I don't see the "No Trade" affecting the Browns decision.  Mack and his agent knew the likelyhood of Browns matching were good and IF Mack wants nothing to do with the Browns, why would he care about a "No Trade"?    If he wanted out, he'd wouldn't care and can get out in year 3.   I think the clause was about stability and protection from the Jags trading him and not Browns.  Year 3 is what the Browns have to maul over for a bit. 

 

No, if the Browns decided next year that they wanted to trade him before his contract is up then now they cannot. It is there ONLY to force the Browns to give Mack all of his money. 26 million dollars. To a center. Interesting that you guys seem to value the center position so highly as Mack is going to be the highest paid center of all time. Think about that for a second. The Browns have no outs in this, they have no way of getting money back, and that is why it will be hard for them to match. 

---

Follow me on twitter @Demetrius82

Year 3 is what the Browns have to maul over for a bit. 

 

Are they going to tape it back together after they maul it over for a bit?

---

I don't see the "No Trade" affecting the Browns decision.  Mack and his agent knew the likelyhood of Browns matching were good and IF Mack wants nothing to do with the Browns, why would he care about a "No Trade"?    If he wanted out, he'd wouldn't care and can get out in year 3.   I think the clause was about stability and protection from the Jags trading him and not Browns.  Year 3 is what the Browns have to maul over for a bit. 

This is where I see the concern for the Browns. Many factors could come into play that will demand year three guarantee of 8 million with the possibility he won't be able to play. This is not a good deal for either team for a center but is obviously one that the Jags felt they could stomach. The Browns may as well.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I get this, you get this, the Browns org. gets this......but apparently....I'm being "raked over the coals"....lol. 

 

And we're back to siding with opposing teams' fans, ladies and gentlemen.  He'll be here all week!

---

The Browns have no outs in this, they have no way of getting money back, and that is why it will be hard for them to match. 

All of those things apply to Jax as well. It will be no harder for the Browns to match than it was for the Jags to offer it. Easier, actually, since the Browns won't want to lose one of their own for nothing.

---

And we're back to siding with opposing teams' fans, ladies and gentlemen.  He'll be here all week!

 

Well, no, my opinion has been pretty consistent in this thread and was the first mentioned so.....I'd say in order of "siding" it would be a bit reversed. I'm not "siding" with anything but the truth. 

---

And we're back to siding with opposing teams' fans, ladies and gentlemen.  He'll be here all week!

 

He's just keepin' it real brah. He's no teal underoo undwearing homer.

---

He's just keepin' it real brah. He's no teal underoo undwearing homer.

 

All snarkiness aside, thats pretty much correct. 

---

All of those things apply to Jax as well. It will be no harder for the Browns to match than it was for the Jags to offer it. Easier, actually, since the Browns won't want to lose one of their own for nothing.

 

Yep.....Other than the 2 minor clauses, the deal is otherwise pretty much similar to the Kalil/ Kelce deals. Mack is a better player than those 2 IMO, so why wouldn't the Browns match it?? 

---

Win or lose, we certainly gave the Browns more than they bargained for.

 

Bravo new regime.  We've been more relevant in the last couple weeks than we've been the last couple years.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

All of those things apply to Jax as well. It will be no harder for the Browns to match than it was for the Jags to offer it. Easier, actually, since the Browns won't want to lose one of their own for nothing.

 

Unless of course, you know the Jags and Mack already have a wink, nod agreement to restructure. 

---

Follow me on twitter @Demetrius82

80 pages about a guy that hikes the ball and blocks.  What will it be like if they ever sign someone who scores points?

---

Yep.....Other than the 2 minor clauses, the deal is pretty much similar to the Kalil/ Kelce deals. Mack is better than those 2 IMO, so why wouldn't the Browns match it?? 

 

They have?

 

"immediately"...

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

All of those things apply to Jax as well. It will be no harder for the Browns to match than it was for the Jags to offer it. Easier, actually, since the Browns won't want to lose one of their own for nothing.

Do you guys know if there was even talks of extension or new contract at all last year or before free agency started. Did Macks agent ever offer up a deal before free agency and did the Browns turn it down?

 

Yes, they apply to Jax as well and quite honestly,I am not sure any center is worth the risk. But I'll sure welcome him here if it happens. Hell it's only two tickets and a bunch of swag and stadium booze and parking worth of my money.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

Win or lose, we certainly gave the Browns more than they bargained for.

 

Bravo new regime.  We've been more relevant in the last couple weeks than we've been the last couple years.

 

I guess a moral victory is better than nothing.... :unsure: 

---

Yep.....Other than the 2 minor clauses, the deal is otherwise pretty much similar to the Kalil/ Kelce deals. Mack is a better player than those 2 IMO, so why wouldn't the Browns match it??

Are you going to offer your suggestion of what could have been done to create this iron clad contract or not?

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Id rather overpay and take the brownies out of the equation and lock Mack up.. My 2 cents..

 

For a player like this I agree. 

Except you both know that's not possible to do. They have the tag, and they have more cap space. There was literally nothing more that the Jags have been done. Any disappointment you're feeling now is merely based on your own wrong expectations going in. 

---

Win or lose, we certainly gave the Browns more than they bargained for.

 

Bravo new regime.  We've been more relevant in the last couple weeks than we've been the last couple years.

 

Like O'Halloran said, if they don't get Mack all it cost the Jaguars was a plane ticket and a steak dinner.

---

Yep.....Other than the 2 minor clauses, the deal is otherwise pretty much similar to the Kalil/ Kelce deals. Mack is a better player than those 2 IMO, so why wouldn't the Browns match it?? 

 

Minor clause? A two year opt out, no franchise/transition, no trade and a roster bonus of 8million due on 4/5/15 are "minor" clauses? Good grief man use your brain. That contract is awful, and not in the way the Jags want to make it, but in general. Why would you sign someone to something like that? Say he gets hurt? You are screwed. If they cut him ANY TIME, that 8 million due? Its fully guaranteed and hes getting 26 million for two years essentially. 

---

Follow me on twitter @Demetrius82

I guess a moral victory is better than nothing.... :unsure:

As far as perception around the league, you're damn right is.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.