The 2026 offseason for the Cleveland Browns was full of intrigue, particularly surrounding the situation with defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz. As the Browns narrowed down their head coaching candidates in January, Schwartz seemed like the frontrunner.
His deep NFL coaching experience, familiarity with the Browns’ roster, and popularity among the fans made him a logical choice. Yet, the Browns opted for former Baltimore Ravens offensive coordinator Todd Monken instead.
This decision led to a whirlwind week where the Browns attempted to keep Schwartz as their defensive coordinator. Despite being under contract through 2027, Schwartz had no intention of staying after being overlooked for Monken.
True to the reports, Schwartz resigned on February 6th. With his rights still held by the Browns, Schwartz is set to sit out the 2026 season unless a resolution is reached.
The situation left fans puzzled. With one of the NFL's top defenses at his disposal, why wouldn’t Schwartz leverage his position before potentially moving on in 2027? Clarity emerged at the NFL Owners Meetings in Arizona when owner Jimmy Haslam addressed the media.
During the session, Haslam also commented on star defensive end Myles Garrett, who is amid trade rumors. Garrett is not expected to attend the team’s voluntary workout program starting April 6th. While it's common for veterans to skip these, it raises eyebrows given Garrett’s status as the franchise's cornerstone, especially at the dawn of the Monken era.
When asked about Schwartz’s departure, Haslam’s candidness was revealing. “No, I thought Jim did a really nice job.
He made it all the way to the very final group because he did a really nice job,” Haslam said. “There was a bias to hire an offensive guy.
So there's nothing against Jim. He did a nice job.”
This admission sheds light on Schwartz’s frustration. It turns out the head coaching search was skewed towards offensive-minded candidates, making Schwartz’s involvement feel more like a formality than a genuine opportunity. While transparency is appreciated, Haslam’s public acknowledgment of this bias is surprising and likely not what the PR team would have recommended.
Some fans felt Schwartz should have honored his contract, viewing his departure as quitting on the team. However, if Schwartz sensed the bias during the interviews, his decision to leave becomes understandable.
The situation might have unfolded differently if the Browns had been straightforward from the start. Instead, Schwartz finds himself on the sidelines for 2026, a stark contrast to what could have been another year leading Cleveland’s formidable defense.