
 
Edit: 8 not 18M guaranteed ... I started at 10 but decided 8 was more reasonable yet the edit somehow became 18 ...

 

[Stitch01]

Ship probably sailed. Recent signings had him favorably valued to the Pats at the number they had him. Some posters made good points that market value is not identical to Pats' value and pointed out cap situation as a whole. But now MV is the only thing that matters, right? Why would the Pats bring him back on a more expensive deal than the one they had with him two days ago?

They could sign him to a bigger market value deal that still has a lower cap number this season.
 
Also very possible, as you said, scheme changes make him less valuable.  That's why I wasnt really wild about the Chung signing, even at small dollars.