John Dorsey's Cleveland Browns making use of analytics after all


By Cynthia Frelund
NFL Network Analytics Expert

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...ytics-after-all

The Cleveland Browns' new general manager, John Dorsey, might be teaching us more about analytics than he planned.

A proud traditionalist and self-avowed "football guy," Dorsey inherited 12 picks in the 2018 NFL Draft -- a parting gift from fired executive VP of football operations Sashi Brown, whose tenure included the Browns' controversial hiring of renowned analytics-minded former baseball executive Paul DePodesta -- when he took the job at the end of last season. Earlier this month, Dorsey relinquished a few of the mid- and late-round picks from the stockpile accumulated under Brown in order to acquire veterans who will presumably be immediate on-field contributors in 2018.

Here's where analytics -- real analytics -- come into play. Contrary to popular opinion, analytics are not about nerds trying to ruin sports. They're not a means for one person (or group) working in a silo to prescribe outcomes for others. In the NFL specifically, analytics are not defined by hoarding draft picks. The best definition of analytics I have found is this: They're about the practice of creating and refining processes to make decisions of the highest possible quality using historical, contextual and situational data.

Context and situation are especially key in the NFL, magnified by the relatively small number of games and strict spending floors and ceilings. On the field, these are things like: how close the game actually was (did the team lose on a missed field goal or by 20 points?); if it was, say, Deshaun Watson's first start or fifth; and -- this is a biggie -- if there were injured or missing players. One off-the-field example: Has this free agent played in a system like ours before, making for a potentially shorter learning curve?

In short, take lots of data, organize it so everyone who makes decisions can meaningfully use it, then work together to create the most overall value. Value can include not over-drafting a player or acquiring additional draft picks, but there is no way to define NFL value without including on-field results. And the search for value is pointless when the coaching staff and front office aren't on the same page.

Using both Hue Jackson's and Dorsey's past league experiences as reference, the number and speed of trades and free-agent acquisitions this offseason suggests they are executing a unified plan. Here's how the Browns' moves show us a cohesive front-office and coaching definition of value, which starts to reveal Cleveland's potential 2018 strategy on the field ...
Snag some proven playmakers in high-need areas

Say what you will about Tyrod Taylor, but there's absolutely no question the Browns have upgraded at the all-important QB1 spot.

With seven years of pro film on Taylor -- including three full starting campaigns -- the quarterback's production and style are far more known quantities than those of the other veteran options in his price range. The Browns gave up a third-round pick and will spend $16 million this season for a signal-caller who posted the NFL's lowest interception rate last year (1.0 percent; he threw just four picks) and logged just 21 total turnovers in the past three years (the fewest in the NFL among quarterbacks with at least six starts in each season). Last season, Browns rookie DeShone Kizer, who started 15 games, threw a league-high 22 interceptions.

Taylor has also averaged 5.6 yards per rush since becoming a starter in 2015, with no fewer than 427 rushing yards in each season over that span. Not to mention, 14 additional scores on the ground. Digging a little deeper shows Taylor ranked in the top 10 among all QBs in rushing average on first and second down during those seasons. This is important, as a team is more likely to call designed quarterback runs on those downs. Defenses have to respect Taylor's ability to extend plays, as he threw eight touchdown passes (against three picks) last season when holding the ball for 2.6 or more seconds. Under the same circumstances, Kizer threw two TD passes and 12 interceptions in 2017.

While Taylor hasn't cracked the top 26 in terms of passing attempts per game in any of the past three years, his results in critical throwing situations are strong positive indicators. Taylor ranked in the top six last season in both completion percentage and passer rating when under pressure. And when he was forced to scramble and make a play on third down, his accompanying completion percentage led the NFL.

"Polarizing" is a word often used to describe Tyrod Taylor, because he's taken the third-most sacks (124) over the past three seasons combined, and -- most importantly -- he is inconsistent in the red zone. Taylor threw half of his four INTs last season in the red zone, while ranking 25th out of 31 qualifying quarterbacks in yards per attempt (2.9) within this crucial area of the field.

Using the quarterback rubric I created by enlisting 22 NFL-level coaches to help define performance clusters (there are only five: elite, above average, average, below average and well below average), Taylor's production in each of the past three years has rated between QB12 and QB16. Not a bad return for the 65th overall pick, which would have been the Browns' sixth selection in next month's draft. They still have five picks in the top 64, with four occurring in the top 35. The value this year's Browns receive from Taylor projects to far exceed a single third-round pick.

The opportunity for Taylor in 2018 was sweetened through the Browns' acquisition of Jarvis Landry from Miami for a pair of Day 3 picks. The 25-year-old wideout caught a whopping 81 percent of his red-zone targets last season, resulting in nine touchdowns (most among WRs in this area). He also had only one red-zone drop.

Let's look over Landry's four years of overall NFL experience, with an additional focus on the past two. Landry has ranked in the top four in yards generated from the slot and in the top five in broken tackles over the past two seasons. Last year, he had 60 receptions that earned first downs, which is more than three times the number any single Browns wide receiver earned. For a team that ranked 31st in time of possession last season, moving the chains is an attribute Cleveland must improve upon this season.

Further, by trading for the franchise-tagged Landry two weeks ago, the Browns avoided uncertainty in the WR free agency market by merely giving up a fourth-round pick in 2018 and a seventh-rounder in 2019. They didn't burn any of their high-value selections. And this is key when it comes to Cleveland's most vital task of this entire offseason ...
Formulate a long-term plan at the game's most important position

Taylor and Landry not only provide the potential to win this year, but also create the space for Cleveland to optimize its draft/free agency strategy. Given that the Browns possess pick Nos. 1, 4, 33 and 35, they are in the unique position of being able to draft an instant-impact player like Penn State running back Saquon Barkley AND a highly touted QB prospect to develop behind Taylor.

Based on the on-field strengths Taylor brings to the team, a logical fit at quarterback -- in terms of someone Hue Jackson could cultivate for maximum upside potential -- could be reigning Heisman Trophy winner Baker Mayfield. The Oklahoma product checks in at 6 feet and 5/8 inches tall (or 6005, as scouts term it) and 215 pounds. That's approximately the same size as Taylor, who is 6 feet and 3/4 inches tall (or 6006) and 215 pounds. Mayfield also averaged 6.9 rushing attempts per game last year (averaging 3.2 yards per attempt) and had the best passer rating under pressure in college football (111.6, according to Pro Football Focus). The strategy Cleveland implements for Taylor has natural extensions to Mayfield -- based on their similarities in stature and certain attributes -- and would give the Browns the time to develop Mayfield from a college-spread QB to an NFL-caliber signal-caller.

The analytically defined value here lies in past data showing that developing a quarterback in a system (and with a playbook) optimized for his best attributes leads to greater NFL success as measured by wins (SEE: Jimmy Garoppolo). Broadly speaking, the data works out like this: In critical areas that are correlated with greater win percentages -- limiting turnovers, producing on third down and in the red zone -- QBs who get to add complexity to the playbook as their experience level increases win more often, while QBs who have to be more productive immediately do not win as often. Yes, the teams that immediately start rookie quarterbacks are often "worse" overall, but fit and play calling impact execution and results (SEE: Dak Prescott, Jared Goff). It also just makes sense.
Don't stop wheeling and dealing

With structure around the quarterback position, the Browns were able to extract value from a QB who didn't fit their plans by trading away Kizer in order to acquire corner Damarious Randall. Additionally, parting ways with nose tackle Danny Shelton (and a 2018 fifth-round pick) for a third-round pick in 2019 shows that the Browns' current strategy is not all about "spending" draft equity, but about a shared definition of current and future value.

Between signing potential impact free agents like RB Carlos Hyde and DE Chris Smith, tendering wide receiver Josh Gordon and creating a plan to soften the blow of 10-time Pro Bowl LT Joe Thomas' retirement (Cleveland signed tackles Chris Hubbard and Donald Stephenson), the Browns are also using their league-leading cap space to round out their roster. An additional consequence of addressing so many positions with free agents is the creation of uncertainty about whom they will be targeting with the first and fourth overall picks. This generates value if other teams believe Cleveland is targeting a player they wish to draft, allowing the Browns to be in a position to trade down and earn even more draft picks.

Given the pick trades we've already seen -- notably, the Jets jumping up to No. 3 and the Bills vaulting to 12 with the potential to move up further -- Cleveland's decisions will shape the entire draft. It's a safe bet we're not done re-shuffling the Round 1 deck.

Win today ... and tomorrow

I would never say Dorsey and Jackson aren't "football guys." That said, I believe they're using the resources amassed by past "analytics" -- in terms of both draft equity and cap space -- in a way that improves their potential to win now and, so far, follows some of the most important data-driven insights that have led to sustained success for teams in this league.

Collaboration between the front office and coaching staff -- with all this capital -- could be a one-year fluke. Or it could be a sign that analytics have indeed changed things in Berea ...

We really need a football guy.

I find it funny people are even trying to make this an issue. There's no doubt every team in the NFL uses analytics. It's a wonderful tool to have in your tool box. That's never really been an issue.

The question becomes how much of a factor does it play? Is it the overriding factor in the decision making process or is it simply an ingredient in the decision making process?

But you all go on with your bad selves. lmao

Analytics or not this guy (John Dorsey) knows football and how to get the right players in the right situation ...

The issue was never analytics per se. It was the overemphasis on analytics by non-football people.

Ideally you want your key football people to have a strong background in football while also being open to analytics. Bellichick would be a good example. He doesn't talk about it much but it's been fairly well-known over the years that the Patriots rely heavily on analytics.

There's a flip side to what we've witnessed play out the last couple years, as can be the case with controversial issues (trading down, going for it more often on 4th downs, etc.)

Super Bowl!

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how any team or individual could possibly have managed to win SuperBowls, year after year, without analytics. Just mind-blowing.

What a bunch of nonsense. Has a place; it is a tool. Not divine oracle or some such.

What a bunch of horse do do ! lol

Here's where it became an issue, and hiring DePodesta did a lot to not only kick it off but to put it on the forefront. It became an issue when so many people, fans and NFL people alike, determined that the Browns would be making all their decisions based on analytics, (this is where DePodesta figures in). It was never going to be that way at all.

In fact, the Browns already had an analytics department beefed up by Joe Banner. Analytics were nothing new to the Browns. The addition of DePodesta put outsiders opinions over the top.

To add to the rhetoric was making Sashi Brown the man with final say on the 53-man roster. So what was perceived was two Harvard educated men, Sashi and DePodesta, were in charge of evaluating player talent. Neither had any experience in that area, but that didn't stop the prevailing opinions of outsiders. Even though DePodesta stayed out of the first draft altogether saying he knew nothing about the process. Still, he was credited with building the roster along with Sashi.

Neither did Sashi have any real experience in player evaluation. Even though he worked for an NFL team for years, player evaluation was never part of his job description. Yet, the outsider opinions were based around these two "Harvard Boys" were controlling all evaluations and since the only tool either one had was analytics then it was surmised that analytics was the driving force behind all decisions.

In contrast, when Dorsey was hired as GM the rhetoric changed. Since Dorsey made his mark as a "football man" the idea of analytics were assumed to be something he played no part in. Again, outsiders opinions based on his perceived background as a football guy. This change in rhetoric is what spawned articles such as the one Vambo posted. So, the Browns and Dorsey do actually use some analytics in their decision-making. Well, of course, all teams do. Just not as much as was said Sashi did and a lot more than was assumed Dorsey did.

The article thinks it's making news but it's not.

j/c:

Analytics are a useful tool. If you are in control of a roster that goes 1 and 31, analytics will tell you that you should be fired.

And it worked.

Fixed!

Keep the blinders on my friend. Hubert is a problem.



I am glad we have Dorsey, so don't try to paint me in to a group that worshiped Sashi and hated Hue.



You perplex me.

How many games would Hue have to win next season for you to change your mind?

I know peen is trying to change the narrative, but this is not a Hue thread. It's a thread that was started to celebrate how great Sashi was. You know, the same Sashi who is still unemployed and who has not been mentioned as a candidate for any job in the NFL.

Maybe you could take your question to the Fire Hue thread?

I have said I think we can win 9.

That isn't the number for Hue......maybe 6-7 low end. It just depends. I do look at situations.....it could even go lower if people are dropping touchdown passes. It might nudge a bit higher

LOL............and you pulled off yet another hijacking of a thread. Kudos!!!!

At this point I thought every thread was a fire Hue thread. 😂


That said I don’t really think Hue was the problem. I don’t think any coach could have done much with the hand he was dealt. I am treating this like a clean slate. Let’s see how he does if they give him a little talent to work with.

John Dorsey would have to be a special kind of stubborn to avoid all the analytics guys in the front office.

I think there is a succinct difference between words such as "avoid," "ignore," or "rely on" in regards to analytics.

Successful franchises like NE and Philly use them, but do not rely on them like Sashi did.

That's why they still have jobs and Sashi does not.

I knew when he didn't out right fire Depodesta he was going to use him.

versatile, I had to go back and reread that article to see if it was the same one. I read that article twice and and at no point did it seem like a “celebration of sashi Brown” . unless I missed something his name was mentioned once almost in passing. the vast majority was discussing the moves Dorsey is making to improve the Browns. I have no idea what your gripe is with that.

Hahaha

I'm not so sure I agree with you ddub. I sort of doubt it was rhetoric. DePodeta had zero football experience and Sashi lacked any sort of resume' that indicated he should be put in charge of an NFL team. When the FO is solidly an analytic group with very little football experience, I don't believe that you can get a balance out of something that isn't balanced.

I didn't see a FO there that had the balance between football experience and analytics we have now.

All teams use "analytics" aka math and logic. If they didn't they'd be incredibly stupid.

Rhetoric, as the definition as I'm using it is... "language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.

The rhetoric was that DePodesta and Sashi were in charge of player evaluation. But that was not true. It became the rhetoric because DePodesta had a history of player evaluation in baseball using analytics and so everyone assumed that he was going to attempt the same tactics in football. He was not.

DePodesta was hired as Chief Strategy Officer. Again, the rhetoric was that he was in charge of talent and roster strategies. He was not. His hiring was for Strategy policy over the entire organization in an attempt to streamline the whole business so that it could run more smoothly and to define responsibilities that would keep everyone in their own lanes.

Since he was so familiar with baseball analytics he helped with applying his experience onto the football realm. But he was not intricate in talent evaluation or roster evaluation per se, at least that was not one of his responsibilities. His responsibility was assisting in the analytic side but not as a decision maker on talent.

In fact, you'll remember, he bowed out on participating in the first draft because he said he didn't know how that worked in football. He was on the sideline watching. But the rhetoric was that he was an integral part of talent evaluation and the draft. He was not.

He was trying to learn how to transfer his baseball knowledge, and what worked there, into the football methods. But he didn't get much time to actually do that seeing as how he had less than two years to work on it.

The one baseball-like method was to gut the roster getting rid of aging, overpaid, ineffective players thus building a large cap space and acquiring extra draft picks. It is nothing new to football to rebuild by starting over. The difference in Cleveland was that rarely had any team gutted the roster to that degree.

The fact that Sashi was fired but DePodesta stayed on is testiment that he had no responsibilities on talent evaluation or the roster. He was kept on to do the job he was hired to do as Chief Strategy Officer of the Browns business model. He also, very likely, still applies his analytic knowledge as an aid to Dorsey the same way he did for Sashi.

It's just that Dorsey and Sashi use/used it in a different manner.

Sashi, having no football player evaluation experience, but still being responsible for the 53 man roster. It was his job to take a consensus of all opinions from football people. I believe when no consensus could be reached Sashi likely made the final decision using the numbers. He had nothing else. And when the numbers didn't settle it to his satisfaction he stood pat, (not drafting a FQ for two years as an example).

The importance of analytics, as described by the rhetoric being discussed league-wide, was overblown to the point that the Browns were said to be taking a 180 degree opposition to the way the football guys had been doing things forever. While analytics were being used, and in the example I gave of Sashi freezing on drafting a FQ, they were used badly at times.

DePodesta is still here even though the rhetoric was held that he was trying to convert football into baseball-like analytics tactics. It never happened. If anything DePodesta should have been the one fired if the rhetoric of him being the driving force behind it were true.

Anyway, this whole conversation hurts my brain, and I don't have much of it left. I tell people I have 3 brain cells left. I use one to eat, one to take a crap and the other one for everything else.

We're just going to have to disagree here. I don't believe you can put a guy like Sashi in charge of being the decision maker and not believe that analytics isn't the overriding determining factor in the decision making process.

Now I will agree that the voices claiming every decision was solely based on analytics were wrong. But I actually don't believe that's what most people were saying. They were seeing direct overwhelming evidence that the people in charge were much more experienced in analytics than they were football. At least that's where I was at.

The scouting department works for the FO. The HC works for the FO. They're not equals but employees. The hierarchy dictated to me who made the final calls and what was the overriding factor was in those decisions.

Just tell everyone that you are going to jump in the lake and then blame your players. You'll be good for another year.

You used too much logic there dub. Their eyes glazed over by the second sentence.

Gotta review the tape...

j/c

And people talk about the usual suspects. lmao

Yep third post...




The article as I read it shows how well the FO was working together then the usual suspects started pointing fingers .

Yes ddub and I were having an actual discussion about our beliefs on how much the former FO used analytics verses how much we think the new one will.

I know it's very disruptive when people have rational discussions without others coming in and trashing it up. And people wonder why we can't have nice things anymore.

minus him getting fleeced by NE on those trades.

For the record, DePodesta stated that the first draft 2016, he was going to sit back and view the process and not get involved in the decision making part. He still of course provided analytical information for the team to use.

I was very happy to see Dorsey keep him here and use him. Yeah I'm sure all teams are using Analytics in some way and form. But Paul D is the best of the best which is always good to go that way.

Also I was happy that although a "FOOTBALL" guy Dorsey was open to utilizing Analytics as a tool for the process.

I'm sure a lot of that is being applied to our FA pickups and their value to football and to the Cap!

Just love the way this is all playing out.

There were a few others posted before mine but you ignored them. Why is that?

I put j/c. Which means a general reply. Not intended to a specific poster. Now is there any way we can get back to discussing the topic rather than sidetrack another thread?

Sure don't side track any more I'm good with it.

Heaven forbid we discuss analytics on an analytics thread.

You see, good back and forth respectful debates used to be very common on this board without people trashing it up. ddub and I actually used to do that quite a bit.

Not so much anymore.

Quit keeping it going then. Let it go if someone posts something you don't deem worthy PASS IT BY, it was posted as a FO doing good things thread but people had to add their agenda to it. But you blame everyone else for trashing the board when you are one of the biggest offenders. Have a wonderful day!

Are you willing to let it go or must you continue this?

I don't think it's a malice thing so much as people not understanding the science.

a couple of random intersections in my thoughts on the subject

As a Dodger fan I shared concern but mainly interest when depodesta was hired - I thought the internal workings and modernization of the Dodger organization was better for his time but his time was incomplete.

based on the value the browns have been receiving on their player moves, the professionalism of the organization (we are still digging out of that hole and our owner doesn't help) --- but based on a basic assessment, our organization is better with depodesta

Depodesta is strategy - not analytics, not player evaluations (his comments on wentz should have stayed in his head).

Organization seems to get stronger annually - I wouldn't be opposed to Depodesta getting any of Jimmy's responsibilities (is our owner our weakest link?)

They seem to be making smart moves without selling the farm I hope it continues and we see the positive results on the field. Interested in seeing how the new O and how the D looks with the new additions may be Peepers closer to the line.

One of these guys was doing calculus, or trying to do so, and read some tea leaves. Hue brought some of his grief on himself by insisting on Kizer despite performance and with marginal improvement. Hue was playing sudoku at best.

And he told me I hijacked the thread. LOL

And I think that neither you nor ddub are correct. Here is why.

From day one Sashi had a plan and that plan you ma ask was what?

A: Tank

To that end he was successful, he aimed low and hit his mark. He was no fool either the steps he took to insure that we tanked were obvious.

I said going into last season I thought he let Haden go to insure we would lose, and guess what we did just that. He wasn't about to take a chance that our defense would be good enough to win a game or games. Everyone in this league would hope to employ Corners with Joe's ability and we let him go. Its impossible IMO not to take that single move and see what it was all about.

He put a QB room together made up of guys who had never won so much as a game. But here IMO is the kicker I think Sashi would have been fine with the Browns winning games last year but not because of the defense.

What does that mean? Well if we won it was going to be because DK played better then expected, anything short of that and we lose.

To sum up I think Sashi was very good at evaluating talent and more importantly he understood how to sabotage a roster enough to insure they lose. He had a plan and it played out just like he wanted it too.

I know that there are likely many who won't agree and thats fine but I am totally convinced I am 100% on this.

Sashi was no fool he worked his plan, as painful as it was to watch I think it worked.

How dare you.


That couldn't have been his ultimate end-all goal. So what do you think his end goal was and how does tanking accomplish that?

He stockpiled picks and cap space and would be the one using them right now instead of Dorsey.

Don't you find it annoying when you have to point out the obvious to a dufus who completely overlooks it? lol

That isn't so obvious to a lot of people.

I do think that tanking was the plan, but I also believe the intent was to build a war chest to attract the best GM and let him to the picking. In 2016, with the state of the team at that point, no GM worth his salt would come near the Browns. Sachi stripped the team down to the studs, added a good (well, decent but young) foundation, and built a collection of cap space and draft picks that would make any GM drool.

I think he went too far in some areas, and that resulted in his being fired. But I think the plan was to hire a true GM in 2018 all along.

I'd love to comment on the plan, but I am so sick of the BS fighting on here. Maybe I'll pm you.

You needed to make a post to tell Dub you’ll pm him? Why not just pm him?

If you were a thinking man, you could figure it out w/out me telling you, just as I can figure out why chose to question my post.

Neither is hard to figure out.

Yet the ridiculousness continues...

Where's the drama in that?

Huh? The plan wasn't to lose. That is ludicrous, but even if it was the plan he'd still be here, wouldn't he?

The things Sashi did the past two seasons will forever be underappreciated and completely misunderstood.

Sashi had his faults, but he did a lot more good than bad for this franchise.

he turned us into a expansion team in 1 year... whats to misunderstand?

What Sashi did was TORTURE ... it was PURE HELL ... no doubt it really STUNK ....

But he did not turn us into an expansion team ... expansion teams dont have the talent on them we did ast year ... u cant deny ... Ogbah, Kirksey, Collins, Shelton, MG, Zietler, Trettier, Bitino, Joe and Gordon and some with potential .. they dont have the 1st and 4th picks and 5 in the first 64 ... they dont have the ability to trade for Jarvis Landry or Tyrod Taylor or make many of the other moves we made ....

Sashi’s big mistake was no QB .. if we made the TT trade last year I think we would have won 4 - 6 games last year .... then Sashi would still be here ... and THANK GOD HES NOT ...

As bad as it was ... ITS OVER NOW .... can we please move on and ENJOY TODAY .....

Thanks and GOOD BYE SASHI ......

The goal wasn't to lose, it wasn't to have the #1 overall pick. But there are always going to be those who want to believe that narrative.

when you get rid of all but 4 starters and 4 backup players in 1 year... fill the roster with draft and undrafted players... pretty much has the makeup of a expansion team no matter how you suger coat it.

It wasn't tanking per say. Nobody tanks, nobody wants to go 1-31, that was never the "PLAN".

What his plan was an I totally agreed with it was to enact a TOTAL REBUILD something none of the new regimes committed to. Only sign young FAs as a rule unless there is a need (unfortunately that was WR). But we got rid of a lot of average vets.

He also wanted to stockpile and if you note our first season 2016 we had a record 19 rookies on our roster.

The BUILD UP was to start peaking year 3. We build an incredible amount of Cap Room. We stockpiled on draft picks valuable ones in 2017 and 2018. 3 first round picks a 2nd and the first pick of the 3rd round in Larry.

This year we got #1, 4, 33, 35 and 64.

We entered the FA period with over 110 mil.

This is year 3. Yeah I probably trust Dorsey a tad more than Sashi at this part of our build up. He even is still incorporating Analytics into the process.

Sashi did a good job in tearing down this team like nobody did before and stock piling draft picks. But never was the object to tank. It just never was to be competitive as we stripped ourselves to the bone.

jmho

Agreed. The record was simply an unfortunate and unforseen by-product of The Plan...

I disagree ... the record was directly correlated to the qb room ...

If we have a qb we win 4 - 6 games ... Sashi did not understand the value of veterans .... that was clear .... but NO QB is why we went winless and its what cost him his job ...

I always said it was a good plan that the execution was the key .... well if sashi would have executed getting a QB here last year he’d still be here ... and i don’t think any of us that have a clue want that .... ...

I have hard time believing anyone at this juncture wouldn't see it as tanking.

As odd as it is we are now witnessing an influx of veterans and its a big part of the reason many of us believe the push is now on to win.

I am not faulting Sashi for what he did, I said it from the beginning while many of you denied it even bet with me in some cases and it turned out I wasn't just right but dead right.

We had a core of good solid players prior to the dismantling, and now over the course of the past few weeks we are balancing out the youth with vets, but here IMO is the kicker while some of the vets we are bringing in are noticeably worse then the young talent we kicked to the curb a few years back. Yet we see hope in balance, or I do anyway! WHY?

There isn't a coach in the NFL that doesn't place value on vet leadership and knowing how to win at this level. We cut all of that out. So if the plan as you say wasn't to tank it sure as hell looks like it.

Any objective individual that is capable of separating themselves from being a fan for a moment would IMO easily reach the same conclusion. In fact it was widely written about heading into last season by the national press.

SMH can't believe anyone would deny something so obvious.

Sure Vambo. You can have the last word. I mean that's what it's all about for you, right?

I didn't buy into tanking as the plan. But I was questioning what Bad to the Bone was getting at when he claimed that was the plan. I asked, why tank?, and Dep suggested that it was to stockpile picks and money to make a big push this season. That should have been obvious to me that that was the goal in tanking, but it wasn't.

I don't think anyone tanks, at least not to the point of an 0-16 season and surely not the plan at the beginning of the season. At the end of the season, having won only a few games and already slotted to the #1 draft spot, maybe a team doesn't want to lose that slot so they play the youngsters to "see what they got". But that would be at the end of the season with a result already in sight, like the Colts and their "Suck for Luck" campaign.

I admit that having a QB room with no NFL wins was certainly not conductive to winning. There should have been a vet/bridge to start the season, at least that. He left the QB room with the blind leading the blind. That was a big mistake. But it makes sense if he was as afraid to decide on a vet the same as he was afraid on a draft pick QB.

You see, I surmise that since picking a QB was such a huge, HUGE, HUGE decision that that's where he folded in fear of making a mistake.

I think his biggest mistake was not taking a QB period. What would make this offseason so special? It's not like we weren't at the top of the draft before like we are now. We had pick #2 and traded out, afraid to take Wentz, (who I didn't want, but do now... lol).

And then we had pick #1 and #12 but did nothing toward a QB. I totally wanted Garrett and we got him. But we still had pick #12 and could have moved up or had taken Watson, (whom I didn't want, and still don't). But still.

I think Sashi was afraid to pull the trigger on a QB. Regardless of whatever Hue's input may or may not have been, it was Sashi's job to get a QB for us and he failed terribly. I think he didn't know how to evaluate one and so was also unsure what to think of any of the input he got from others. Had he been otherwise he would have made a pick instead of always pushing the decision off to the next year... and then the next.

Who knows what he would have done this year if given the chance. His time for avoiding the decision was over.

I think Haslem was hesitant to wait and see how Sashi would react this time, (Pull a name out of a hat? Ask a homeless guy?). So he went and got a GM with experience to make the QB pick. Dorsey might not get it right either, but he dang sure won't hesitate to pull the trigger.

I just realized this should have been in the "Thanks Sashi" thread but I'm going to hit submit anyw

I think he had a QB in mind and that QB was in this QB heavy draft. Getting a QB without much of a team around him might have got us a few more wins last year but wasn't going to help us long term. (especially if we didn't like that QB long term)

Hue not tripping over a few wins didn't help the matter and when Hue decided to recruit his daughter and o-line coach into his "him or me" stance to force Jimmy's hand, Jimmy had to make a choice.

Hue earned being fired himself, but firing another coach would mean starting over yet again with a new coaches scheme. I don't think Jimmy wanted to make any changes at all this season, but when forced, he decided to plug a different GM into the existing front office and neuter the head coach a bit that cost him a few wins last year.

The QB situation may have been a deciding factor for the fans, but I am pretty certain that Jimmy was both informed and in agreement with the thought process used to form our QB group last year. I don't think he fired Sashi for the QB, I think he fired Sashi because of the ultimatum.

People never speak for themselves. They must be recruited to have an opinion.

That's your take, but you don't know if it's true. My take is that both were fed up w/Sashi's constant BS and spoke up out of frustration.

The difference between us is that I will say my take is an opinion while you state yours as a fact.

Is that a thread hijacK? LOL

I thought real football guys would never be caught dead with that hussy Anna Lytics.

No we didn't. I really don't understand this take. A lot of the guys on that 2015 team aren't even in the NFL any more.

I don't think Browns fans realize how bad things were. I know I didn't. I can think of a couple players we "let get away" but nothing that resembles a "core of good solid players."

We were bad. Very bad. I don't agree that your take was correct or even "dead right" as you claim.

There is a lot of made up b.s. I think if you read the articles, listen to what the organization was saying, it's easy to see what they were trying to do. And it wasn't tanking.

I disagree ... the record was directly correlated to the qb room

1-31 was never the plan...I cannot repeat it often enough I guess. You can draw up all the correlations you want.

Pure and simple 1-31 gets you FIRED...I'm sure Sashi's plan was to get fired. I'm sure Hue's plan was to get fired.

Nobody was trying to go as low to the bottom as 1-31.

Its a miracle the how kit and kaboodle wasn't blown up!

Smh...Yep, any GM and HC would make a plan to be 1-31. The plan was to do a complete rebuild and know that the Won Loss record was not going to be a good one. But nobody NOBODY thought it would be as bad as 1-31. To say that was a plan is just wrong.

Why u blasting me with this? ... I NEVER SAID that was the plan ... i said the FAULT with what sashi did was NOT GETTING A QB ... if he got a QB we would have won 4 - 6 games last year ... and Sashi is still here ... how do U CORRELATE that to me saying the plan was to tank ... THATS BS ....

WTF ... your as bad as your buddy Vers ... either that or u need to learn how to type in ..... j/c ....

PLEASE RESPOND to the folks that your RESPONSE IS APPROPRIATTE FOR ... thats clearly NOT ME FOR THIS POST ....

He even put a like on Deputy's highjack! lmao

I guess it's really not about high jacking the thread at all. It's all dependent on who you are and what you say when it gets high jacked.

I don't think losing was the plan, I think losing was a the foreseeable byproduct of the plan. It might be a poor analogy, but the soldier who jumps on the grenade to save his buddies didn't plan to die, it was the foreseeable byproduct of saving his buddies.

The Browns plan was to strip down the team, rebuild a solid foundation while building salary cap and draft capital. They did that knowing there would be a lot of losing, and they accepted that as a consequence. It wasn't the goal.

(edit - sorry, I was typing while ya'll were trying to get the thread back on track. My bad.)

How am I supposed to have any confidence in a man that can't even dress himself? This guy looks like he just lost 100lbs.

Ah, his dress uniform.

Ah yes, but Bill didn't even show up for this photo!

I actually like Belichick's attire there. It says to me: 'I'm going to wear what's comfortable and I don't give a ... what you think.' I can respect that.

Dorsey just needs to buy a brand of pants that's a little less baggy. Maybe go for the 32 inseam instead of the 34.. I've done worse.

I was just listening to Cleveland Browns Daily while walking my dog and The Miz was just saying how Cleveland had some great tailors.


Someone's gotta help John Dorsey out here

Here’s a question for this board, how do you think the analytics will factor into the decision at the QB position in the draft? Which QB does analytics favor? And in the end will Dorsey pick the best QB from an analytics point of view or go with the guy he likes the best, if it’s s different guy?

I don't know if anyone can answer these questions until following the draft.

Mayfield is an analytics dream. If we pick Mayfield, then I say yes, he picks using analytics. I don't think we pick Mayfield.

Everything I've heard, when it comes to analytics, says Baker Mayfield.

There's some MMQB Article about that.

Mayfield is an Analytics Superstar

I may be wrong. We may not be considering analytics much... This had me concerned a bit. It sounds like we are down to Darnold and Allen. These two are a big family feud "errr" red X for analytics.

I'll be ok with Darnold. Allen, however, to me says this is just an old school guy going with an eye test loving the guy who can throw a mile. Darnold may pan out and we'll be fine with him, but Allen? If we take Allen over Mayfield we are going to regret it for a long long time...

I know. I'm terrified we are going to screw this up.

But I don't get it. I don't understand how Dorsey could view Allen as a pick at 4, let alone 1.

Not a clue

It seems like he is somewhat similar to Pat Mahomes, who Dorsey traded up for last year in KC.

Did you watch Patrick Mahomes at Texas Tech?

He was actually a good player. He won the Sammy Baugh trophy in 2016. I'm sure he had numbers far better than Josh Allen.

41 TDs to 10 INTs. Over 60% completion rating in his final two seasons. He holds two NCAA Records for most passing yards in a game.

I mean, I know he's Big Twelve offense verses Big Twelve Defenses, but I'm telling you, if you watch the tape on both, Mahommes was actually a good player. They're nothing alike, except both have strong arms


EDIT: And trade up or not, Mahomes went 10 not 1

Mahomes had a narrow base, and could be really bad on some passes. He could trust his arm too much. His mechanics could get wildly erratic.

Here is what was written in his NFL.com draft profile:


SOURCES TELL US "He's got a great arm, big balls and he's mobile. He is going to drive his head coach crazy for the first couple of years and there is no getting around that. If it clicks for him and he's coachable, I think he could become a special quarterback." - NFC executive

NFL COMPARISON Jay Cutler

BOTTOM LINE Mahomes is a big, confident quarterback who brings a variety of physical tools to the party, but he's developed some bad habits and doesn't have a very repeatable process as a passer. Mahomes' ability to improvise and extend plays can lead to big plays for his offense, but he will have to prove he can operate with better anticipation and be willing to take what the defense gives him in order to win from the pocket. Mahomes will be a work in progress, but he's a high ceiling, low floor prospect.

That's fine. But I watched a couple of games of his. Mahomes was pretty successful. Allen wasn't that good

Allen won a lot more games than Mahomes. He is bigger, stronger and more athletic. What impressed Dorsey with regard to Mahomes besides his arm was his football intellect. Maybe Allen is similar in that regard.

Mahomes had significantly better skill players than Allen and played in that wonderful Air Raid Offense. So stat comparison is ridiculous.

sure you can compare.

such as Mahomes finished his last year in college with 65.7% completion.

wanna know what allen's was?

Mahomes was selected #10 overall in a lesser talented QB draft. He was the second QB drafted. The circumstances around him being drafted were totally different.

I’m not as scared as most are with Allen, I am concerned but not to the extent as most are. I’ll trust Dorsey if he picks him. The way I’ve been looking at it is this, I’ve done more film watching of Allen then anybody I’ve ever looked at, and while he did have inaccurate throws it wasn’t nearly as many as I thought it would be, I didn’t see any more wildly missed throws then any of the other QBs. Also he had nothing at Wyoming this year, and I mean nothing, the Wyoming pro day should have been called the Josh Allen pro day. He looked at times out there on the field that he felt he had to carry the team. A lot of the windows he was throwing in on tape that I’ve watched are miniscual compared to other prospects, his guys didn’t separate at all, now was that cause Allen was late with his throws are just severe lack of ability for them to do so? With such small windows to throw at there’s gonna be some dip in comp. percentage, I definitely didn’t see very many easy, wide open throws, but again his own doing or lack of talent? That I’m not 100% on, ergo the concern. Ive tried imagining it if Allen was on Oklahoma’s team, USC’s or even UCLAs team would his stats have been better? Would he have looked more accurate? I’ve also imagined the other guys, Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield, etc., on Wyoming and how they would have fared, cause those guys had way more talent around them then Allen did. But that’s just my own opinion.

I would bet if Allen played in that same offense as Mahommes, his completion % would have been over 60% as well. I bet if Mahommes played with Wyoming and its offense, his completion % would have been less.

Well... I posted a link a while back where Brian Billick said he essentially lost his job because they assumed Kyle Boller would be better with better talent. They were wrong. Buyer beware.

I wasn't at first because of his apparent improvement as a result of these coaching camps he attended.

But when I look at his film...sorry just a ridiculous pick for Overall #1. I mean maybe if there were no other prospects...but there are and some good ones. Its Darnold, Rosen and Mayfield then a chasm from them and the rest.

jmho

Agreed