Myles Garrett requests a trade

[BarleyNY]

48 minutes ago, DJB said:

 

Wow. That is a major change of direction, but not the first in recent months.

 

Edit: It might be nothing, but the report is that he won’t negotiate “an extension”. What I was told was that the old contract would be torn up and he would be signed to an entirely new contract.

Edited Thursday at 09:13 PM by BarleyNY

[MikePJ76]

13 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

 

This should escalate trade talks....regardless of what their GM has said

It won't escalate anything currently.  They can both dig in and say whatever they want.

 

When he starts missing mandatory workouts/meetings/Mini camps then we will see who blinks first.  The team will threaten him with fines.  

 

If they don't trade him by the draft I imagine the team has the upper hand. They can fine him into submission once camp starts.  They will be in no rush to move him because draft picks are not as valuable at that moment.  So once may rolls around and he is not around and then camp opens and he is not around, they will just fine him until he shows up at which point they will sit down and talk.

 

So in essence if they are going to move him it will happen before the draft.  

 

I have to wonder what role the micah parsons extension plays into this, I heard this morning that he could be looking at 42 million a year...if parsons gets an extension worth that much and you trade for Garrett what are you paying him, 50 million?

 

Impossible position for Cleveland and of their own doing.

[BillsFanForever19]

22 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

This should escalate trade talks....regardless of what their GM has said

 

It will escalate the media talking about the situation. But it doesn't mean it's going to take the GM from "not trading him under any circumstances" to "time to get on the phone".

 

As others have said, the GM could be of the mind that after he makes some moves, specifically at QB, Garrett will change his stance. Especially if he throws a massive contract at him.

 

Right now both are using the media to get their point across. Both are digging their heels in. And regardless of what's being said in the media, I don't think either side is changing their mind right now. This is looking like a situation that won't see a resolution anytime soon.

[Warriorspikes51]

4 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

It will escalate the media talking about the situation. But it doesn't mean it's going to take the GM from "not trading him under any circumstances" to "time to get on the phone".

 

As others have said, the GM could be of the mind that after he makes some moves, specifically at QB, Garrett will change his stance. Especially if he throws a massive contract at him.

 

Right now both are using the media to get their point across. Both are digging their heels in. And regardless of what's being said in the media, I don't think either side is changing their mind right now. This is looking like a situation that won't see a resolution anytime soon.

 

well folks, there it is!   We now have assurance that Garrett being traded is IMMINENT  🤫

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

20 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:

It won't escalate anything currently.  They can both dig in and say whatever they want.

 

When he starts missing mandatory workouts/meetings/Mini camps then we will see who blinks first.  The team will threaten him with fines.  

 

If they don't trade him by the draft I imagine the team has the upper hand. They can fine him into submission once camp starts.  They will be in no rush to move him because draft picks are not as valuable at that moment.  So once may rolls around and he is not around and then camp opens and he is not around, they will just fine him until he shows up at which point they will sit down and talk.

 

So in essence if they are going to move him it will happen before the draft.  

 

I have to wonder what role the micah parsons extension plays into this, I heard this morning that he could be looking at 42 million a year...if parsons gets an extension worth that much and you trade for Garrett what are you paying him, 50 million?

 

Impossible position for Cleveland and of their own doing.

 

Wasn't there a new tactic done by the players, they'd show up, but not participate?  Didn't someone do that last year?   That prevents them from being fined.

 

One of the things I've read and it does make sense, rather than cut Miller, i the Bills can get him to go down to around $7 or $8 mil, it's better to keep him as the cap hit this year, plus what you'd need to pay his replacement make it now worth cutting him.  

 

The past two years though whenever Miller came in they'd move Groot to other side, that's not going to work if Garrett is over there, so what's the best solution then?

[Allen2Moulds]

Most of these billionaire owners, don't like to be held hostage by their millionaire players.  My guess is that by the time the draft rolls around, the Browns wish list will include more players than they are able to obtain on their own, unless they get a haul for a Garrett trade. Between GM's loving the draft (aka Christmas), and the owner likely to say, ok, enough is enough, he gets moved. 

Edited Thursday at 09:35 PM by Allen2Moulds

[Virgil]

I'm not normally a fan of players forcing their way out, but the Browns is such a dysfunctional organization that I can respect it here.  When he signed his extension, the Browns had a solid looking team on paper and we all know how that worked out.  (Seriously, can you think of worse underperforming teams on paper than the Jets and Browns in recent years).  

 

Granted, I want this to work out for the Bills and I can honestly say there is no trade too high that would upset me for Garrett.  When our GM comes out and says that gamewreckers don't just become available, and then one does, then we have to pull out all the stops.  

[BillsFanForever19]

2 hours ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

 

well folks, there it is!   We now have assurance that Garrett being traded is IMMINENT  🤫

 

I'm not saying things can't change. "It's looking like" doesn't denote a guarantee. Just to say that the idea that this is going to "escalate trade talks regardless of what the GM says" is wishful thinking and most likely not accurate, as others have said. 

 

And it's funny - you made the same post about me for Micah Hyde seeing the field. And Drafting 2 WR's in the 1st 2 Rounds. And signing Arik Armstead. And Christian Kirksey starting over Terrel Bernard Week 1. And those are just the ones that immediately pop to mind, as you've been posting that on everything I post. You calling out anyone's track record is pretty rich.

Edited Thursday at 11:51 PM by BillsFanForever19

[TheFunPolice]

The Browns are digging in and letting their pride get to them. Teams do this (and I get it) but it almost always ends the same way, assuming the player is determined to get out. 

 

What we don't know 100% for sure is how determined Garrett is. Is he willing to lose millions of dollars? 

 

If so, then he might eventually get his wish, but it would be next season right before the trade deadline. After this draft teams won't have picks to offer until a year down the road and everyone will have spent their cap money. 

[North Buffalo]

1 hour ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Wasn't there a new tactic done by the players, they'd show up, but not participate?  Didn't someone do that last year?   That prevents them from being fined.

 

One of the things I've read and it does make sense, rather than cut Miller, i the Bills can get him to go down to around $7 or $8 mil, it's better to keep him as the cap hit this year, plus what you'd need to pay his replacement make it now worth cutting him.  

 

The past two years though whenever Miller came in they'd move Groot to other side, that's not going to work if Garrett is over there, so what's the best solution then?

thinking Miller is first sub... he was on a pitch count anyway

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

2 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

thinking Miller is first sub... he was on a pitch count anyway

 

Yes, but when Miller would come in Groot would move to other side.  That won't work now if  Garrett is there as don't want to take Garrett off field.  Maybe on occasion to give him a break, but not regularly.  And likely the plays you'd want Miller on the field for are the same plays you also want Garrett there for.    Can any of them move inside?.  Have a front 4 of Groot, Garrett, Miller, and Oliver?

 

And maybe not Garrett, but someone of his level or close to his level?

[BillsFanForever19]

36 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Yes, but when Miller would come in Groot would move to other side.  That won't work now if  Garrett is there as don't want to take Garrett off field.  Maybe on occasion to give him a break, but not regularly.  And likely the plays you'd want Miller on the field for are the same plays you also want Garrett there for.    Can any of them move inside?.  Have a front 4 of Groot, Garrett, Miller, and Oliver?

 

And maybe not Garrett, but someone of his level or close to his level?

 

No, you're not moving Myles Garrett, Greg Rousseau, or Von Miller inside to Tackle. 

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Wasn't there a new tactic done by the players, they'd show up, but not participate?  Didn't someone do that last year?   That prevents them from being fined.

 

One of the things I've read and it does make sense, rather than cut Miller, i the Bills can get him to go down to around $7 or $8 mil, it's better to keep him as the cap hit this year, plus what you'd need to pay his replacement make it now worth cutting him.  

 

The past two years though whenever Miller came in they'd move Groot to other side, that's not going to work if Garrett is over there, so what's the best solution then?

Yes. It has been dubbed the “hold in”. It is due to the league’s insistence of making fines for not showing up to camp mandatory in the last CBA. Garrett doesn’t need the reps so it really would not matter if he did that. 

[Goin Breakdown]

5 hours ago, DJB said:

 

I love the picture choice for the tweet. "Yep what that says"

[Billsfed1]

7 hours ago, Virgil said:

I'm not normally a fan of players forcing their way out, but the Browns is such a dysfunctional organization that I can respect it here.  When he signed his extension, the Browns had a solid looking team on paper and we all know how that worked out.  (Seriously, can you think of worse underperforming teams on paper than the Jets and Browns in recent years).  

 

Granted, I want this to work out for the Bills and I can honestly say there is no trade too high that would upset me for Garrett.  When our GM comes out and says that gamewreckers don't just become available, and then one does, then we have to pull out all the stops.  

Bang on.

[cle23]

19 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Wasn't there a new tactic done by the players, they'd show up, but not participate?  Didn't someone do that last year?   That prevents them from being fined.

 

One of the things I've read and it does make sense, rather than cut Miller, i the Bills can get him to go down to around $7 or $8 mil, it's better to keep him as the cap hit this year, plus what you'd need to pay his replacement make it now worth cutting him.  

 

The past two years though whenever Miller came in they'd move Groot to other side, that's not going to work if Garrett is over there, so what's the best solution then?

 

It wouldn't prevent fines.  That would essentially be conduct detrimental, and they can suspend him for it, though not likely to happen. But another new thing a few years ago if I remember correctly, is that teams can't "forgive" fines of players that hold out and then show up right before the season.  If the player misses mandatory camp and games, that money is gone, and the team can also go back for bonuses and such.  So Garrett would stand to lose A LOT of money.

[GaryPinC]

19 hours ago, TheFunPolice said:

The Browns are digging in and letting their pride get to them. Teams do this (and I get it) but it almost always ends the same way, assuming the player is determined to get out. 

 

What we don't know 100% for sure is how determined Garrett is. Is he willing to lose millions of dollars? 

 

If so, then he might eventually get his wish, but it would be next season right before the trade deadline. After this draft teams won't have picks to offer until a year down the road and everyone will have spent their cap money. 

Other than the altercation with Mason Rudolph a few years ago, Myles seems to be a very high character person.  He's also been sensitive to the plight of the fans over the years and he is this town's Bruce Smith and a very bright version given how bad the team has been for so long.  Unlike Bruce, he has never complained about his contract or even the poor situation of the team most years.

 

This is the first to my knowledge and he's been very clear about it not being the money, that he wants to go to a contender as he crosses the peak of his career.

As you said, we can't know 100% but I'd say he's very determined as this was not an easy decision because he's been such a big part of the local community his entire career.

[BillsFanForever19]

 

[BuffaloRebound]

it’d probably take a 1st and 2nd this year and a 1st next year and rousseau.  Garrett is that good that I’d gladly do that trade.