The Cleveland Browns have been rebuilding since 1999. What makes this plan any different and why would this one actually work?In 2016, the Cleveland Browns embarked on an ambitious rebuilding project, the likes of which has never been attempted in the National Football League. Heading up this project is longtime baseball executive and famed Moneyball protagonist, Paul DePodesta. One year has passed since the start of this project. The question must be asked, how is the rebuild progressing?
The Browns face the daunting task of tearing down and rebuilding an NFL franchise without a template. Nobody has ever tried a rebuild of this magnitude with an NFL team. Thus, Paul DePodesta, now Browns Chief Strategy Officer, seems to have fallen back on his baseball roots for inspiration. The DePodesta-led Browns are rebuilding on the model used by the Chicago Cubs.
In 2011, the Chicago Cubs began a rebuilding process under President of Baseball Operations Theo Epstein. Their goal was to create a sustainable long-term winning organization. To accomplish the task, Epstein and the Cubs had to take a long-term view of organization building. To that end, they formulated a vision and plan for the entire organization. After the plan was formulated, they acted decisively to accomplish the plan.
In the same way, the Browns have formulated a vision for what the Browns organization will be. Last offseason, DePodesta and Executive Vice President of Football Operations Sashi Brown began to act decisively to make that vision a reality. The goal was the same, create a long-term sustainable winning organization.
The Cubs rebuild put them in position to win the 2016 World Series. The Browns are at the beginning of their rebuilding project. So far, the rebuild has left the Browns barren of talent and several top draft choices. The Cubs’ success should provide hope to a Browns fan base that is reeling from a 1-15 season.
How did the Cubs pull it off? What can their success mean for the Browns?
Cleveland Browns: A baseball-style rebuild begins in next phaseThe Cubs’ rebuild followed a basic plan.
First, shed the contracts of high-priced veterans who are past their playing prime. They will not be around when the rebuild is over anyway. So, it would be best to trade these players for future considerations that would contribute to the rebuild.
The advantage of the first step is two-fold. First, a team can trade the players for future draft picks or younger players who can contribute to the rebuild. By getting rid of high payroll and aging veterans, a team can add younger and cheaper talent that may be a part of the team’s future. Second, by shedding large contracts a team will open money on the payroll. That money can be carried over until the team is in position to compete. The freed-up payroll can be used later to add key free agents to be bridge to younger players or a key long-term piece.
The Browns began the tear down phase of their rebuild last offseason. They shed the contracts of players like Donte Whitner, Alex Mack, Mitchell Schwartz, etc. The list goes on. The results were compensatory draft picks in the 2017 NFL draft and freed up salary cap space. Subsequently, the Browns traded a third-round compensatory pick for Jamie Collins. In the end, the Browns turned a veteran player into a younger building block on defense. They also freed up enough cap space to be major players in the free agent market this offseason.
In 2017, expect the Browns to use those extra picks to draft building blocks in the rebuild. But do not expect the Browns to be major players in free agency. They have a lot of work to do acquiring talent as the base of the roster before making a run at veterans to fill in the missing pieces. They will sign younger players who can contribute to the rebuild long-term or veterans to short-term contracts as bridge players to younger talent.
Second, the Cubs built their roster around a certain style of player to promote a specific culture. The point mainly concerns roster construction. The mistake the Cubs sought to avoid was viewing their roster as basically static with holes at certain positions. Instead, the idea was that rosters are fluid. Some players break-out, some regress, some are injured, etc. Viewing the roster as fluid allowed the Cubs to acquire talent regardless of position to build depth.
Browns fans have seen the static model used since 1999 and may not be familiar with the more fluid concept of roster construction. The static model examines the roster and assumes that key players will play at a certain level. Then the “holes” in the roster are identified. A typical goal would be to fill those holes.
The result is a reactionary roster development plan. For example, the Browns may fix all the holes in their roster heading into any particular season. But during that season a key player may get injured or may leave via free agency, which opens new holes in the roster. The general manager is then left plugging holes like plumber. This plans leaves teams perpetually behind when it comes to fixing a roster. Browns fans have seen firsthand how this model fails to produce a winner on a consistent basis.
The more fluid method first identifies the type of team the organization would like to build. It then looks for players who have the characteristics to make that team a reality. In this model, it is important to acquire as many players with the right characteristics as possible regardless of position. This may seem counterintuitive, but if the Browns acquire more talent at one position than necessary, they could trade older players for future assets. The point is to put as many players with the right characteristics on the team to build the organizational culture.
In the 2016 draft, the Browns sought to change their culture by drafting players who play with meanness and attitude. They also targeted players who had overcome some sort of adversity in their lives. During the later rounds, the Browns placed a premium on athletic players whom the coaches could mold into football players. Look for more of the same in this year’s draft.
In 2017, expect the Browns to continue acquiring players with the characteristics necessary to build the organizational culture. Like the Cubs, this may look like drafting players who fit the characteristics regardless of position. The Browns have plenty of holes on the roster, but they may be filled through free agency and undrafted free agents. Look for the Browns to use the draft to put the right players on the roster.
Third, the Cubs used the available salary space to sign key free agents to fill in the remaining holes. The Cubs didn’t hit the free agency market as a major player until there was a threshold of young talent in their minor-league system and major league roster. Only when they were poised for a “leap year” did the Cubs’ front office seek to fill in the roster with key free agents.
The Browns are nowhere near this position right now. They are still in the position of filling their roster with young talent via the draft. But here is where baseball and football takes a steep divergence. Major League Baseball has a minor league developmental system as where the National Football League currently does not.
When the Cubs draft players, they were not expected to contribute for a few years. In the NFL, a player drafted day one or day two is expected to start or make a serious contribution to the team that year. This is both good and bad for rebuilding. It is good because, if one drafts correctly, a rebuild can take significantly less time in the NFL than in MLB. It can be bad because if one does not draft well, it can set the rebuild projects behind for years.
Needless to say, the Browns need to draft well over the next two drafts for the rebuild to be successful quickly.
Fourth, the rebuild requires patience. The Cubs’ rebuild took five years to complete. The roster was overhauled, new talent brought into the minor-league system and the team needed to grow at the major-league level. In the four years it took for the Cubs plan to mature, fans began to lose patience and belief that a turnaround was possible. When asked about the rebuild process and the increasingly impatience fan base, Epstein stated:
"Sometimes when you take on a challenge, you know you’re going to be unpopular for a few years. You know you’re going to wear it for a few years, individually and as an organization. But if you’re tough and you have discipline, you know there’s going to be pay-off for everyone.
That’s what makes it worthwhile. No one would want to come into a situation where it’s all on a silver platter for you, and you just show up and get the accolades that you don’t even deserve. We’re trying to build this thing the right way, from the ground up.
We want to deliver as soon as we can, but we’re not going to stray from our vision."
His words are similar to that of DePodesta when discussing the Browns rebuilding process.
"When I was going to the Browns, I had met with the ownership, Jimmy and Dee Haslam, and they asked me, ‘What do you want out of an owner?’ And I said, ‘Well, I’ll tell you what I don’t want.’
I said, ‘If you ever take your kids to an amusement park at Disneyland or whatever, they beg you to go on the big daddy roller coaster. They beg you. You say, ‘Are you sure?’ They say, ‘Absolutely, I want to go on this thing.’ So you wait in line for 45 minutes, it takes up a good chunk of your day, you finally get to the front of the line, they eyeball it, and they say, ‘Uh, I’m not getting on that thing. Not at all.’
And that’s what happens to a lot of owners. They would say, ‘Hey, we want ‘Moneyball,’ we want this disciplined approach to what we’re doing.’ But then when it comes time to making that hard decision, they say, ‘I don’t want any part of this.’
I said, ‘I need someone who’s going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it’s not always going to be fun. There are going to be parts of the roller coaster that are going to be scary, that are going to be uncomfortable, but hopefully at the end of the ride when we get off, you’re going to want to say, let’s do that again.
But I think that’s how we always got through it, was having that shared vision from the beginning and giving you the conviction to actually go through with it."
Patience seems to be in short supply for the Cleveland Browns. Fans are hungry for a winning team. They have been waiting since 1999 and their patience is understandably thin. Unfortunately, for the current front office to rebuild this team correctly, it may take three to five years. The question is whether the owners Dee and Jimmy Haslam will give them the necessary time.
Sadly, do not expect the Browns to experience a “leap year” in 2017. A “leap year” is when a team goes from losing or mediocre to winning. There is simply not enough talent on the roster to go from 1-15 to Super Bowl contenders. They should be better than in 2016 but expecting a winning record may be too much to ask for. However, I could be wrong. If so, I could not be happier to be wrong.
The Browns have torn down their roster and have begun to rebuild. They are currently at the second stage of the process where the roster is being filled with players who fit the characteristics which the team is looking for. There are more years of roster building to come.
Browns fans may not want to hear this, more patience will be needed before the Browns become a consistent winner. The alternative is the quick fix that has failed to fix anything since 1999. Give this front office time to do this right. Why not? Everything else has failed.
Cleveland Browns baseball-style rebuild
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
