2025 Salary Cap Outlook: Cleveland Browns

We’re continuing with the last installment of our series examining the five worst cap situations in the NFL heading into this offseason. Just six teams are in the red per Over The Cap’s projected effective cap space for 2025, a number that’s been twice as big in recent seasons, but that won’t be much solace to the Browns, who are one of several teams that will need to make some tough, financially-driven decisions. 

We’ll examine those looming decisions for Cleveland in-depth, looking at which cuts and restructures could be on deck and how the team’s financial circumstance will dictate what the roster looks like in 2025. 

Browns: -25,912,101

The Browns don’t have as big of a hole to climb out of as the Saints do with just a $25 million deficit compared to $70 million for New Orleans. But for my money, Cleveland’s cap situation is the worse of the two because of how boxed in the Browns are by how they’ve constructed their team. 

It’s not just at quarterback — though that’s a huge piece of the mess the Browns have to extricate themselves from. Up and down the roster, the Browns have limited their options by how confidently they’ve tied up money in certain players who either haven’t lived up to their contract or have started to feel the wear and tear of injuries and aging. It could legitimately take them years to recover. 

Here’s what the first steps of the road back for the Browns could look like. 

Cleveland’s Albatross

In the 1798 poem The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner, a sailor is forced to wear the corpse of an albatross after punishment for killing the bird and risking bad luck. It’s the genesis of the idiom “an albatross around your neck” as a way to describe a significant burden. I can’t think of a better metaphor for the Browns’ predicament with QB Deshaun Watson and his full-guaranteed contract than being festooned with a gangly, decomposing bird they blundered into wearing through no one else’s fault but their own.

The failings of both sides are well-trodden ground by now. The Browns bent over backward to accommodate a quarterback who was suspended 11 games for two dozen credible accusations of sexual harassment, giving him a precedent-shattering five-year, $230 million deal to get him to agree to a trade to Cleveland. For three years, they’ve made every effort to tailor the personnel and the scheme to him, yet the results have been awful. Watson’s been one of the most inaccurate and inefficient passers in football in the 19 games he’s been on the field in the past three years. 

Watson’s season-ending torn Achilles will force the Browns to confront the reality of their predicament and bring in alternatives to start. But unlike other underperforming quarterbacks who can be cut or traded, Watson’s contract still protects him. He has two years remaining on the deal with $46 million in guaranteed salary each season. Because the Browns restructured his contract twice, though, they have to account for $172 million on their books over the next three years. 

To put that another way — the NFL record for a dead money charge was set by the Broncos last year with QB Russell Wilson, who took on $85 million to cut him. If the Browns cut Watson this offseason, they would be liable for more than twice that amount. 

The only way out of this is to keep Watson on the roster in 2025. His Achilles rehab could impact his availability for the start of next season, so there’s a good chance he spends some time on one of the injured lists. Once healthy, Cleveland could give him a chance to compete with one or two other options for playing time, or even try to shut him down on injured reserve, though they’d have to be careful not to trigger a grievance from the NFLPA. 

In 2026, the Browns can use a June 1 designation to cut Watson and split the dead money hit between 2026 and 2027. It’s just a matter of how they want to split up the bill. If they did nothing else to Watson’s contract, this is how the dead cap hits would shake out, including a still-record $100 million dead money sum split between 2026 and 2027. 

Plan A: No restructure, June 1 cut in 2026

• 2025: $73M
• 2026: $73M
• 2027: $26M

However, the Browns can also restructure Watson’s deal to try and push the money out to later years when the growing salary cap gives them more flexibility to absorb the burden. Here’s what that looks like if the Browns restructure Watson this offseason, and if they restructure him both this offseason and next before cutting him in the summer of 2026 (hat tip to Jack Duffin who I believe was one of the first to point out this possibility). 

Plan B: Restructure in 2025, June 1 cut in 2026

• 2025: $39M
• 2026: $84M
• 2027: $49M

Plan C: Restructure in 2025 and 2026, June 1 cut 2026

• 2025: $39M
• 2026: $55M
• 2027: $78M

Some important context — the salary cap this year is not finalized but it’s expected to be in the range of $272 to $275 million. Over The Cap projects the cap to grow to $290 million in 2026 and $314 million in 2027, loose figures but ones that should be in the ballpark. The Browns already have $287 million on the books for 2026 and will be hard up for space once again. Things clear up in 2027 with $167 million in commitments, although that’s for just nine players. 

These numbers are also different from Duffin’s and I suspect it’s because Duffin is using additional void years. When a player is restructured, salary and other compensation is turned into a signing bonus which is split evenly over the remaining years of the contract, up to five years. Void years are a way to maximize that proration without a team committing longer to a player. 

Watson has void years in 2027 and 2028 which were added last year when his deal was restructured. Most contracts allow automatic restructures, but to add void years that aren’t there the player and agent have to sign off. It might not be a huge deal but it does mean they have to convene at the negotiating table. Given how tricky the situation is between the two sides, I’m not quite comfortable projecting that at the moment. 

At any rate, void years would just shift a few million around here or there and not materially change the contours of the decision the Browns are facing. They can take their medicine in 2025 and 2026 before being relatively unburdened in 2027, or kick the can down the road as far as possible hoping to figure things out on the fly as Watson’s cap hits continue to escalate. Judging by how the Browns have operated under GM Andrew Berry so far, (and this reporting fromBrowns beat reporter Mary Kay Cabot) my hunch is they’ll opt for the latter. 

Retooling The Rest Of The Roster

The Watson situation would be headache enough for any front office, but he was far from the only problem with the 3-10 Browns this past season. There are questions up and down the roster, and finding solutions is trickier because of the way they’ve constructed the roster. 

Berry arrived in Cleveland from Philadelphia as a key piece of the Eagles front office, and he has adopted a similar philosophy with contract structures. Most of the team’s major contracts have been built with option bonuses instead of base salaries. Option bonuses are treated like signing bonuses against the salary cap but the actual cash is not due until the option is picked up. It’s a way to pre-restructure deals in some cases — and the Browns have done plenty of restructures as well. The idea behind it is cap space now is more valuable than cap space in the future because a dollar now is a bigger percentage of the cap than a dollar in 2028). 

Here are all the option bonuses for the Browns in 2025 and the dates due, when known: 

• DE Myles Garrett ($13.4 million, due September 1)
• G Joel Bitonio ($3 million roster bonus due March 20, $10.745 million option bonus due date unknown)
• G Wyatt Teller ($1 million roster bonus due March 20, $10 million option bonus due date unknown)
• TE David Njoku ($13 million, due September 1)
• DT Dalvin Tomlinson ($750,000 roster bonus due March 17, $10 million option bonus due date unknown)
• WR Jerry Jeudy ($14.5 million guaranteed, due March 28)
• DE Ogbonnia Okoronkwo ($3.2 million, due August 28)
• LB Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah ($3.2 million guaranteed, due date unknown)
• S Juan Thornhill ($4.5 million, due date August 30)
• K Dustin Hopkins ($780,000, guaranteed, due date unknown)
• DT Shelby Harris ($2.7 million, due date unknown)
• LB Jordan Hicks ($1 million roster bonus, due March 15)

Another of Berry’s philosophies is it’s better to lock up players to extensions sooner rather than later because the market is always going to grow. Even if you sign a player to a number that looks uncomfortable now — see Jeudy’s $18 million per year deal before even playing a snap for the Browns — that figure will look better with age as other players sign deals to push the market forward. 

The catch is being that aggressive with cash reduces the flexibility teams have in the future because cutting or trading players accelerates all that dead money to the present. There are just three players the Browns could cut to get any material cap relief in 2025 and the total savings for axing all three would be only $8 million. As a reminder, they need to create $25 million just to get under the cap and fill out the rest of the roster. 

The Browns will have no choice but to restructure some contracts to find breathing room to operate. As much as possible, however, they must avoid pushing money forward for aging or deteriorating players that hampers their flexibility in 2026 and 2027 when they still have sizable dead money on the books for Watson and other players. 

As noted in the previous section, restructuring Watson would create a significant chunk — enough to wipe out the Browns’ deficit and give them wiggle room to operate in-season. To sign the draft class and have any sort of free agent budget, Cleveland would need to make more moves. Restructuring CB Denzel Ward who already has $12 million in guaranteed money would add another $9.2 million in cap space. 

Ward has been one of the few bright spots for the team this season and is a core player. But he turns 28 next year and it’s always hit or miss how cornerbacks will hold up the closer they get to 30. To add another layer of concern about Ward’s longevity, he’s had six documented concussions over the course of his career, including two this year. The Browns have boxed themselves into a corner here but this is an example of a decision that’s logical for them at the time and in alignment with their philosophy that could burn them down the road. 

Staying in the secondary, which as a whole has underperformed and been one of the bigger reasons for Cleveland’s step back in 2024, starting CB Greg Newsome II is due $13.377 million in the final year of his contract in 2025, all of which is guaranteed as the fifth-year option. Figuring out what to do with that number is another big decision for the Browns. 

The 25-year-old former first-round pick flashed in his first three seasons before struggling this year. An extension would be one way to lower his cap hit in 2025 but Newsome is a tricky player to value given his inconsistency so far. Perhaps something in the $10-$15 million a year range would work but that would be an overpay if Newsome doesn’t improve and leave the Browns out even more cash. 

The other way to clear that money from the cap in 2025 is by trading Newsome, and given his tape in 2024 and his salary, the trade would look more like what the Browns gave up to get Jeudy (fifth and sixth-round picks) than the third-round pick a few other teams have gotten for trading high-profile corners. Trading Newsome would also create a hole in the starting lineup, but the Browns might need to reinforce their secondary no matter what happens. 

The other position group that has dramatically underperformed and faces an uncertain future for the Browns is the offense line. Injuries have been a big factor but the bottom line is the group has not played up to its big-name billing and four of the five projected starters in 2025 as things stand now will be on the other side of 30. 

Former first-round LT Jedrick Wills did not establish himself as the man at left tackle in a contract year and has started just four games. He’s been battling a knee injury and it’s been disputed whether he’s healthy enough to play, but either way, it seems like 2023 fourth-round OT Dawand Jones has passed him. Jones’ status for next year is in some doubt, however, after he broke his leg. Bone breaks are easier to recover from than ligament tears but any major injury that takes a player off his feet for a while is an extra concern for someone as massive as Jones (listed at 6-8 and 374 pounds). 

On the other side, Browns RT Jack Conklin has improved as the season has gone on and he gets further away from last year’s torn ACL and MCL in Week 1. That was his third major knee injury, though, and Conklin has been limited to eight starts this year. He turns 31 next August and is due $15 million in 2025. Cutting him would save $5 million (the biggest possible cut the Browns could make) while a restructure would save $9.5 million. Again — you can understand why the Browns would lean toward restructuring Conklin while simultaneously noting how it puts them in a more precarious position in the future. 

Restructuring Pocic would save another $3.3 million and he’s a passable starter at center, though he turns 30 next August. Both Teller and Bitonio have had issues in 2024. The two are on pace for their lowest-graded PFF season since arriving in Cleveland, and this is the second straight down year for Bitonio. Going back to the list of bonuses, both Bitonio and Teller have roster bonuses due in early March which are designed to force the team to make a decision about their status early. 

Bitonio is one of the longest-tenured players on the team and has a ton of stature in the locker room. But the end comes for every player, and the 33-year-old Bitonio’s worst two years of his career have been the last two. Perhaps a reworked deal to bring him back for less than $15 million could be hammered out but as things stand, Bitonio is a prime cut candidate. Cutting him outright would cost the Browns a couple hundred thousand in 2025 cap space but give them much-needed flexibility in the future. 

Teller just turned 30 a month ago and in theory has a little more longevity. He’s due $14.8 million in total in 2025. However, the Browns would have to make Teller a June 1 cut to move on from him because the dead money acceleration would cost them $4.7 million in 2025 cap space otherwise. Cutting him and Bitonio would be a huge shift for a team that has built its identity around the line up until recently. It also matters that third-round OL Zak Zinter hasn’t necessarily shown he’s ready for a bigger role. 

That said, if there’s a spot teams regularly go cheap at, it’s interior offensive line, as it’s usually easier to find replacement-level players there than at tackle or other premium spots. Either way, the Browns face big questions at four of five offensive line spots heading into 2025. 

Choice Cuts

The way the Browns have structured their bonuses provides a few more hints as to other moves they might be considering to save money and cap space. In addition to Teller and Bitonio, Tomlinson and Hicks have early March bonuses that should prompt an earlier decision. Releasing Hicks would save $1.5 million so it’s just a matter of whether the Browns value his veteran experience at a $4 million cap number or are ready to move on to younger options. 

Tomlinson’s bonus is tiny compared to the rest of his salary but if the team is considering moving on, it provides a deadline. Tomlinson is another player who would have to be a June 1 cut, as otherwise the Browns would lose $5.6 million in space. A June 1 cut saves $6.5 million in cap space and $14.5 million in total cash, but teams can only designate two players as June 1 cuts before that date, and any cap savings don’t kick in until after. Tomlinson is PFF’s No. 23 defensive tackle and has a strong reputation as a run stuffer, but the Browns have to decide if that’s worth $14.5 million. 

There are a long list of players with bonuses due in the summer, including Garrett, Njoku, Okoronkwo and Thornhill. For players like Okoronkwo and Thornhill, that gives the Browns leverage for a potential pay cut, as they’re easier to cut after June 1 and most of the money around the league has dried up by that date. Thornhill has struggled enough this year that he might be cut anyway. 

For players like Garrett and Njoku, that structure makes them easier to trade if the Browns decide to go that direction. Both players are valuable starters — an understatement when it comes to Garrett, the reigning Defensive Player of the Year — but Njoku is going into the last year of his contract and will be up for a new deal in 2026 when he’ll be 30 years old. The Browns wouldn’t say no to the right offer, especially because it would absolve them of responsibility for $13 million. 

The Browns rebuffed trade interest in Garrett this past season but his situation is worth monitoring. He has two years remaining on his contract and is due just under $20 million in 2025, just under $25 million in 2026. The bulk of that in both years is from option bonuses. At two years and $45 million, that’s dramatically below the top of the edge rusher market where Garrett belongs and the overall $25 million APY he signed for back in 2020 is now outdated. 

Garrett would be well within his rights to seek a modified contract, especially since he turns 29 and only has so much leverage left to maximize his earnings over the rest of his career. It’s fair to question how much of an appetite the Browns will have when it comes to forking over another huge sum of guaranteed money, even for their best player. 

I also wouldn’t blame Garrett if he had concerns over the next few years and the Browns’ capabilities of fielding a competitive team — not just a .500 squad but one that could credibly return to the playoffs and contend for a Super Bowl. He hasn’t said anything to indicate he’s looking for a way out, so this is just conjecture, but between his contract and the Browns’ prognosis, there are some signs of a potential storm brewing. 

There’s even a case to be made that the Browns should trade Garrett and use the savings and draft picks, possibly multiple first-rounders, to accelerate their rebuild. That would require the Browns to acknowledge they’re rebuilding, which isn’t a given, but that’s a conceivable win-win situation for both sides. We’re not there yet and it remains to be seen what the offseason holds but that’s a situation worth monitoring going into 2025. 

Conclusion

If I had to take a stab at how things will play out for the Browns this offseason, this is what one plan could look like:

• Restructure Watson’s contract, leaving them with $8 million in cap space
• Also restructure Ward, Conklin and Pocic, creating $27 million to work with in free agency. That seems like a decent amount, but it will go quickly with needs at quarterback, offensive line, defensive line, cornerback and probably wide receiver. 
• Cut Bitonio, Teller and Tomlinson, the latter with June 1 designations. Thornhill can also be cut after June 1, adding $17.2 million more in cap space. However, that will primarily be alloted for draft picks, in-season signings and rollover. 

Without factoring in any other spicy moves like trading Garrett or extensions for anyone like Newsome, that leaves the Browns with $276 million in cap commitments for 2026, 25 players under contract and the bulk of Watson’s cap hits still to come. The Browns are going to be walking a tightrope when it comes to the salary cap and roster construction for the foreseeable future.