DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum cont...The Browns Front Office...not ready for prime time...

I don't take it as confrontational.

I say it's a "threat to the good old boys club" in the sense, not of ownership, but at the executive and coaching level.

If this were to work, analytics based that is, you won't see guys like Holmgren, as an easy example, hiring guys like Pat Shurmur and his other cronies.

The NFL is a small world as far as hirings go, it's a club that's tough to break into too. But, once you're in, you're typically in. How many times has Rob Ryan undeservedly gotten jobs? Hell, Ray Farmer last year hired old pal and former mentor Bill Kuharic.

There's countless examples of this throughout the NFL, but I won't bore you with them all as I'm sure you get my take by now.

Bottom line, change is a threat to the status quo.

I am not criticizing you for your opinion. Opinions are good and this has been a respectful conversation. I am thankful for that.

I disagree w/you because I think winning is paramount. I think teams will do whatever they can to gain any type of advantage. I think they are smarter than many fans give them credit for. I think they do what works, not because they are traditional thoughts, but because they work.

Changes are made all the time. Do you remember when passing the ball was likened to failure? Woody Hayes said that 3 things can happen when you pass the ball and two of them are bad. Now look.......I am not sure about this, but I think every team in the league passes the ball more than they run it. [Someone look that up and correct me if I am wrong] but even if it isn't EVERY team.......it surely is most teams. The game evolves. Philosophies change. I don't buy into the "old boys network" jargon.

I think that is more in the lines of wishful thinking by Brown's fans that perhaps we finally have an advantage.

Again, this is just my opinion and I could be wrong and you could be right. Just enjoying our conversation w/out all the usual BS.

I'm not certain we are even disagreeing. We seems to agree on 'out with the old and in with the new'. The only difference of opinion seems to be who in the NFL league ranks will have their ass chapped by the new approach (should it be proven successful).

So now that I'm into it...

I've never once said Hue is in charge. I have said he will/is/does play a major role which I believe is true.



I have given my opinion many times on Sashi and the 53. I don't need a link to him saying he's responsible for the 53, I've posted them myself. You talking to me like I never knew that?

Lastly, I'm uncertain why you bring people into a conversation, naming names, stating their opinion for them. I've seen you do this to many others. You went nuts with it on one of the other current threads naming four or five people.

I'm not a psychologist, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night. It looks to me you do that as a means to ridicule people who aren't even currently in the conversation but whose views you disagree with.



Did something you said about that group piss me off? Did I make a comment in that regard?

I want you to think about that for a moment and apply it to many people.......including yourself.

I don't recall anyone but you doing that.

I'm talking about naming people in your posts who are not currently part of the conversation, stating their opinions and then ridiculing them to others.

mac,

in regards to the 60/40 vs. 70/30 split... I'm curious to know if you or any other Dawgs know where the 60/40 comes from? Is that the % that was developed for baseball and basketball? I think understanding where those numbers come from would give us a pretty good insight as to how married he is to that end goal AND if it might actually be something to consider if we can get past the initial bad taste in our mouths.

FWIW, my interpretation of that 60/40 is that it would be reflective of a much more disciplined scouting process. I think the data aspect of things will provide a solid, objective basis that will let us recognize trends that we might be able to take advantage of. But I also think it still recognizes the need for the subjective observations of scouts and some room for the intangibles. For example: how often do we talk about players who's 40 yrd time isn't great, but they are known for good "game day" speed? Or the guys who may not look great in practice for whatever reason, but look great on Sundays?

When I look at the last several drafts, one of the things that sticks out to me is that while we've consistently crapped the bed on our 1st and many 2nd Rd picks.. we haven't done all that bad in the later rounds and with UDFA's. To me it looks like heading in to Draft Day we have a plan (or system)... but for whatever reason our GM's consistently get caught up trying to make a splash and outsmart everyone else... when all they end up doing is outsmarting themselves. Then, after the "important" rounds, it's like they go home and leave it to the underlings, who revert to following the plan.

I could be reaching, but I just thought it might be a possibility.

I cannot believe this was not posted in this thread.

The author talks about this front office making the decision to not resign any of our own free agents..






Cleveland Browns must stop talking about importance of continuity and start showing us they're capable of it: Tom Reed

By Tom Reed, Cleveland.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on April 13, 2016 at 5:24 PM, updated April 13, 2016 at 7:38 PM

BEREA, Ohio – The Browns executive who failed to re-sign any of the team's three most prominent free agents under age 30 spoke on national satellite radio Wednesday and said "our biggest barrier to success is a lack of continuity."

OK, then.

This isn't meant to single out head of football operations Sashi Brown, who either declined or was unable to retain right tackle Mitchell Schwartz, receiver Travis Benjamin or safety Tashaun Gipson. The Browns are undertaking a massive rebuild. We get it. It's why they cut ties with older players such as linebacker Karlos Dansby, safety Donte Whitner and allowed three-time Pro Bowl center Alex Mack to walk.

But not keeping Schwartz and Benjamin, who were coming off their best seasons, and Gipson, one year removed from the Pro Bowl, is the antithesis of continuity.

"I think it's tremendously important," Brown said when asked about continuity during a wide-ranging interview on SiriusXM NFL Radio. "One of the quickest ways to be bad for a long time is to keep making changes in this league.

"Success isn't built overnight. I think the teams we all admire around the league have had that continuity that is a little bit circular. But I absolutely think that Jimmy and Dee (Haslam) understand the importance of continuity."

Browns' decision makers have been uttering similar comments for years only to be shown the door after a season or two. Jimmy Haslam, a former Steelers minority owner, has been espousing the virtues of continuity since his 2012 arrival. He's on his fourth head coach and front office.

It makes you wonder if anyone in Berea knows the actual definition of continuity. You know how people sometimes get words confused. Stalagmite or stalactite? Concave or convex?

Here's Merriam-Webster's simple definition of continuity: "the quality of something that does not stop or change as time passes: a continuous quality."

Synonyms: Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals.

Antonyms: Cleveland Browns.

OK, that last part isn't in the dictionary, but Brown referenced all three AFC North rivals during his interview when asked about their stability:

"We understand our biggest, in the division, our biggest barrier to success is a lack of continuity."

It's the same executive who prior to the start of free agency said: "It's important that we keep our own. It sends the right message to the locker room when you reward guys who do it the right way ... "

It goes beyond not re-signing Schwartz, Benjamin and Gipson, who never caused the franchise grief and epitomized doing it "the right way." This has been going on for years – new regimes not wanting building blocks of predecessors on their roster. It's how homegrown talent like T.J. Ward and Buster Skrine wind up on other teams.

It all gets back to the skewed definition of continuity. Each group thinks it starts on their watch.

"(The Haslams) want us to build a system here, a Browns' way," Brown said. "We will all be pushing toward that – Paul DePodesta, myself and others – are truly going to build a system. ... There is a real commitment from the top down here that's sustainable. We want that to be a competitive advantage of ours in time and I'm looking forward to seeing that grass grow, so to speak."

What is a Browns' way? One of the reasons the franchise has been so poor in the draft is the men running it don't get time to establish a system or a core philosophy.

Look at how the Bengals reversed their fortunes after a dreadful four-win season under Marvin Lewis in 2010. Many expected Mike Brown to make a coaching change. Yahoo reported that Lewis' friends urged him to leave the dysfunctional franchise. Instead, owner and coach learned from previous mistakes and built an organization that's made five straight trips to the playoffs.

In Oakland, it would have been easy for the Raiders to fire general manger Reggie McKenzie after a pair of 4-12 years. The Raiders and Browns had been almost identical franchises for the previous decade – a revolving door of front offices, coaches and quarterbacks. Everything changed in the 2014 draft as McKenzie landed edge rusher Khalil Mack and quarterback Derek Carr – players whom the Browns passed on.

Cleveland, meanwhile, was in the middle of another front-office change. Outgoing executive Joe Banner, who should never have been fired after one year, had commissioned an analytical quarterback study whose findings were essentially: Anybody but Johnny Manziel. We all know how that turned out.

Browns fans hate reliving past failures, but they often serve as a powerful teacher. Is there ever a time to fire a coach or a GM after a short stint? Of course. Sometimes change is beneficial, but when you make a habit of it, when it becomes systematic, then you invite chaos and instability.

That, unfortunately, has been the Browns' way.

The concept of continuity is like saying you want to keep your kids or your country safe. Who isn't in favor of the sentiment? But it's how you go about achieving goals that matters. Are you willing to weather rough patches? Are you willing to pay more money to keep your free agents?

The Haslams need to be patient with DePodesta and Brown as they take a deep dive into analytics. They must realize coach Hue Jackson will absorb some brutal seasons as the organization restocks the roster.

The Browns need to take a quarterback with the No. 2 pick and develop him. They must surround Jared Goff or Carson Wentz with talent acquired through high picks over the next few seasons. Establish a plan and stick to it.

And, before he's either traded or retires, decision makers should talk to left tackle Joe Thomas and let him explain the meaning of continuity and the problems caused by not adhering to it. Nobody in the franchise understands or expresses the damage caused by constant turnover better than No. 73. He's seen it first-hand for nine years. JT, starting over:

When the conversation ends, the Browns should declare a moratorium on talk of continuity. We've heard it all before. Let's see it in action.

link

What is a Browns' way? One of the reasons the franchise has been so poor in the draft is the men running it don't get time to establish a system or a core philosophy.

This has been obviously the biggest criticism of this organization under Haslam. I've been one to echo it. But now looking back and seeing things as whole, a statement like this one I think assumes we've had men that have had a coherent system and philosophy to establish in the first place.

-In light of reports about Norv having rather harsh words for the FO at the end of that season because they weren't providing him what he needed on offense (particularly the RB's IIRC), and Chud basically being blind sided by the TRich trade, that doesn't sound like a group of men trying to establish the same system and philosophy.

-Under Pet... would you REALLY want O'Neill to have stuck around to continue to establish our defensive philosophy??? I don't think so lol

Do we know if we've finally got a coach and FO on the same page? I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Can you highlight or quote the parts you are referring to? I don't seem to find anything about the FO making the decision to no resign any of outr own free agents.

Did we really want to give someone like Ray Farmer time to establish a core at the pace he was on? I don't even want to think the free agents he would've signed and the numbers involved. Nor do I want to think about another Gilbert/Manziel drafting and even Shelton and Irving also, truly, showed no reasons to be first round selections.

We need to get real football people in here, then give them the time. Giving Ray Farmer time would've resulted in a larger uphill battle for the next guy(s) in line to have to overcome. His track record was proven to be large amounts of crap.

Sashi Brown: Lack of continuity has been biggest barrier to success

Posted by Josh Alper on April 14, 2016, 8:06 AM EDT
link

In what’s become a frequent sequence of events, the Browns ended the 2015 season and then made sweeping changes to their front office and coaching staff.

Coaches, executives, systems and players have come and gone frequently since the Browns rejoined the league in 1999 and the only constant has been that the team keeps on losing. Executive vice president of football operations Sashi Brown would like to see a different kind of consistency from the organization.

During an appearance on Sirius XM NFL Radio with Bob Papa and Solomon Wilcots, Brown referred to the stability in Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Cincinnati and the results that have come for those teams as the antithesis to what’s gone on in Cleveland.

“I think it’s tremendously important,” Brown said. “One of the quickest ways to be bad for a long time is to keep making changes in this league. Success isn’t built overnight. I think the teams we all admire around the league have had that continuity that is a little bit circular. But I absolutely think that [owners] Jimmy and Dee [Haslam] understand the importance of continuity. We understand our biggest, in the division, our biggest barrier to success is a lack of continuity.”

Brown also talked about the Haslams wanting to build a system of their own, which are familiar words when a new regime takes over even if it explains why the idea of continuity didn’t lead to holding onto many veterans in free agency. That may not be a bad thing given the on-field results in Cleveland, but it remains to be seen if the Browns will have a reason or the resolve to stay the course.

I must be missing something because I don't see where the FO before hand made a decision to not keep those guys...the writer wrote we "let Mack walk" we did no such thing...we offered Mack a really decent contract and he decided it was time to leave... in light of last season we had to make some changes. I think we can all agree on that point,was way to dysfunctional. I am really interested on what we do in the draft and after before I can make any real judgement on our current FO and company

idk who is the #1 QB? that's subjective. and right now my feelings towards our current FO our in neutral and waiting to see what all they do before I put my thoughts together on them...the only thing I would have changed so far is Schwartz that's it.

Wait, what kind of crazy thinking is that? Seriously Mac. How did the Browns become the bad guy because the Titans Fleeced the Rams?

Is there a QB worth the #1 pick? I don't think so. Maybe the Rams do, But I can't find many folks thinking that.

What's it got to do with the Browns? Man you will take any situation and turn it into a Hate comment about the Browns FO. wow.

it's not our FO's fault the Rams leap frogged us to #1 spot if that's what your implying. I would not go from 2 to 1 just for one of those QB's neither in my opinion is worth even a top 20 pick. but that's just my opinion on it.

Why? Who would you take with the first pick?

What would you have given up to acquire the first pick, too? We need all our draft picks because we have an abundance of holes to fill.

This goes great with my ideal draft.

WIth one of Wentz/Goff gone, we can get our "king's ransom" trading down several spots and drafting Paxton Lynch.

let them have Wentz then...by all accounts if they are targeting a QB it's Goff...still wouldn't grab a QB that high anyway...better to get Ramsey, Jack, that Buckner fella, then grab the best WR if the value is there

Even more! The price for the #2 overall pick just went up!

Yeah because we are so close to the Superbowl right now we can waste a few picks.

J/C

Could it be that the Rams, now moving to California, take Goff - the kid who just finished his college ball in California?

Sashi must be talking about how Haslam should develop continuity by not firing him in a year or two, because he sure doesn't practice what he preaches. He let four of our better players walk in free agency. That is the antithesis of "continuity."




Truth. And the issue is that Jimmy Haslam is still the owner. He talks about continuity, but he panics and blows things up much too early.




More truth.

Goff or Wentz makes no difference to me neither is worth a pick that high...again it's just my opinion on it...sure they moved up to take one or the other no doubts there mac.

Maybe you missed this article that came out yesterday? You seem to be acting very presumptuous, but that's your provocative.

From the article:

Why it will be Jared Goff, not Carson Wentz, going to Browns at No. 2

JASON LA CANFORA
CBS Sports NFL Insider

I believe Jared Goff will be drafted before Carson Wentz, barring a trade of the first-overall pick. And if new Cleveland Browns offensive coordinator Pep Hamilton gets his way, it will be Goff and not Wentz who that team uses with the second overall selection.

Article

Just need to find that taker =)

I agree.

I think the trade is actually good news for the Browns. Trading down is the way to go.

Adam Scheffer Verified account
@AdamSchefter
Today's trade was big win for Cleveland; its leverage for No. 2 pick went way up. Anyone who wants next QB now needs to pay up to Cleveland.

Tweet

The Eagles, 49ers, Broncos, Bills, Jets, Texans, and probably a few more are all calling us now. Not only is there a drop at QB after Goff, but BPA is now available at pick #2.