Harder Fix Saints or Browns?

[corta765]

I think this is fascinating question because of the circumstances surrounding each team. It breaks down like this:

 

Saints

• They will be 77 million over the cap in 2025 before any increase or change is made
• Carr's contract cannot be touched as the dead cap is 50 mil, it drops to 28 mil in 2026
• Carr is a very meh as a QB, but he can be gone in a year and hold fort for a season
• They have an aging roster, but some pieces do exist like Olave for a rebuild to go with
• Market pressure is not crazy so patience exists 
• Ownership is more stable then Cleveland and it seems like maybe they are ready to take their medicine with a bad cap and team in 2025

 

Browns

• They will be 43 mil over the cap in 2025 before any increase or change is made
• Watson's contract is untouchable in 2025 as it would be a dead cap of 172 million lol. They could maybe try in 2026 but the cap hit is still 99 mil which they can massage out over two years but still a lot. 
• Watson is basically the worst QB in football before you even get into the issues off the field. Yet your on the hook $ wise for 2 years minimum 
• The roster is pretty good though and the current head coach is a pretty good one
• The market is a tough and they know they are wasting a good roster
• Ownership is bottom 3 in the league and very untrusting

 

 

My Pick:

 

I think the Browns are a far harder fix because of Watson's contract and the fact the roster will basically age out by the time the cap opens. Outside of lucking into a QB in the draft your basically stuck at the most important spot. Even though they can open some cap space to fix some holes on offense it is tough sledding to reshape the roster too much without a full on rebuild. By comparison the Saints can basically take one very bad cap year and team and then hit the ground running in 2026 with a new QB and space to start improving the roster both draft and FA wise.

Edited 3 hours ago by corta765

[947]

Title says Raiders or Saints, Poll says Browns...

[Magox]

Cleveland

[That's No Moon]

Saints ownership is absolutely not more stable than the Browns. The Saints will be sold pretty soon.

[Buffalo Boy]

Browns gonna brown🤷‍♂️

[KingBoots8]

Saints might have new owners, but that might give you a year leeway to get things right. Cleveland has terrible owners who will likely cause more problems than anything on the field. Not to mention the awful cap issues for 2 more years.

 

Cleveland may let you suck for a while knowing they messed up, but most likely not.

[Chicken Boo]

Should have thrown Carolina in there as well.  They may have the worst owner of the bunch.  

[PrimeTime101]

Browns because they continue to make horrible decisions from the top down.. year after year after year. 

[somnus00]

I don't even think Kevin Costner can fix this Browns team.

[dpberr]

I picked the Saints.  

 

In theory, the Browns have an issue around one player, and could drop a nuclear bomb and take that dead cap hit of $172 million over 1-2 seasons and be done with it or negotiate a retirement settlement with Watson that'd be less than that number.  Yes, they would likely field the worst team in league history, as every player would be league minimum, but it could be done.   The NFL would likely go to great lengths to stop it.  Fans would be apoplectic.  However, they likely get the #1 pick in the draft, and are also getting a new stadium.

 

Saints have a multi-year project of clearing dead cap and current cap with multiple bad contracts, and they have an aging facility.  There's little to look forward to until 2030.  

Edited 3 hours ago by dpberr

[KingBoots8]

1 minute ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Browns because they continue to make horrible decisions from the top down.. year after year after year. 

Remember when they were a play away from the AFCCG and looked like an absolute force? That’s how fast bad ownership can ruin a promising team.

[Augie]

Browns are a hopeless mess with Haslam in charge, and I just can’t get over that. He thought that contract for Watson was the right idea, and I feel  badly for Browns fans. He’s bad enough to suck the hope out of even the most die hard fans. 

 

 

.

Edited 2 hours ago by Augie

[17islongenough]

I get what the Browns tried to do.   It just completely failed. 

 

Never got the Saints.  Should have torn it down after Brees retired.   But they just kept themselves in cap hell just to go 500.

 

 

[Saxum]

Browns are easier to fix - sell team to someone who is not an idiot - but without changing owner Saints is easier.

[RobbRiddick]

It's very fitting that the Browns have ended up in such a poor state after they told themselves all the Watson stuff wasn't really that important and as long as he played well and helped them win a SB then it wouldn't matter. I hope they rot for years 

[MJS]

The answer is always the Browns because they are the Browns.

[co_springs_billsfan]

15 minutes ago, 17islongenough said:

I get what the Browns tried to do.   It just completely failed. 

 

Never got the Saints.  Should have torn it down after Brees retired.   But they just kept themselves in cap hell just to go 500.

 

 

.500 is enough many times to take the NFC South, but if that's the highest you're aiming for....

[Sweats]

The Browns is the correct answer here.

 

Everyone told them they were making a mistake by fully guaranteeing Watson and like i'm talking everyone from other owners to the fans, to the media, etc.......and the Browns did what the Browns always do, they made piss poor decisions that created a cap hell for that team.

Also, their owner and management are terrible.

 

You know what the word "Browns" reminds me of?..........that's right, a hot steaming pile (poop assessment thread for reference).

[Royale with Cheese]

The Browns cannot cut Watson because the dead cap hit would be so large it would prevent them fielding a full 53 man roster.  They are stuck with him probably 2 more years and he is a bottom 3 QB.

[Shaw66]

I guess it isn't a fascinating question, because more or less everyone agrees it's the Browns. 

 

In my mind, it's simple. If you're NFL team and you don't have a QB to build around, you need a quarterback. 

 

Seems like both teams have cap problems that will keep them from acquiring a QB in free agency, but it's pretty tough to get a good QB in free agency - just look at, uh, the Saints. Cousins is about the free agent QB any team has gotten since, uh, the Saints and Brees. 

 

That means they have to draft a QB. Let's assume both teams hit the lottery and draft QBs are good from the get go and are guys they can build on. Which team is in a better position to build?  Saints, because their cap situation is less bad than the Browns. 

 

Ownership? I have no idea if Gayle Benson knows what she's doing in New Orleans. I am sure that Jimmy Haslam doesn't know what he's doing in Cleveland. Again, the negative advantage foes to New Orleans. 

 

I'd rather be the Bills.