Former Lions OT George Foster Signs With Browns

by Chris Pokorny on Jun 6, 2009 11:24 AM EDT in General News

The Cleveland Browns signed former Detroit Lions offensive tackle George Foster on Friday. After spending the past two years with the Lions, a span that included 12 starts in 19 appearances, Foster was released on Monday.

Foster clearly had potential upon entering the NFL, as he was a former first-round draft choice of the Denver Broncos in 2003. In total, Foster has started in 57 of the 67 career games he has played in. The Broncos lost him when they traded for former Lions CB Dre Bly. Not surprisingly, Foster's build is right in line with what Mangini is seeking: 6-5, 338 pounds.

Foster has played the right tackle position for the past several seasons. He will either add to the competition between John St. Clair and Floyd Womack, or settle in as a reserve left tackle behind Joe Thomas. Either way, all of these veteran backups sound a lot better than relying on a Nat Dorsey or an Isaac Sowells.

Tweet Comment 75 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Okay. I’ve read several articles that point out that Foster played RT in recent years and speculated that he might be a backup LT in Cleveland. Does anyone know if he has any experience at the NFL level as a LT?

by JustBob on Jun 7, 2009 2:39 PM EDT reply actions

I think he was a LT in Denver.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 8, 2009 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions

Now that I look, I think that Lepis was the LT in Denver. My bad.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 8, 2009 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions

I can’t say that I am totally pumped about Mangini, but I am very happy to see this front office continue to address the O-Line.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 8, 2009 12:35 AM EDT reply actions

He might be the 3rd best RT on the team (not counting Thomas). I think St. Clair and Tucker might be better. Good signing though.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 8, 2009 10:09 AM EDT reply actions

I’m all for this. Love all the attention this new staff is putting into the line.

by tjk_doc on Jun 8, 2009 11:17 AM EDT reply actions

I can’t even begin to say how often I’ve complained about the Browns’ lack of attention to the O-Line over the years. Time will tell which of these guys can actually play, but you’ve got to be impressed that the staff is building depth and competition in the line, as well as encouraging diversity in covering more than one position. One certainty in the NFL is that you’re going to have injuries along the offensive line, and it looks like they’re assembling a team where there won’t be much dropoff when somebody goes down (unless, of course, it’s Joe Thomas). I really like this direction, and they’ve followed much the same philosophy with the D-line. Good move.

by drjeo on Jun 8, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions

We’ve been “addressing the line” for the last 4 years. Just saying.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 8, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions

fair, but this just feels like a bit more of a directed, systematic approach to aggressively building depth. maybe i’m just selectively remembering, but it felt like the last couple of years saw a lot of seth mckinney, bob hallen-type depth signings…said differently, warm bodies.

whatever the case, i love this signing. the more depth at OL the better. and i love the attempt to build depth at DB, too. color me impressed with the mangini, kotnkus (sp) efforts thus far.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 8, 2009 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m impressed too, but it’s not like they’re working with an empty roster. I have no doubt that the same kind of actions would have been occurring with the previous (front office) regime. A franchise LT was drafted, and a LG was made the highest paid player at his position, as well as a center whose career unfortunately ended after the first non-contact drills. One of the three best DT in the game (when motivated) was acquired. That’s a TON in 4 years.

My point is not to beat a dead horse. It’s to communicate that this has been going on for a while now, which is only to say that it takes a concerted, sustained attempt to “address the line.” And that the attention given is nothing “new”, it’s just a reassuring continuation of something that was already in the works.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 9, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions

More to the point of your “depth”, Hadnot and re-signing McKinney were perfect examples of an attempt to “build depth” that I see as no different than this Foster signing. At the time, Hadnot and McKinney were signed to be the 6th and 7th OL (assuming Tucker at RG and that bald dude’s name who escapes me at RT).

Again, nothing new. But this is just a “phew” moment, that hopefully we’re not taking a step back.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 9, 2009 2:20 AM EDT up reply actions

you know, i happen to think that the most impressive move of savage’s browns career was to land hank fraley (rogers would have to be a very very close second). there were other, bigger signings/picks/trades, of course, but bentley went down, and there was literally NOTHING behind him. snagging an above-average guy who went on and became team captain was nothing short of amazing.

my point being i agree that savage took steps to address the line. thomas/stein/bently were huge moves, you’re spot on. but i guess i felt like it was a bit more sporadic or reactionary when savage made his OL acquisitions. 1 or 2 nibbles a year…whereas mangini and kotnkus (sp) have already (off the top of my head) gotten mack, womack, st. clair and foster now (am i forgetting any?) in a single offseason.

as i say, i could be selectively remembering, and your point is well-taken…it’s not as though phil forgot there was an OL on this team. in the final analysis, we’re arriving at the same “phew” moment, where we feel good about moving forward with the OL.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 9, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions

I kinda think Fraley has always been average at best, and a liability at worst. Since Savage acquired him, he might not have seen C as a big need-to-upgrade this offseason, whereas I’m delighted Kotnkus (sp) targeted it. I think the “captain” status was always more based on personality than performance, and I think 07 was due more to the guard play around him.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 9, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions

oh, don’t get me wrong, i don’t mean to imply that fraley was or is any kind of pro bowler. and you’re right that he had a significant amount of help at guard (at least LG). he’s deteriorated substantially, especially last year, and i’m thrilled that mack is in the mix now.

my point in praising that move is that it showed a great deal of creativity and crisis management on savage’s part. there’s a lot of time to put together draft boards and talk about trades…acquiring fraley in the wake of the bentley disaster, on extremely short notice, and having fraley start servicably for 3 years, was a great case of GM’ing. and you don’t hear me say that often about savage!

by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 9, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, landing someone as decent as Fraley had to have been hard, especially that deep in to camp, and only having given up a 7th rounder when every team out there knew we didn’t have s&*^ at center that year.

by rufio on Jun 9, 2009 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions

And yet, everyone now wants his head for dealing a 7th rounder for a young CB with starting experience last year…

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 10, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions

who was that

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 10, 2009 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Travis Daniels I believe.

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Jun 10, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions

And Romeo played him for one play.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions

“All I do is pick the players” seems a little less horrible in light of this discussion (Fraley, etc). Still a mistake, but I’m just sayin…

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Who said that

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Savage, in a press conference, and many people chastised him for throwing Romeo “under the bus” for the failures last season. Which is true on both levels (he was throwing him under the bus and it was Romeo’s fault).

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 12, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions

At the time I didn’t have much of an opinion, but in hindsight its pretty stupid to trade any sort of draft pick for a player with as little value as Travis Daniels

I am pretty certain you will rarely see Mangini giving up draft picks for marginal players

by Roger Dorn on Jun 10, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Perhaps, but I would counter that he’s inherited a roster (and situation) deep enough that he won’t have to, if he continues the successful player acquisition of his predecessor.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions

I disagree certainly at the DB position. Any depth that exists now on defense exists solely because of Mankinis. (except maybe the DL)

by Roger Dorn on Jun 11, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, you’re including an entire offseason that Savage didn’t have.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions

ie, by definition (of successful player acquistion) the 09 team should be deeper than the 08 team.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Yes, but I am not going to give credit to Savage for that. The defense he left behind was thin in depth. He acquired some better starters than what had existed before him. Perhaps he would have been able to acquire solid depth as well, but he struck me more as a guy that would have spent the money necessary to get a Jabari Greer sacfricing the financial ability to add multiple depth players

by Roger Dorn on Jun 12, 2009 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions

I know you and others have been criticizing Savage for not getting as much depth as he could have.

This is a fair criticism (he didn’t get us much depth), but it was just the way he was building the team: starters first, depth later. If you start with our 2005 roster and just pick up good depth players/role players, then you have to make some of those guys the starters when they are clearly better suited to playing part-time. If you do what Savage did and look for impact starters, you sacrifice being able to acquire some depth.

It’s much easier for Mankinis to come in with one of those two areas filled (starting talent vs. depth) and go out and get what is missing than it is to essentially start from scratch.

Again, criticizing Savage for not acquiring great depth is fair, but at least he built the team. Pretty much everyone before him who was in charge of player acquisition didn’t build squat.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree, at least we had some sort of talent when he left. For that he deserves credit. I think his strength obviously was his ability to identify top talent. His weaknesses include building an entire roster, contract negotiations, and working collectively with the coaching staff

by Roger Dorn on Jun 12, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Also, telling people to root for Buffalo.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, they’ve been addressing the line for the last couple of years. I intended my comment to be more of a historic perspective, but I didn’t make that clear. Nevertheless, I’m still glad to see them adding depth -and hopefully quality – across the line.

by drjeo on Jun 9, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions

The quality part is what I have to question. I am truly excited about Mack. St. Clair seems pretty good. I am not really high on Womack, and Foster won’t really be an upgrade unless he actually tries in every drill, on every snap from now until the end of the year.

All of these guys at least seem to be legit NFL players, unlike the Nat Dorsey’s and the countless OL we had under Butch Davis.

by rufio on Jun 9, 2009 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions

McKinney and Hadnot are legit NFL Players. This has been going on for many, many years.

I hope St. Clair is an improvement over Shaffer, but I have my doubts. And I’m no Shaffer fan at all.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 10, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Agreed with McKinney and Hadnot. Especially Hadnot. I think he had a down year last year, though, along with the rest of the line.

I am not trying to place blame on Savage: he probably had one legit NFL OL on the roster when he inherited the team (Tucker). It seems he absolutely nailed the hardest spot to fill by getting Thomas, and scored a twofer by using 3rd overall pick money on a player/position that might actually be worth it.

He did a lot of the work to set up the backbone of the team by getting players at WR, QB, LT, NT, ILB, and maybe OLB (Wimbley) and still found guys like Hadnot, McKinney, and Fraley on the side.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions

I actually like Womack and I think he will compete with tucker for the starting RG spot.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 10, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I like Womack as well. From what I have read, the majority of his problems have been injury related, but that he is actually a strong run blocker particularly from the guard position. Mangini’s emphasis has clearly been on improving the run blocking

by Roger Dorn on Jun 10, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions

If Womack is a monster and he is a great player on a good Browns team and I have to eat some humble pie, I will be 100% ok with that.

I still think our RGs should go
1. Tucker
2. Hadnot
3. Womack.

I think our best 5 (without considering position) right now are
Thomas
Steinbach
Mack
Hadnot
Tucker

…but I don’t know if Tucker is the ideal guy at RT. If St. Clair is the clear-cut best at RT, I think Tucker should move down to RG, which is the best fit for him at this stage of his career.

However the starting 5 turns out, this is still the deepest our line has been…since the return of the franchise? Savage, Mangini, and Kokutnus (sp) all have to be credited for that, and I hope those currently employed by the Browns continue the trend.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 2:09 AM EDT up reply actions

IHere is my depth chart. The second person listed is the backup
Thomas, Foster
Steinbach, Hadnot
Mack , Fraley
Tucker, Womack
St. Clair, Foster

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions

Yea, I think this is fair from both of you. One thing we have learned throughout our years as Browns fans is that you never use only 5 guys throughout the season. That’s why this depth is critical

by Roger Dorn on Jun 11, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions

I hope we draft a lineman in next year’s draft. I am hoping for Sam Young in the 2nd round

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions

but its Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to say that stuff

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions

We even had to use more than 5 in 07 when we had that miracle mostly injury-free year.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions

I think I agree with this… as long as St. Clair is at least an average RT. He’d be the one area needing help (so long as Mack is what we hope he is).

Throw in Royal, Quinn (instead of Anderson), consistent and regular usage of Cribs (and Harrison)… and this offense is getting postive yards every play. That’s the kind of offense a “Cleveland team” needs. And I usually hate positions like that.

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions

It would also be good to get a young RG.

What do u mean you hate positions like that?

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions

If Hadnot actually had a down year last year and plays more like he used to in Miami, he is only 27.

I would put a young RT higher on the needs list. Foster is the only guy we have who can play RT who is under 30, and he’s 29 and apparently hasn’t lived up to his potential.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions

If either rookie WR can move up the depth chart, they’ll certainly be better blockers than Steptoe, too.

And I have more faith in Davis playing like an NFL back than I did in Wright.

by rufio on Jun 11, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Sounds like Foster is a poor man’s Shaun Rogers. Huge, strong, agile, talented, inconsistent technique and effort while playing for Detroit.

If he actually works hard, he could be a monster. Pretty big “if”. At the price we probably got him, not a bad signing at all.

by rufio on Jun 8, 2009 3:46 PM EDT reply actions

I defineatly agree. And anyway, what do we have to lose by signing him, I dont care about Lerner’s money.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 8, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions

any word on what that price may have been?

by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 8, 2009 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions

ESPN said the terms of the contract were undisclosed. I doubt it was very much. Hopefully it is cap figure friendly, regardless of the actual amount of dollars he will make.

by rufio on Jun 8, 2009 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions

An off-topic note to everyone

I’ve been trying to make some new posts to the front of DBN, but for some reason they will not go through in the SB Nation posting platform. I’m waiting for a response from support; hopefully it can be rectified ASAP.

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Jun 8, 2009 10:56 PM EDT reply actions

Sounds like bad coaching in Detroit contributed to his underachievement. Isn’t Warhop the Browns O-line coach? Maybe he can utilize Foster’s talent better. Foster’s play in Denver looked good to me.

by NM Dawg on Jun 9, 2009 9:40 AM EDT reply actions

Its good that now we have 4 guys competing for the RT spot (even though two of them will also compete for the RG spot)

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 9, 2009 1:06 PM EDT reply actions

We also have legitimate backup LTs for a worst case scenario.

by rufio on Jun 9, 2009 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Which is good because our normal scenario was the worst case scenario in regards to last year.

by tjk_doc on Jun 11, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Look Who was the First to find some of George Foster's Tape

Here. I know I’m awesome

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 11, 2009 11:04 PM EDT reply actions

OK, so if Joe Thomas goes down, we are still screwed.

Foster’s pass blocking technique is pretty terrible.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 3:31 AM EDT up reply actions

maybe he is actually better suited for the right side of the line then

by Roger Dorn on Jun 12, 2009 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions

So basically we need Thomas to never get injured. Ever.

by tjk_doc on Jun 12, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions

Yes.

Man, Foster got tooled by Kampman. Just abused. Foster is quick and huge, though, he just was playing with terrible balance and technique. Mangini sounds like the kind of hardass coach who wouldn’t let that continue.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions

The scary thing is, he was on the right side in that video.

It’s just one game, but he played pretty poorly on several plays, and it wasn’t even anything confusing, just Kampman outplaying him.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Heres hoping it really was just 1 game.

by tjk_doc on Jun 12, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Even if it wasnt, he is still just a backup right now.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 12, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

I know, I know. I just like to pretend sometimes. Close my eyes and get lost in a world where we have no problems at L or R tackle. Then I wake up.

by tjk_doc on Jun 16, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions

I also found some more tape of new Browns. This is the guy’s channel. He has some videos on Hood and Davis.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 12, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions

It seems Hood can cover Coles, which is good for when we play the Bengals.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Yea Hood really shut him down.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 12, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

There was one play where he got behind Hood, and the Cards were lucky Favre couldn’t deliver the ball to Coles in stride. It would have been a TD.

Hood looks like he agile and has the good ball skills that his scouting reports indicated. I don’t think he can hang with the fastest of WRs on vertical routes.

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Video was removed, FYI

by rufio on Jun 12, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Yea. I didnt even get to watch it.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 12, 2009 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Here is a link to that video, and he has many other videos on his chanel of people like Veikune, Carey, and 2010 prospects. I am gonna try to get him to join DBN since he is a Browns fan.

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 12, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions

How good is ND’s line? Specifically, the players who were playing RG and RT in the bowl game last year?

Veikune was hustling that game, and showed great awareness—especially when ND threw screens. I would like to see him get a little faster and stronger in his lower body. He should have some potential in both of those areas, as I know that Hawaii’s strength and conditioning program is not that great.

by rufio on Jun 13, 2009 1:21 AM EDT up reply actions

We have a good RT, Sam Young.

Would DV’s small legs limit his strength though?

by BradyQuinnisBeast on Jun 13, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Just because they are short doesn’t mean they have to be narrow. I’m not a doctor or an expert on that sort of thing, but he has to be able to get at least a little stronger. He can definitely at least play stronger.

by rufio on Jun 14, 2009 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions