BR1986FB;1401298 wrote:As far as the Browns go, not really. The Browns know how to manage their salary cap. They don't "rob Peter to pay Paul" (restructure contracts every year so they can make their cap nut) like the Steelers are notorious for.
And as far as "putting themselves in a very bad position" the next few years...they've been in that boat over the past few years. Keep restructuring contracts so they can make that "one last run" when frankly, they don't have a Super Bowl caliber roster. They have a SB caliber QB, but the rest of the roster is no longer there. Colbert's going to have to reload/retool.
It's the cost of doing business in the NFL if you have a franchise QB. Patriots, Saints, soon the Packers, etc all get into this position. When your QB is 20% of your salary cap you're going to lose players due to cuts. It's a good (yay...you have a franchise QB) AND bad (boo...he takes up a 5th of your cap space) position to be in.
True, the browns havent been in that position with the cap. Much of that though, and I think you agree, is that they have lacked the type of players who would command big salaries.
A couple of owners ago though they had a purge because of the cap. Think it was after thier playoff loss to the steelers maybe? I remember they had a LB who was due to make an insane amount of money that they had to cut. Now..that was the agents fault for agreeing to the backloading of the deal, but still.
Browns havent made big FA splashes, but they also havent drafted many guys that really would warrant big deals. The steelers, like the browns, have not been big in FA with overblown deals, but the diff is that they steelers have done a pretty good job, overall, at drafting guys that they kept for good money. AND getting lucky with how James Harrison became to be (cut a number of times, including by the ravens, and only picked up when another steelers LB hurt his foot and he then became a star).