A Mild Conspiracy Theory About the Sale of the Browns

Why would you force out an owner who you could almost guarantee a win over each year? If I was an owner, I’d love to have a Lerner own a team that didn’t know how to create a winning organization, or didn’t care enough to get involved to create a winning team. Also, why were the Browns continually under the cap (I think this year by $20 -$25 million dollars)? I think Randy didn’t want to spend the $$, and told Holmgren to underspend each year. Why wouldn’t the Browns get a couple of attractive free agents when everyone could see the receivers were terrible, and we had no quality running backs. Randy sold because of two things, his Austin Villa team needs an infusion of $$, and while the team was valued supposedly at $720 million, he got over a billion dollars for the team

Not a bad theory Craig. I can see how the other owners might look at Randy as the weak link. If the other owners are gung ho for the league and doing whatever they can to preserve it and continue sitting on their individual licenses to print money, then they’d be foolish not to try and weed out the perceived “liabilities”.

It is a boys club and they probably don’t like the fact that he seems to want to have as little to do with it as possible.

I think it may have more to do with the fact that a billion dollars is hard to say no to, no matter who you are, but this is certainly not far fetched. On the other hand, perhaps Randy wanted out and had been talking to other owners about it, trying to get things lined up before any word leaked, that way the message is easier to control

Obviously it pokes a hole in that theory. I always considered that a sound theory from the fans’ perspective, but never really considered it from, say, Bob Kraft’s.

The sale had me thinking from different perspectives, especially when Jimmy Haslam appears to be so hand-picked by the league.

Because it’s not about winning, it’s about making money.

Dogs flew spaceships! The Aztecs invented the vacation!

It really depends on how the other owners view Holmgren. Plenty of ex-FB people were or became owners in the past. So, does the NFL-owner community feel that Holmgren is up to that task (as a future minority owner at least?). This was really his audition for such a role. If not, and the handling of the Colt-concussion situation was poor, then I could see them doing as you suggested.

The other side of the coin is that Randy Lerner could have wanted out of the ownership role that he never really wanted in the first place. The NFL could have helped him select Haslam as a potential buyer in that situation as well.

Too many moving parts here, but an interesting theory nonetheless.

Not to take this to X-Fileian extremes, but I have a hard time with coincidences. How odd is it that the Browns are basically Philadelphia Eagles Part Deux? If Banner replaces Holms (likely), and everyone else stays (who knows how likely?) That would make our Prez, GM, HC, and OC all Philly alums that all were there at the same time. I know this would be borderline Illuminati-level conspiracy planning, but that just seems like a huge coincidence.

I feel like slapping myself for even bringing it up, but I figured while we’re talking conspiracy, might as well go big.

I don’t buy it. The most obvious problem is that I think there are other owners the NFL would want to get rid of first. The Browns were selling out and making money, so nobody in the league offices would care that Lerner was incapable of putting together a winning team. And if a scapegoat was necessary over the McCoy incident, there were plenty of other people who could have been sacrificed.

I don’t disagree that other owners may have been unhappy with Lerner’s lack of involvement, but I don’t think that is what was really going on. In case we all forget, Al Davis did whatever he wanted against the wishes of his fellow NFL owners for decades. I don’t think the other owners really have any power over any other owner in the end. Seems fairly simple to me that Al Lerner, at the time of his passing, wanted the team to remain under his family’s control for 10 years, at least from what I’ve read. It also seems pretty clear to me that Randy has not really wanted to own this franchise, and it’s been exactly 10 years since his father’s death. He fulfilled his father’s wishes and now wants to move on with his life.

I challenge your first premise: that the league has any leverage over an owner to sell his franchise. I’d like to hear that conversation: “we’ll reduce your revenue sharing!” (pffft). “If you ever show up at our meeting no one will talk to you.” If owners could pressure other owners to sell, Al Davis, Mark Cuban and George Steinbrenner would have been goners.

I won’t go into the rest of your stuff, but none of it makes sense to me unless you’re fishing for a conspiracy theory. Something based on known facts seem more realistic:

Randy didn’t want this ever, but (per the PD) he promised his mom he’d take it on after dad died. This team was not his desire to begin with and clearly never his passion. Current public perception, post-draft, is that the Browns are on the uptick. He’s been dying to get out, out of the public eye and his steady public flogging, out of Cleveland which is far away from his business interests and those things he is passionate about. The offer is good, real good, and the buyer is already league-vetted, which promises a quick exit without weeks of more press calls for updates. Mom relents, maybe a quick exit presser where he can honestly say that the team is on the right track and in good hands, an “I’ll never forget the passion here,” slam the limo door, lean back and sigh, dolly back, fade to black.

Not as intriguing, but probably a whole lot closer to reality.

It’s possible this might have had to do with Lerner not being totally involved in the Browns and he eventually looked himself in the mirror one day and knew it. Besides the Dolans (indians) No other owner in past years has been criticized like Lerner especially being non-existent and his owning of a soccer team in another country never sat well either. Honestly, the Browns needed an owner and other football people who understood how to run a franchise and not just do it for the money (Holmgren). There have been so many colossal mistakes by this franchise and Lerner was involved in nearly all of them. The dude was clueless but kept it going to honor his father but it was not a comfortable position for him and I give him some props for finally letting go. As for conspiracy theories, I love em, so I wouldn’t be surprised if other owners wanted to push Lerner out, but I think this was all Lerner and no one else

I can see where the billionaires don’t want the millionaires being privy to the workings of their club, more realistically, Al Lerner asked Randy not to sell the team for 10 years after his passing. Guess how long its been? Randy couldn’t wait to get out from under this thing.

what issue could the NFL possibly have with Randy having NFL poster boy Mike “Big Show” Holmgren as the face/president of the team? besides, it’s not like the Browns were in any danger of losing the fan base or revenues were down, or that he was cheap.

just seems to me that the timing was right and he found a good steward in Haslam to keep the team in Cleve and to hopefully bring in a championship culture, which it seems like he did. probably his best move he has made as an owner, mazel tov Randy!

Fellow conspiracy theorists could read the Rooney statement and go “hhhuuummmmm??? May-be!??!”

Liability is subject to ongoing actions. If your weakest link is “equal” to you, there is certainly a possibility that your weakest link opens you up to liability if you’re part of the same group.