Kirk Herbstreit invokes ‘Browns-on-Browns crime’ during Prime Video broadcast

Kirk Herbstreit didn’t say anything wrong by calling out “Browns-on-Browns crime,” but it was still an interesting choice of words.

Herbstreit and Al Michaels were on the call for Thursday night’s matchup between the Pittsburgh Steelers and Cleveland Browns on Prime. During the somewhat touchy broadcast, because of the cloud cast over the game by Deshaun Watson, the most surprising thing Michaels or Herbstreit said may have had nothing to do with the Browns quarterback.

Midway through the first quarter, the Steelers faced third down and 16 yards to go, and while they fell well short of a first down, the Browns were flagged for three penalties, led by a roughing the passer by defensive tackle Maliek Collins on the play.

Kirk Herbstreit calling Cleveland’s penalty issues “Browns on Browns crime” is insane. 😭 pic.twitter.com/qzNNwaFrqv

— The Kevin Harlan Effect (@KevinHarlanEfct) October 2, 2026

“Three on one play!” Herbstreit noted of the penalties. “How symbolic is that for these first four weeks of the season for Todd Monken. He just talked about how you gotta quit having Browns-on-Browns crime.”

During the week, Monken did talk about how the Browns needed to stop beating themselves, but he phrased it differently than Herbstreit, saying, “We’re going to be a damn good football team once Browns stop hurting Browns.”

Herbstreit didn’t say anything incorrect by referring to “Browns-on-Browns crime,” but the phrase undoubtedly caught some people’s attention, just as it did a few years ago when Mark Sanchez made a similar comment while calling a game for Fox. Sanchez’s quip came as two players, wide receiver Dyami Brown and defensive back Tre Brown, faced off against each other on the same play.

Regardless of intent, the comment raises the thought of “Black-on-Black crime,” a controversial phrase that is often perpetuated and politicized with the intention of deflecting from systemic issues. We’re not saying that’s what Herbstreit meant to invoke. He could just as well have said “Steelers-on-Steelers crime,” and no one would have thought anything of it. “Browns-on-Browns crime” was likely said in the same vein. But Monken said it better.