DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Front office ....

Lol. I'm surprised he didn't HIGHLIGHT the sentence about Pryor. Cause the entire reasoning behind that lil tid bit was to slam us for letting a 1 year converted QB walk. And he KNOWS it.

See it as you wish. I see it for what it is.

Thanks for responding. Like I told you in the PM, I am only going to address some of the points. I think we might be misinterpreting each other due to the length of the posts.




Yes, it was one year, but they only won 1 game and were pretty lucky to do so. I also disagree w/you about us winning 6 games this year. Who is our QB, bro? Who are the big plays going to come from on O? Who is our FS? Do you like our secondary? Do you not think our lack of experience is going to be a factor?

I'm thinking 3 or 4. I think the odds of us winning two are just as good as 5.

Anyway you slice it, these guys are going to have experienced a ton of losing over two years. That is not good, bro. And I think I understand more about the psyche of a football team than you do, considering our backgrounds.

I've said this before, but you can be a great motivational coach and get guys to buy in. They will work harder. Sacrifice more. Study more. Train more. But bro, you gotta have some success or the message gets old. You can't ask guys to work harder than other teams and keep losing. It doesn't work!

Now, I hate saying this because you probably know I am the biggest Joe T fan on this board. I'm sure you remember all our discussions before that particular draft. But bro.........Joe is a true pro, but I think he has accepted losing. I don't think it rips him apart. I think he is cool w/trying his best and dealing w/whatever happens. He is a well-adjusted, intelligent man. I am not insulting him. However, I don't think the desire to win burns in his belly like some other guys.




I think you are misinterpreting what I am saying. And I was ready to drive to Lexington and slap you for the "simply not true" comment. LOL

I am saying that NONE of us know the individual details of what transpired w/each player and the team. I am NOT attempting to guess.

They are gone. Period.

Examining why on an individual basis is a waste of time and only used by those who either want to slam the FO or make excuses for them. They are not here, bro!!!

You say we can't blame the new guys, but how the hell do you know why they left? Did you ever stop and think that perhaps some of these guys were sick and tired of the constant blow-ups and changing of regimes? Did you ever think that perhaps they didn't trust Haslam's resolve and that they thought that the team would never win under such circumstances?

I am NOT saying that is what they thought. What I am saying is that we don't know. So, don't give me no crap about "simply not true." I don't know and you don't know, either.

One more for now. You mentioned Robertson. I am not making a big deal of this loss, but a couple of posters said that Kirksey took his place and one even said something about getting rid of him because he was part of the losing culture. Uhmmmmm......let's just say that I ain't buying those comments. I think Kirksey and Robertson would have been better than Kirksey and Davis. That's open for debate, but that's how I see it.

I'll be back for more later. I just think addressing fewer points makes it easier and maybe we won't misinterpret each other as much.

Love talking football w/you, bro.

Thanks. I actually put out a lot of good stuff. LOL I just gotta ignore some folks. And believe me, I keep being told that by some. LOL





Hmmmm..........maybe I wasn't clear. Diam misunderstood me, too.

I am not saying they are trying to establish a culture of losing. I am saying they went 1 and 15 and that is losing on a grand scale. It's all the kids have ever known.

Combine that w/the fact that the vets we kept have also experienced extensive losing in their careers and you have something that is very difficult to overcome.

I know people don't like to hear that. They want everything to be rosy and peachy. I get that. I really do.

However, what happens when things go south after people are so "positive?" You don't have to answer. Just think about how things have played out each year.

It's been happening since we came back, DD.

I'll just point to the last couple of examples. Think of Farmer. I questioned his moves over and over and over again. I got reamed for it. Now, what do people have to say about Farmer?

Last year at this time, I was not very happy about the Horton hire. People ripped me. Now, look at what they say about Horton. LOL..........it's unreal.

Here is the thing, my man. People need to have hope. W/out hope, you are lost. They convince themselves that this is the right mix and knock anyone who wants to look at things realistically. Then, the season starts and the losses mount. All those warm, fuzzy feelings turn into indigestion and inner turmoil. So, they need to blame someone and the rants escalate that we need to fire this guy. Our stupid owners always oblige. We fire someone every freaking year.

And that is our biggest problem. New regimes mean new schemes w/new players. Our roster is in a constant upheaval.

I think we are going to lose a lot of games next year. And I am absolutely okay w/that. I do not expect us to win. We are young. We don't have a qb. Our secondary sucks. We don't have good WRs. We are so inexperienced and all we know is losing.

My point is that we have to stick w/these guys. Please, please don't start calling for guys to be fired.

Last year, I predicted Horton would be the sacrificial lamb. And it was way before the season started. That turned out to be true.

This year, I think people are going to go after Hue. And getting rid of Hue would be a huge mistake!!!

Anyway.........I got a little off track...LOL, sorry. I just wanted to say I liked your post. You disagreed w/me but didn't bring all the usual BS w/it. You were respectful and logical. And it isn't about us agreeing or not. It's about having intelligent conversations. Nice job.

vers i agree with alot of what you said , but you forgot
.
.
.
.
.

ABOUT KIRKSEY AND CROWELL

The Browns believe these two players are ready to make a significant step forward.

Christian Kirksey became a starting linebacker in 2016 and impressed with his energy and toughness. The Browns love his attitude.

While Kirksey declined to discuss his contract situation, I hear the Browns are making progress in signing him to an extension. It's not done. But Kirksey does want to stay. He has one more year on his 2014 rookie contract.

The Browns starting linebackers in the 4-3 defense look like Jamie Collins and Kirksey at the outside linebackers, Demario Davis as the middle linebacker. At least, that's how Gregg Williams opened his defense at the OTA.

Isaiah Crowell signed his second-round tender contract for $2.7 million and reported to OTA. His contract talks are stalled, but the Browns plan to revisit that situation at some point.

Crowell is an unrestricted free agent at the end of the season. He rushed for 952 yards -- a healthy 4.8 average. He also caught 40 passes.

http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2017/05/cleveland_browns_have_terry_ta_120.html

Vers., I noticed you bringing this up quite a bit:
Anyway you slice it, these guys are going to have experienced a ton of losing over two years. That is not good, bro. And I think I understand more about the psyche of a football team than you do, considering our backgrounds.


So, what's the answer? We just had a major tear down and are starting to rebuild. You have to crawl before you can walk.
Maybe you think they should bring in alot of vets and have to cut some draft picks in order to keep it at the 53? I don't know. They did sign a few Vets to go along with our young ones and rookies. You say all this losing aint good, then what shall we do? Start over? That doesn't make sense.
Please explain

Conversely, it'll make these guys even more HUNGRY.

Those that aren't weak minded, anyway.

My main concern with your projection is that last year was a terrible WR class yet the FO focused on the position and drafted multiple players at the position. That doesn't give me much hope those guys will develop.

I've seen this done before and we've seen WR's rated much higher than everyone but Coleman in and out of the door pretty fast. I certainly hope you're right but I certainly don't have much faith in it. I try to learn from history.

I hope Jordan Payton is starting a PED ring in the WR meetings. Only chance we have of developing that group sans Corey Coleman.

Gotcha, thanks for the reply and thanks for the clarification.

The highlighted part... 1 and 15 is all the kids have ever known.. in the NFL. The mental and emotional make up of our 2016 Draft I don't think is by accident or coincidence. I don't think you would either. I don't believe that our FO expected to be as bad as 1-15, but they knew it would be a rough year and I believe the guys we got were the right ones to bolster against the beginning of that losing culture.

And you are right, the vets have known a lot of losing. I think that point just underscores ddbuia's post about the need to tear it down to the studs.

I always wondered if those years in Vandy ruined Jay Cutler.

11 wins in 4 years. Gets to you.

It's him. Vandy had nothing to do with it.

Oh ok. Thanks for the info.

No need to continue further discuss my hypothetical statement anymore than that...

I liked your post, ddub. It was logical and well thought out. You said a few things that I would like to question, not so much to argue, but to get us to think more deeply.



That sounds good, but I think the problem w/the approach that the Browns have had for years was not the "old school approach," but rather the lack of continuity.

Both of our owners have blown things up numerous times. We have never given regimes a fair opportunity to see the "approach" through.

We fire guys every year, including this current off-season. How many coaches were fired? 5? We blow up the roster and purge it of vets and some talent, and then blame the coaches? That sounds more like the same old approach to me.




Again, this sounds good and I'm sure posters loved it. However, we let younger players walk and we kept other guys. In my mind, Joe Haden should have been first to go if what you are saying is true.

I do think we tore things down, but I don't know if it is such a rosy picture.



Bro, we were 1 and 15 last year. How are those 14 guys not a part of "woe is me, losing culture?"




I don't know about all of that. I do believe that Hue went to the owners and talked to them and some changes were made. I don't think we abandoned Moneyball, but I do think that the football people in the organization, namely Hue, were going to have more say in building the roster.

I believe that they saw some positives and some negatives with "the plan." I think "the plan" has been tweaked. That is why we spent more on FA this year and why we even moved up in the draft a couple of times.

Anyway, I really enjoyed reading your post and was just offering some food for thought.

Vers., I guess you didn't read my post. Your starting to sound like Mac, complain about the tear down and how it's gonna make us losers in the long term and then you go on to say this:
I do believe that Hue went to the owners and talked to them and some changes were made. I don't think we abandoned Moneyball, but I do think that the football people in the organization, namely Hue, were going to have more say in building the roster.

Why do you think it was Hue? How about, since it was their first year together, they looked back and decided as a group what needed to be tweeked? Why all the drama? I just think there are working together and will continue to do so.

Now back to tearing it down, You say they keep firing everyone and thats not good(which I agree with you). Now were doing a complete tear down and you say thats bad and were teaching the young kids bad habits of losing....Whats to do??

I seem to have a different impression of what "Moneyball" is than most people. Not just posters here but also TV analysts and radio sports talk show hosts. Everyone seems to think "Moneyball" is being cheap. I think it is about trying to find the best way to use the money you have. What is going to make my team better? Paying great player "A" $20 million or paying very good play "B" and "C" $10 million each.

I don't think Hue's influence on the roster via FA, the draft, extending players, etc. has changed one way or the other. How about the Mike Silver's piece that said Hue removed himself from the draft room and selection discussion to go work with his players, like a coach should do. That doesn't really tell me things have changed in his decision making power. I think Sashi has firm control over everything and I think the plan has remained on track from Day One. Sashi has remained consistent that Hue's influence in finding the QB will be paramount. Hue was able to bring in his QB of choice last year. That's pretty big roster influence early on in his tenure as HC, no? Hue is also able to offer his opinion on players,, which should also be welcomed by the scouting department.

It's funny. People (not you, bleed) that despised what was going on last year are starting to like what they see and understand the plan, thus try to alter the reasoning for that shift to justify to themselves why they are changing their minds and why the team has hope. It all comes down to who you like more with some posters-- the front office or the coach. It's ridiculous. How about this concept-- they've been working well together for the past two years and everyone knows their role and has stayed in their lane. I think that makes much more sense than some unfounded, manufactured power shift.

I think this is the place to post this article. It fits well with Jester's comment above.

http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2017/5/28/1...morning-5-28-17

Bingo.

Yeah it doesn't always have to come down to a winner and a loser. It's not one side pitted against the other

Not to argue with your opinion on this, because I know you feel strongly about the firings and the lack of continuity, and I won't say that isn't a valid theory, because it is, once you have the right people in play.

I would postulate, however, that most if not all of the firings were justified, as most if not all of the FO's and coaching personnel fired were either in over their heads, were making consistently poor decisions (primarily drafting horrendously), were not the right people for their jobs, were embroiled in power struggles, were simply feeding their bank accounts, or were outright incompetent. It's remarkable (to me) how consistently incompetent people were put in power positions (hired by ownership), and how the "grasping at straws" mentality in those hirings kept perpetuating a continual and downward spiral of poor management and coaching.

JMHO

My reading of the firing of Horton wasn't that he was a scapegoat, but that his approach (or attitude, or coaching style) didn't fit with Hue's. I see it more of a tweaking.

I think that Horton was one of Hue's top guys, when he got the Browns top job. However, he wasn't THE top guy,. and Hue wasn't happy with the attitude on defense, and the development of players on defense.

I seem to recall that Hue handed off the play calling duties at one point last year, to concentrate on the defense.

Anyway, Horton was one of the top guys Hue wanted, but I think that Williams was THE top guy on Hue's list, and when he became available, he made the move and got him.

I agree with you, and think that Hue wants the same philosophy on both sides of the ball ..... attack on offense, and attack on defense. I know that Williams is more well suited to attacking ..... he probably tries to sack the pilot when they land for away games. lol

I loved the hiring of Hue Jackson. I hated us firing Pettine, but I said that if we did, the guy I would want was Hue. I still think that he is the right guy for this team, and will get this thing turned around, and get us on a path of consistent winning.

I also hated the hiring of Horton. People can go back and look. I was also not a fan of the Williams hiring .... but I do think that he's an upgrade. I believe that Hue's top guy became available, and he became disenchanted with the way Horton called the defense, so he fired and hired.

Horton was a failure his 1st go around as the Browns DC. He's been a failure in all of his stints as a DC
His defenses have always been soft and non aggresive.
Williams at least will bring a more attack mindset

Agreed. Some of us judge each individual move based on its own merits. Others, take sides and try to belittle the opinions of those who don't see it their way.

Bingo X 2. The "Plan" hasn't changed...it's just in the next phase.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think anyone is saying that one year makes a losing mantra. But a lot of us see another long season on the horizon.

IMO the debate is whether it would have been smarter to keep certain players like Barnidge to try to win a little more now. When looking at it, it's quite possible that close to half of our roster will be rookies and second year players on a team that went 1-15 last year. I know you're a positive guy, but a lot of use feel that is the makings of another very poor season from the perspective of W's and L's.

I think the real question is at what point will it re-enforce a losing mentality? At some point losing becomes a culture with every regime.

Where I feel good about it is that Hue is a great motivator. Because of that I believe he can instill confidence longer than any coach since the Browns have come back. Still, there's a limit to it and I wonder is exactly where that limit is.

I see you dropped out of the thread, but as promised, I will address some of the points you made in your final post to me.



I agree that it's a bit scary thinking that BB gave up on him, especially in such dramatic fashion. But, we don't have a lot of talent and I think he is worth the risk. I've been wrong before and will be again. We'll see.




I agree w/this, but the point I was trying to make was that I thought we needed a RT way more than a guard. Now, if Greco is going to miss part of the season, the signing makes way more sense. And again, I don't think it was a bad acquisition, just a bit strange because Greco is a very good guard.

I am going to skip several paragraphs because I agree w/what you are saying.




Yeah, I know that the pass rush helps the secondary. LOL However, the secondary was way worse than the pass rush last year. They were trash. Maybe the worst in the entire league. I don't see coverage improvements.

What would I have done? Drafted secondary players early and often.





I don't recall saying he was going to be w/the players. I do recall saying that the Colts had to hire a psychologist to work on the relationship between him and Pagano. The latter was the HC, not a player.





Perhaps for you, but I think some people misinterpret my position and others downright lie about it.

I did not hate the FO immediately. I was upset w/Haslam for firing Pettine as I wanted some continuity, but I didn't blame the new hires for that.

I have tried to evaluate each move on it's own individual merits. I did not like a lot of the early moves. We have already discussed FA and some of the early draft picks. However, I did like that they traded out of the second overall pick. I loved the Ogbah pick. I liked the Higgins pick a lot. I understood the C. Coleman pick. People try to paint others in a corner on here.

Let me say this one more freaking time: I evaluate each move based on it's individual merits. And I will say that I like the moves they have made this current year far more than last year, although I was still a bit disappointed in our draft.

I hope that is clear for everyone.

This should be your signature.

That too was a good post and made me have to think a lot. As you'll read, I haven't yet changed my mind on things but I'm not saying I won't either. I'm coming from the thoughts in my head and how I think think things are or the way I think they should be. You made a lot of good points and I have to consider that they're coming from someone with experience I don't have. I like this non-arguing method of making counter-points.

Although it may seem like it I'm not an apologist for the FO or am I attempting to defend them in all they do. I hate going through a season angry because I disagree with the team. What I do instead is I "buy in". In other words, I spend my time trying to understand the thinking behind what they are doing, to make sense of it for myself. Sometimes too I play the devil's advocate to get reactions from others I respect to help me think this stuff through. That's why I said I haven't yet changed my mind on these things but I still may.




I agree with the lack of continuity being maybe the biggest problem since the Browns returned in 1999. Nobody get a chance to finish what they started. No roster gets the chance to mature. Players work hard to make schemes come second nature only to have a scheme change in one or two years. Brutal and deadly.

My point was that it was time to try something different. Of course, continuity in itself would have been something brilliantly different. But what I think was really different this time was hiring DePodesta as a Chief Strategy Officer.

Forget about the "money" part of Moneyball for a moment and we see what he did in baseball was to have a different way of looking at the team, a different strategy going forward. He challenged the 'old school' way of looking at the process of building a winning organization. Many of his ideas were met with the same backlash as the Browns got initially, and still get. Whether it proves to be better or worse for the Browns the jury is still out. But the overall strategy rubs the 'old school' guys the wrong way. I think that's why we didn't bring in an established GM. He would have not agreed with changing the thinking that much from what is the standard way it's done now.

Now that the team is in their second year with this regime it's long overdue for the owner to allow continuity to mature as they build. The FO is not the best nor the worst FO in the NFL. Hue Jackson is not the best nor the worst HC either. Let them develop their ideas long enough to, at the minimum, have a chance.

Also, on the firing of Horton and other coaches... I have no problem with firing Horton. Not because of anything Horton did or didn't do, but a new HC has to do some scrambling to get a coaching staff hired and he's not always going to get who he wants in that first year. So after that first year and other coaches become available I have no problem moving on to someone the HC deems a better fit.

Now, if it happens again next offseason then I have a problem. He can't keep changing out coaches, especially coordinators, as though they are to blame for the team's problems.

If he lets one or two lower level coaches go next year I'm still ok with that. But by then he'll be going into his third year and should be done shaking things up.




Notwithstanding, still, they did/are do/doing a true rebuild the likes of which no one as ever done and that's something that freaks out a lot of people, fans and NFL people alike.

Last year a lot of people were upset that it looked like they were making the team worse, not better, with the players they let go. But starting from the beginning of last year to make the team better was not part of the plan. The plan, obvious now, was to free up money and stockpile drafts so the could start changing the culture and evaluate the roster for the moves they made this FA and draft.

We're going to lose some players we think should have stayed, keep some players we think should be gone and sign/not sign some FAs that won't/could have helped us. Same with the draft. We all have player we love and those we don't so agreeing with the draft haul can be difficult and trying. The only recourse we have with that is to wait it out and see what happens in a few years.



Because they haven't been mired in it for season after season. Those 14 players just came off a college career where they won big for several years. They get to the NFL and go 1-15. Their mind-set is not one of "Here we go again." If they've got any moxie to them at all they're going to look at themselves and think, "Man, the NFL is tough. I've got to work my ass off to get better." Granted, after about 4 years of losing bad one loses a bit of that moxie as they blame themselves less and blame the organization more. We've had a roster of those kind of players for too long. The shame is that they are good players. But they've been stuck in a bad organization without proper leadership. I almost tear up over some of the good players that have ruined their NFL dream and ended with bad careers simply because they were unfortunate enough to be drafted by the Cleveland Browns.

Also, I think they finished the season on a high point. As lucky as one might want to paint it the Browns did beat the Chargers playing against Phillip Rivers. That was huge for a lot of reasons. The next game they took the Steelers into overtime coming this close to winning that game. I realize that Pittsburgh kept their top 3 offensive players out of the game or it could have been over long before it was, but the Browns still played vs the Steelers 1st string defense with our offense and took them into overtime. I'm thinking the Steelers defense didn't feel so good after that game even though they won.




I don't know about all that. LOL What I think happened is that in the beginning of their first year they had so little time to prepare for FA and the draft with a coaching staff they hardly knew personally. They were also in the very beginning of establishing their strategy throughout the whole organization and were scrambling on all fronts. Heck, even DePodesta said he sat out the first draft to watch and learn because he didn't know anything about it.

This time around they'd already spent a year in their strategy and a year learning each other and how the FO meshes with the Coaching Staff and all things in between. I think they looked at what they did right and wrong last year and adjusted that throughout the season so they could hit the ground running as soon as the offseason started. I think it was a typical manner in which well run business conduct themselves. I really don't think it took a confrontation between FO and HC to get things changed.

I think one of the reasons we spent more on FA this year compared to last year is that last year was the first year of all of these guys being in charge. They didn't know, (as well as they do now), what they needed. After a season of evaluation Hue and the FO had a much better take on where they needed to improve and moved on it accordingly.

I could be wrong about that. I have no facts and I don't bother calling them 'cause they won't tell me nuthin'. LOL I just don't think that because we see some things operating differently that it took any out of the ordinary conversations to initiate it.[quote]

There have been a number of good post on the "culture" aspect of what has taken place with the team since the introduction of analytics, the hiring of Coach Jackson, etc.

My take on what took place last year was that no one expected it to be as bad as it turned out to be. But here is my assessment of whether young players were damaged permanently by going 1-15 in '16.

Jackson never lost the locker room. Not the vets or, the young guys. They continued, all season long, to support the direction of the team. On nearly every opportunity players were given to infer doubt they routinely gave Jackson an endorsement of confidence. I'm not saying this as a referendum on Jackson but as evidence that the team has not accepted losing as an expected way of doing business.

Thanks for the civil discussion, ddub.



Thanks, but I want you to know that I am not trying to change your mind. Almost all of my thoughts on this subject are opinions. I could be wrong about some, or even all, of them. It's just good football discussion. Oh, and I am enjoying the civil counter-points.



I just hope that we stick w/these guys now that we have hired them. I don't want any more firings. The record will probably be poor again this year. I hope that we don't follow our standard course and start firing people, namely Hue.




It's was certainly a huge tear down. I still would have liked to keep Mack, Scchwartz, and Gipson though.




I don't know how the players will react. I do think Hue is a good motivator though. That should help. I was more speaking about the plan. Losing a lot of games is tough on everyone involved. What if we go 2 and 14 this year? It's a possibility. Think about what that would be like for the entire organization. I guess that is my biggest problems with "the plan."

I really think it would be great if we had at least some success this year. That's one of the reasons I really wanted Jimmy G here. Good qb play and taking a dynamic pass rusher in Garrett would win us some games. Now, let's just say that I am not too high on how our qbs will play this year.




LOL.......Nice.

Again, I am just speculating. There was a report that Hue went to ownership after last year. The decisions seem a bit different this year.

My views on this are upsetting some people, but I don't see how that would be a bad thing. Why shouldn't Hue have more say? Who knows the roster better than he does. He might not be picking the players, but I don't see how it would be a bad thing to let people know that we need to improve certain areas of the team.

Thanks again for the solid debate/discussion. It's enjoyable. Oh........and again, I am not trying to change your mind. I don't know if I am right or wrong. It's not like when I say something like "teams were scheming to stop the run and force Kessler to use the entire field." I can plainly see that. These thought on our front office are pure opinions. And I think the conversations that some of us are trying to have beats the heck out of how these FO threads usually go.

That's a good point.

I don't think Hue gained anymore input than he already had. I think he had lot's of say, both last year and this.

That doesn't mean Hue may not have wanted a QB last year. I read a interesting article. Basically is it outlined that drafting 1st round QB's is risky and that the Browns plan is to not draft any in the first round. As you know, if you draft one there, you are pretty much stuck with the guy for 4-5 years, even if they aren't any good. Also add in the fact you have given up a premium pick for a dud, you didn't get better at any other position.

The thought is to keep firing away and 2nd and 3rd rounders. It's easier and less damaging to the team if you decide to move on after year 2 or 3. In the mean time, you keep building the team. It had some crazy stat based on fact that 1st round QBs only provide about a 40% hit rate.

We have had what? Three first round QB selections? We know how that worked out.

It also pointed out that a FO who picked a dud QB in round 1 were all gone before being able to select another 4-5 years down the road.

I think Hue is seeing the light, and the FO is now in full gear. Last year was a patch together draft. None of those guys really knew each other.

No doubt it all pans out on the field of play, but at least on paper, it looks like the FO is hitting stride with this past draft, which will enable Hue to hit stride.

We are still pretty young, but I think we have a plan and are putting in the types of players who should be able to help make the plan work.


I do agree with you, we don't need to make any changes after this season unless some people make really stupid decisions. I mean really stupid, which I don't think will happen.

The earliest we should even think of replacing any coaches, unless they get hired as a HC is possibly as early as the bye in the 18 season.

I don't care if we only win 1 game this year. We need to keep Hue heading in to 18. Then it starts to become finger pointing time. No sooner.

FYI, I thought your observation about the distinction between approach and continuity was also thoughtful. I had to stop and consider the differences between those two influences on a football organization. After thinking about them both, I feel as if continuity is the more important influence but the specific approach, is not far behind. Think about it, New England has used some sort of analytic approach for sometime. It goes hand in hand with the expectations of being a Patriot and being coached to meet those expectations, its part of the "Patriot Way" of doing business.

The process of evaluating, acquiring and managing players is married to the process of preparing those same players to compete at the highest level, specific to the style of play you want to use in the NFL. Cleveland still has to demonstrate mastery that marriage.

Honestly, can we deal with the elephant in the room? I think using a few well chosen expletives would be more impactful but board policy being what it is, I won't. I haven't made many post on these Front Office threads but I've read the same tired, hackneyed,unconvincing arguments over, and over and over...and over again. Mac, unless you can bring something that hasn't previously be dissected ad nauseam (defined as a thing done to a sickening and excessive degree), with all that is merciful please stop this. I can't deny your right to continue onward but the vast majority of POLITE posters have indulged you way beyond what you deserve.

With no exaggeration, after at least a half dozen, 100 plus post threads, about how incompetent THE CURRENT FO has been doesn't this latest signing of Kriksey completely, totally, and irrevocably shuts down the nonsense that THE CURRENT FO routinely fails to sign its own players?

I ask you to desist.

The proposition is tiresome.

You know, it doesn't really matter how it came to be so long as it did. I guess the only reason I don't like the idea that Hue had to straighten them out is because it makes the FO appear to have not known what they were doing, that their plan was failing. The only problem I have with that is I don't want their plan to fail, (and I don't really know what the plan is, lol). I just want them all to have a handle on what they plan to do and make it work. I don't know if I'll live long enough to see us deep in the playoffs let alone a Superbowl. But I'm gonna fight it out and hope they do as well.

btw... Where's Diam? He was chompin' at the bit to address my post and I've been excited to hear his take on that. I'm thinking he's got some real good input. What I'm not so sure of is if I can provide counter points to his response. I may have to 'phone-a-friend' for any chance to be a $millionaire. LOL

I think all plans evolve over time. Intelligent people in all professions formulate solid plans and then adjust them as time goes on.