DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Front Office...continued

after an 0-16 showing? Absolutely!

We will be the 2nd team in history to ever do it


Di the Lions keep Matt Millen and co after their record year of suckage? nah

If we go 0-16 our Coachs and Front office should have the same fate Matt Millen had...its unacceptable...period...

You know how long Millen had been in charge in Detroit right?

No they did not. However, it was his eighth year in his position being responsible for the roster as opposed to this FO's first year gutting the roster.

I think the scenarios are slightly different. Will going 0-16 be embarrassing....Yes, it will, but the situations aren't quite the same when you have a exec building a team after eight seasons compared to a team starting all over.

That doesn't mean this FO will be able to turn it around I just think the comparison between the two FOs is a weak one.

Not sure why you want a GM and a President of Player Personnel. That seems like the same position. I'm not even sure if President of Player Personnel is a title that actually exists in the NFL.

Wait! What?

You sent that to mac? Seems like the crying and excuse-making is coming from those who are criticizing mac.

I don't agree w/mac's constant negativity on the FO, but man, the guys who cry all the time about his posts are way harder to tolerate.

But why would you want them to do that?....Just a month ago you bashed the Browns for "firing" people in the scouting department because of new executives brought in. That seems a bit inconsistent from your prior stances and statements on this board. If a 'GM' came in he would do the same thing and bring in people congruent to his thought process.

Not to mention you now want DePodesta to "continue to improve the Browns" with analytics (which seems very anti-mac in earlier posts). Remember... the scouts that were retained, according to you, only were kept because they liked analytics. What if the new GM doesn't like analytics as much? How will DePo keep marching on?

You're either committed to the process or not. There are no half measures. Fine tuning/tweaking sure, but no half measures...

I tend to agree. Sink or swim, this core of FO and head coach need to be kept in place to see this through.

You can argue that the free agents they let get away weren't the FA's that this regime valued. Not sure that holds much water, but hey, you can argue it.

Again, it's ironic to see you write that, but whatever, I'm not going to dwell on it.

To your point about "why does anyone need to be fired" I agree, I don't think anyone should. However, you can't just add a GM right into the middle of the equation next year, allow him to add his scouts, and think current scouts will be retained or the current execs won't be fired/allowed to leave. That's a fantasy world. And why would Jimmy keep paying people for doing the same thing. Why would Jimmy keep Sashi if he gives roster control to a GM? Why would scouts stick around if a GM wants his own group? Why would Berry be retained if he is not longer managing the scouting, draft board, etc?

Andrew Berry is our GM-type without the title you're seeking and he doesn't have final decision on rosters. But even still, some GMs don't have final roster control. I don't know for sure, but I think he and his team have significant power regarding the draft. Like you said analytics is a 'tool' to help them make more informed decisions. Why would we need to add someone? You either like him in his role or you don't....and yes he has experience in scouting as it's been pointed out several times...adding someone only muddies the water, IMO.

I don't think you're thinking about this situation realistically. You can't just simply add people, give them significant responsibility, responsibility currently allocated to certain employees, and think everyone stays. Again, that's a fantasy.

So you are saying that you no longer want Sashi in control of the 53 man roster. Do I have that correct?

j/c:

People have talked about players growing the most between year one and year two. It's possible that the front office could see a similar jump. It's definitely not a foregone conclusion, but the guys were in new roles and it is a possibility that they've learned through their first year on the job.

DePodesta's first year was supposed to be evaluative. Now maybe we'll see "corrections"/adjustments/tweaks which are much easier to implement between seasons.

If they bring in a "football consultant", in a parallel role to Depo, I'd be okay with it. I don't want to bring in new decisionmakers, yet, though.

This season we definitely seemed to deal with quicksand/snowballing. Let's see if everyone can bounce back. We did seem to draft players with resiliency. It's been rough, but they should all get more time.

Just about everything that could go wrong this season did, and we were working with a rather lousy hand to begin with.

This front office is clearly inept, but all we really can do is keep letting them try to figure it out. If we clean house again, we will never get anyone good to come work from Haslam. It is possible these guys will learn from abject failure.

Just a reminder of what the front office expected before the season started. This Article was written back on Sept 7th

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2016/09/07/ken-carman-the-browns-are-not-tanking/

Another good article written back in March of 2016

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...t-me-at-combine

the FO and HC have said it was an additional tool like 1000x..

Yes. Yes they have.

But in the hands of novices, tools can be useless or disastrous.

The people in charge of the analytic aspect are not novices.

DePodesta is a football novice. This is his first stint at applying the analytics to the NFL.

He is also not the only person involved in football analytics (we are not even sure what his job is at all, he seems more like a systems analyst to me).

Ken Kovash and Kevin Meers are both probably more involved with the analytical examination of football than anyone else in the organization and they have been in football (or thinking about football) for years. They also probably have an army of very smart interns/entry level people working for them.

Here is an article written by Kevin Meers, who is the our Director of Research and Strategy, on "How to Value NFL Draft Picks":

https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

Thats not how I see it.... DePodesta will give his analytics analysis and then hand it to someone else. The whole point of analytics, are to create boss data report(s) so that someone else to can make informed decisions.

Oh man. I had no idea we had some original HSAC guys in our FO. Thanks for the info. I trust the FO more now than ever.

That doesn't change the fact that DePodesta is a football novice and if his talents are helping this 0 - 14 team it's in very subtle ways.

He is a football novice, but like I said earlier, how involved is he with the football?

DePodesta's largest area of effectiveness is his ability to analyze systems and see what needs to be improved upon, what needs to stay as is, what needs to go, and what is missing.



http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/01/06/nfl-cleveland-browns-paul-depodesta-jimmy-haslam

Here is an article about DePodesta's work with Scripps Health:

https://www.scripps.org/news_items/5588-moneyball-comes-to-medicine

Doesn't matter if he's new to the football world. It's all statistics, and he's not a novice at that.

We're 0 - 14. Now I could really care less it's statistics, were 0 - 14. Whatever it is, it's failing. We are worse than last year when we sucked. We're worse than sucking. If this is what analytics gets us, scrape the crap. It ain't worth it. I don't care that he can make a spreadsheet, I can make one too and I can lose 14 in a row with no problem, trust me, you don't want me making evaluations on your football decisions. This concept is insane. Get back to football people who can at least win a few games.

We've tied the worst Tampa Bay could produce and we're shooting for the worst Detroit could produce. If this is acceptable to you, you and I are in different worlds.

Was he watching the guys that drafted incorrectly? That's all he did was observe in 2016 because he was hired too close to the draft to put a system in place.

https://factoryofsadness.co/2016/04/22/c...-in-1st-season/

Paul DePodesta will just be an “observer” for the Cleveland Browns in the 2016 NFL Draft, according to one report.

Paul DePodesta holds the title of Chief Strategy Officer. That means he’s the man in charge with crafting the future direction of the Cleveland Browns.

Jimmy Haslam paid the “moneyball” man big money to leave Major League Baseball, to make a big jump in our nation’s most popular sport.

One would think DePodesta would have significant say when the Browns go on the clock in the first round of the 2016 NFL Draft April 28, right.

That perception would be wrong, according to one NFL reporter. Depodesta will reportedly sit on the sidelines, according to ESPN’s Mark Dominik, who heard the Browns’ new executive “will serve only as an observer…in the draft process,” according to a Tweet from NFL.com’s Alex Marvez.

There’s two schools of thought you can take with this news…good…or bad. Let’s make the case for both.

Follow
Alex Marvez ✔ @alexmarvez
.@MarkdominikESPN hears Paul DePodesta will serve only as observer in @Browns draft process this year as part of NFL education @SiriusXMNFL
10:31 PM - 21 Apr 2016
18 18 Retweets 17 17 likes

Paul DePodesta Should NOT Have A Voice In The Draft

It actually makes a ton a sense. He’s obviously an intelligent guy. Let him learn in year one, and that experience will help him grow as an NFL personnel executive.

Plus, vice president Sashi Brown will be employing the analytical angle. Partnered with Hue Jackson, the pair should, in theory, make some decent picks, while DePodesta soaks in the experience.


Paul DePodesta SHOULD Have A Say In The Draft

Absofreakinlutely. I saved this one for last because it’s the right answer here. Jimmy Haslam interviewed DePodesta, and was confident enough to hire him and go all in with analytics. It’d be “so Browns” to have DePodesta, not have him involved.

He’s supposed to be the numbers guy, which means his opinion would likely be objective–a good thing. The idea that he won’t be active on draft day should be frustrating news, because it’s kind of like the Browns are punting on this draft class. This is why DePodesta was hired. Let him do his thing!

OK, Calm Down

Perhaps the info shared on Sirius XM is inaccurate. We won’t be in the war room with the Browns. Who knows which men will have a voice?

But if it’s question, then yes, DePodesta should absolutely have a voice. He’s a valuable part of the organization whether me and the rest of the fan base like it or not.. His contributions shouldn’t be put on hold on the most important personnel day of the season.

If you're saying we hired a guy to sit on his thumbs all year then we deserve what we got. Nothing.

Too many chefs in the kitchen, not enough scapegoats. That's what I get from reading this thread.

Have they? Can you show us about 500 of those times?

You know...........the same people get all up in arms when anyone dares question the FO and it is beyond old. Most of you are the same guys who defended Farmer and trashed anyone who questioned him.

Look at our first pick. What's he done? Look at WRs like Thomas and Shepard who were drafted after him and are playing very well.

I know, I know............they wouldn't do that here and Coleman would be in the Pro Bowl if he played w/those teams.

Tired of all the excuses. Want to see results.

They're both playing with super bowl QB's and didn't break their hands early in the season.

Say what you will, but Coleman has been looking great. Feisty WR who looks great after the catch.

Anyone who is saying Coleman is a bust (or something similar) is either a troll or kidding themselves.

He is a rookie wide receiver coming out of an offense that requires very little of receivers, on a team that has an absolutely dreadful offense.

All rookies require time.

Let's face it though: Coleman's progress was hampered by injury, plus the crazy QB carousel we've had. WRs take time usually.