DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Who Goes First Jimmie?

Agreed...we also let go of solid-good players and replace them with valuable draft picks whom pan out to be nothing...thus creating more holes and setting us back further...We can't coach a player up, why all of our promising rookies regress strongly

You're right, it certainly is fair to ask especially in light of the fact that the areas we regressed are the 2 areas that had little turnover... O-Line, RB's... our secondary...

Williams has been better than Buster and Buster was a damn good corner.

Armonty has been better than Sheard.

Shelton has been solid in the middle.

Starks has played well.

Kruger, Whitner, Dasby, Haden are guys that are supposed to be our core players and those are the players that frankly are sucking butt on sundays. Run at Kruger, he will dive inside and leave everything open beyond him.

Haden has been horible.

Whitner doesnt want to tackle.

Dansby is taking bad angles and missing lanes.

It is really hard to explain what is happening but the new pieces have been good, the core guys just arent getting it done.

Just like on offense. People complain about no big name receivers but these guys are producing. QB we complain about but it hasnt been a main issue either in any of the games.

It's like - it couldn't be worse by them if it was intentional.

These are all good questions and I hope someone has some answers or suggestions.

I wasn't on the board all that much last offseason. I never heard any of this 'Camp Cupcake' talk until the season was on and started feeling even MORE down about everything. . .

You make an interesting point here.

Why do fans hold the FO to different standards than the players? Let's face it, if one of our players were playing terribly, the fans would want him benched or shipped out of town. Yet when the FO performs poorly, some try to say we should give them more time.

I understand it to a point. Most, including myself say that you never know what you have in a rookie for three years. I'm also not one who is calling for anyone to be fired or removed.

But next year is season three for the rookie class of 2014 we have running this regime. So it will hinge on the moves made between now and then for me to see which way I will see things at that time.

Well, one big reason is that the cost of making that change is a lot higher.

When you decide to change the FO, you're deciding to scrap and change EVERYTHING. It's a reboot; you're hitting the reset button.

So, while you can see and draw a parallel, the situations are not exactly comparable simply due to the degree to which things are impacted. If a RB isn't playing well and you decide to move on from them, it doesn't affect anyone but the RB you're scrapping and the new guy coming in.... beyond that, the other folks just have to learn to play with the new guy, but you aren't throwing out the QB, the WR's, the coaches, the scheme, etc just because you got rid of the RB.

When you decide to change the FO, you're deciding to scrap and change EVERYTHING. It's a reboot; you're hitting the reset button.
=========================================================
It really depends on the move you make. If you hire a GM and you let him pick his coach; then the coach picks his staff then the schemes may change. Yes, most likely that happens.

The team is in place. The new organization makes personnel decisions.

When a team has not had a winning season in years what are you really giving up?

Haslam must decide is the team improving? Is progress being made? What does the core talent look like? What can be expected in the future?

If over the last two years the players that have been added are performing and the team "looks" competitive against good teams. Then despite the record maybe you stay the course.

But when you lose six in a row and seven of eight and the team you beat is starting a quarterback in his second game and that team was 2-14.

It is not like you are breaking up the 72 dolphins.

So after everyone gets fired after this year..

I assume the next people also only get 19 games to prove they are good? Right?

I've said it before, but we need to get over the idea of a "quick fix" like someone is going to come in and the stars align and well suddenly be a great team.. That doesn't work..

Build something.

Allow the coaches to install and offense, OVER MULTIPLE SEASONS, and you'll see a better product just based on that.. And it'll be easier to bring people into it..

So you guys are saying give Farmer another draft.

I honestly don't care who the GM is..

I just don't want to change systems every 1 1/2 season..

I'd keep the coaches in tact, and probably just give Johnny the job after this season, and give him all of TC as the guy to get ready and actually see what he has in an offense he is ready to play in..

That's just me.

There are two reasons why I care who the GM is:

1. Read Django's thread.

2. See if you can find the Kansas City Hard Knocks Series from a few years back. (I just don't see him as being very sharp. I don't think he has "it")

well chud was given one year, pettine 2 year, so the next should be 4 year.........

I agree, but as I posted way earlier in this thread Haslam already said...

Browns owner Jimmy Haslam on 2015: 'We're not going to blow things up'

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/08/browns_owner_jimmy_haslam_on_2.html

Maybe if they wanna get rid of him when the season is over he will be offered a nondisclosure agreement to move on?

I don't see getting rid of Farmer as "blowing things up". Pettine is here. His coaching staff is here. Keep this staff together for at least 2 more years after this year. There's your 3 year evaluation period. Get a GM here who understands what the current NFL is about and how to obtain get players who fit into what the coaches are aiming to do. I don't see how having a disconnect between the GM and the coach is going to help. I'm with Parcells and his "they ought to let you shop for the groceries" thoughts. Maybe not total GM control but certainly a partnership. I don't see a partnership between Farmer and Pettine. I see Farmer and his ego getting in the way of progress and obtaining play making talent that is desperately needed here.

Do you have information that we don't have access to? On the surface at least, there is no apparent disconnect.

These are serious questions, I actually don't know the answers (I also don't feel like doing the research):

How many coaches win eleven games in their first two years and then end up having successful teams?

(I picked eleven games because we won seven last year and I predicted we would win four this year.)

How many coaches survive a major front office change (like a GM change)? It they do survive a GM change, how long after that do they continue coaching the team?

I think it is also troubling that the team has also gotten much older this year, but the production has not increased.

That worries me as well. We wanted to get older. No problem there, except we seem so be playing older, as in slower, not smarter.

Older? Yes. Much older? Ehhhhhhhhhh.

Well the starting players got much older.

I'd give farmer one more draft and see how johnny plays for us next season as the starter. I think that is going to make or break him. We pass on another playmaker though and I might just terminate farmer myself >)

Is this true?

Obviously the returning starters all got a year older.

Going from Skrine to Williams is big, but Williams has been pretty good. Would we consider Starks a replacement for Rubin or Winn? He is definitely older. We also put Shelton in the starting lineup, so that brings the average down a little.

Also, McCown for Hoyer is a big difference, but they're both terrible anyway.

Furthermore, some of our worst performances have been from our younger players (Haden, Crowell, Gilbert, etc.)

It's only been two weeks of badness, so hopefully things will get better (I am not optimistic). The problem probably isn't something like age or a soft camp or anything like that, it's probably just that our players have played poorly because some of them are not good (I know, I'm a genius).

Back to the original point. Yes, we got older. I don't know if that is the reason we looked so poopy (poopie [sp?]). I think we have looked poopie (poopy [sp?]) because or players (both young and old) have played terribly.

Winn was never a starter. Is not just this year but last year to under farmer. Look it up if you want but pretty sure I am right. Or at least it sure seems that way.

There was a thread about it before the draft...

Yeah, that's why I asked if Starks was a replacement for Rubin or Winn.

So who was our third defensive line starter? Rubin, Bryant, and who?

Pro Football Reference has Winn, Kitchen, Taylor, Hughes, and Armonty Bryant starting several games each.

Either way, Shelton made the team young, Starks made the team older.

Adding veterans in free agency has reshaped Browns’ locker room

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-5/Adding-veterans-in-free-agency-has-reshaped-Browns%E2%80%99-locker-room-/1e8c4159-1b2e-4ba1-9e25-83e52bec03ab

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-5/Adding-veterans-in-free-agency-has-reshaped-Browns%E2%80%99-locker-room-/1e8c4159-1b2e-4ba1-9e25-83e52bec03ab

It’s not a secret: The Cleveland Browns got older and wiser this offseason in free agency. That was the plan.
Quarterback Josh McCown (35), wide receivers Dwayne Bowe (30) and Brian Hartline(28), defensive lineman Randy Starks (31) and cornerback Tramon Williams (32) have all played at least seven seasons in the NFL.
In addition to linebacker Karlos Dansby (33), left tackle Joe Thomas (30) and John Greco (30), the Browns now have seven players who are 30 years or older, and with the exception of McCown, all are penciled in as major contributors and among Cleveland’s top performing players.
It’s quite the turnaround in just 14 months.
When general manager Ray Farmer inherited the roster in February 2014, the Browns had only four players who were 30 or older: quarterback Jason Campbell, running back Willis McGahee, linebacker D’Qwell Jackson and kicker Billy Cundiff. The Browns were one of the youngest teams in the league.
As almighty of a leader as Jackson was, Cleveland’s locker room lacking players whom younger guys could model their game. And while the lack of stability at the head coaching position had plenty do with the Browns’ struggles, the losing culture hung in the air because there weren’t enough players who had won in the NFL.
Enter Farmer and coach Mike Pettine, both of whom see football the same way. While the pair of football minds agree a franchise should be built through the draft, being solely a young and athletic team without Pro Bowl-caliber veterans is rare among playoff contenders. And two years ago, the Browns simply didn’t have many.
So Farmer and Pettine targeted difference-makers in the prime of their careers, not just 30-somethings who would be see rotational snaps. Dansby replaced Jackson in the middle of the defense and brought the credibility of helping lead the Arizona Cardinals to a Super Bowl appearance.

The same thing can be said with safety Donte Whitner, who replaced T.J. Ward. Whitner landed in the Pro Bowl and the Browns led the league in opposing quarterback rating (74.1) and finished second in interceptions (21), while younger players marveled at his football acumen and genuine nature in wanting to teach them.
After sitting out the initial blitzkrieg of free agency last month – much to some reporters’ dismay – Cleveland jumped in the fray during wave two, adding Bowe, Williams and Starks.
The Browns have challenged all of these players not only to be productive, but in the mold of Whitner and Dansby, help collectively make their position groups smarter. Bowe and Hartline will be hands-on with Taylor Gabriel. Williams will mentor Justin Gilbert, Pierre Desir and K’Waun Williams about the intricacies of playing corner. Starks will do the same in the entire defense live room, as will McCown with the quarterbacks.
In signing proven veterans, a message to the Dawg Pound and the rest of the NFL was sent: These veteran additions will add reinforcements to the visible changes Dansby and Whitner brought to the locker room in 2014.
The Browns’ new approach in free agency should be considered progress, but there are goals Farmer and Pettine repeatedly say have yet to be met.
The 7-9 record was the best record Cleveland has totaled since 2007, but the record isn’t what Browns fans should be most proud of. It’s the disgust and disappointment the end of the season generated from players and coaches that shows this is a team in “win now” mode. A group full of younger players may have been satisfied with the three-win increase from 2013.
“(It was) disappointing to everybody involved – players, coaching staff, everybody within the organization,” Pettine said in December. “In just getting a brief amount of time to reflect, I thought we did a lot of positive things this year. I think we’ve instilled a culture change. I think we’re well on our way to having that bought into by the vast majority of our players – the ‘Play Like a Brown’ mantra.”
Let’s not forget the core pieces of this roster are still in the early portions of their careers. Cornerback Joe Haden (25), safety Tashaun Gipson (24) and left guard Joel Bitonio(23) are sturdy, Pro Bowl-type building blocks for the future of the Browns.
Getting older on the football field means getting wiser in the classroom in April and May with X’s and O’s, and it means getting mentally tougher in the months of November and December when the stakes are raised.
And if Farmer and Pettine are right, it could ultimately mean playing in the postseason in January.

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-5/Adding-veterans-in-free-agency-has-reshaped-Browns%E2%80%99-locker-room-/1e8c4159-1b2e-4ba1-9e25-83e52bec03ab

huh. for some reason the link wont work. but its the browns website.

Right. I am not arguing that we didn't bring older players in. I am saying that the whole team has played terrible in our losses, not just the older players.

I never said that it was only the older players who were playing bad. I agreed w/bone that this team is not playing very well and I said that we got older.

The point is that when you bring in older players, you are looking for improved performance and winning now. The article even mentions about helping in the classroom and playing in January. Thus far, our older players have not exactly helped improve the culture, unless you wanna say that Bowe has taught the younger guys how to make money w/out actually playing. I bet he and Gilbert have some stimulating conversations.

Jimmie hired Farmer because he thought Miami knew Farmer was a must have GM and he didn't want to loos him, besides, at that time nobody any good wanted the job. Farmer hired Petine because at that time everybody good was either already hired or didn't want the job. So, Jimmie, you are going to have to throw a lot of money at a good football mind in order to bring him to Cleveland to run this show. Big money!

If that person can actually burn a first rounder on someone worth a damn, it's already money WE'LL spent.

What Haslam didn't anticipate was Miami being a bunch of idiots too!

Wasn't Holmgren a "good football mind"?

Holmgren knew the owner was more worried about soccer and Holmgren was looking for a retirement payday. Farmer has proven to be a disaster and Jimmie must stop the carnage he is doing to this team. Farmer hides his short comings behind his arrogance.

As a coach...I think so. As a GM...no way. Jimmy got played on that deal.

While I've heard this as a popular opinion, I believe nothing could be further from the truth. Jr. spent a TON of money bringing in people he thought would bring a winner into town. While he didn't get it right, he also didn't bring a bunch of rookies into town.

An NFL team is a huge investment and asset. Jr. never tried to submarine this team or lacked in caring about winning. He just made some bad hires.

Jr made errors of commission.. Not errors of Omission. He tried, spent money like a drunken sailor to get the people needed. He consulted with some very good and successful people in the NFL to try and get what was needed to make a difference.

He did not succeed. But he didn't succeed because he liked Soccer better than the NFL. That had absolutely nothing to do with it. He failed because he made bad hires but he made those hires with the VERY best of intentions.

So I guess we agree Pit. He failed, but it wasn't from a lack of effort.

Haslam may end up with same way. Time will tell I guess.