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

Not sure I understand that....does that mean the Jets are so bad that they will have the #1 pick in the next draft? and there for they are teaching us a lesson?

I think they mean in as far as being the front runner for the 2018 Number 1 pick contender, the Jets are in the lead.

Ahhh I see said the blind man

That is exactly what it means. normally we are neck and neck for a top 2 or 3 pick.

It means the Jets are so bad right now they have no competition for the #1 pick next year....made me smile

lol yes. they are giving it us butt good lol

San Fran is greener pastures than Washington?

I thought Washington had a better record last year and that they have a better qb?

Building a sustainable winning team is...

This doesn't make sense. Clearly the Browns offered the best, long-term deal to Pryor and his camp thought he could get a better deal. He didn't. So he took a 1-year deal to prove his worth beyond 2017. The Browns, if anything over-valued him on the market. They did the same with Schwartz. The nonsense that happened with Schwartz with the deal pulled was the issue, not identifying market value. You also fail to identify, if re-signing our own players is indicative of valuing players correctly, the contracts of Jamie Collins, Joel Bitonio, Jamar Taylor, Jamie Meder, etc. Interesting how you claim a "fail" and omit those players. I feel like this point has been on repeat for quite some time.




Why do you think WR was the focus? Because they took Coleman AFTER two trades and drafted three late round flyers??? Haha, ok. To me, I think it was abundantly clear that the primary focus of last year's draft was to acquire draft assets for future years. Just look at the two trades in the first round. I think that essentially says it all right there.


This FO still needs to find help at a lot of places. In two offseasons and one football season (after a near complete roster purge in 2016) to think otherwise is short-sided. But to think three WRs taken in Rounds 4/5 means the Browns should have their answer at the position is equally short-sided.


Right. Every FO's priority is to win. That's what keeps them employed. Perhaps you don't understand or enjoy their timeline or process, but winning is the priority.

we really, really need to rename this thread lol

Bill Polian: Browns tanked last year, that may become common

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...-become-common/

Bill Polian presided over the worst team in the NFL as the G.M. of the Colts in 2011. That didn’t work out well for him, as he got fired at the end of the season. But it worked out well for the Colts, as it got them Andrew Luck with the first pick in the 2012 draft. And Polian thinks some teams may actively try to be the worst team in the league, if it means drafting another franchise player.

Polian said on Mike & Mike that the Browns tanked in 2016 and may have started a trend.

“The thing that worries me is that the Browns essentially tanked the season last year and no one said — except a few of us — said anything about it. And it may well be that this is something that can spread around the league, and I don’t think that’s good for the sport in the long run. Because in the end it robs the customers of the chance to see a competitive team,” Polian said.

Polian wasn’t saying the Browns’ players were playing to lose, but he was saying that the Browns’ front office wasn’t playing to win. As evidence, Polian cited the controversy that erupted in September, when the Browns lost kicker Patrick Murray to a knee injury and signed replacement kicker Cody Parkey over Robbie Gould, whom their special teams coach reportedly wanted but who would have cost more money. Parkey promptly missed three field goals in an overtime loss.

“They lost their placekicker to injury. Robbie Gould was out there. They signed a player with no track record at all,” Polian said.

Polian said that in a discussion of whether the Jets are tanking, although he didn’t accuse the Jets of that. Instead, Polian simply said that the Browns did it last year, and more teams may do it in the future, and that won’t be a positive development for the NFL.

The only problem with that article is that it's not true.

Parkey had an exceptional 2014 season, going 32-36 on FG, and a perfect 54-54 on FG. That's not a player with no track record.

Browns analysis: Nate Ulrich breaks down 30-24 overtime loss to Dolphins

http://www.ohio.com/sports/browns/browns...lphins-1.714523

The bottom line: The Browns need a reliable kicker. They outgained the Dolphins 430-426, and they won the turnover battle 3-1. But Parkey made just 3-of-6 field goals, leaving nine points off the scoreboard with misses from 41, 42 and 46 yards.

— Nate Ulrich

...and Polian probably did the most obvious tank of all time with his "suck for Luck" campaign.

And Parkey joined the team with no practice whatsoever. He was completely unfamiliar with his snapper and holder in that game.

We went 1-15. For God's sake man. lol

I'm glad they lost that game, and am glad we tanked if we did it on purpose or not. This team needed elite talent (and still does) winning a couple of meaningless games is the difference between taking Garret or Mike Williams at 7.

I fully expect us to win more games this year, but when November comes and if we are 3-8 I hope we lose every game we play from there on out because we will obviously still need better players.

Polian's "competitive" argument is stupid because teams have been tanking for years (see the JJ's 1-15 Cowboy team or his 1-15 Colt team). This isn't a new phenomenon.

Did Polian get fired right after the Colts went 1-15?

It's absolutely nothing new. As was pointed out in a post above, he did it in Indy to land luck. And for anybody who says otherwise, they started Curtis Painter instead of signing a FA QB for God's sale! lol

I believe this FO has a plan and I believe stripping it down last year was a part of the plan. No matter how posters spin it, the end result of doing that is tanking.

I certainly don't disagree with you...but the word 'tanking' to me in this sense means taking steps to lose. Like playing Curtis Painter.

Gutting a roster is more like 'going in the tank'.

So yeah...your comment above that I bolded pretty-much sums it up.

Well I won't get into semantics. lol

Lol. I mean who cares if they went into the season saying let's go 1-15 verbally or not. The fact that all of the teams mentioned (and many others) gutted their roster to begin a rebuild spoke LOUDLY as to what their intentions were. The Browns were just doing like many other teams had done before them....and rightfully so.

Heck I would argue that Heckert and Holmgren did a rebuild/tank job several years ago, but they just sucked at that to and didn't get the 1 pick...haha.

j/c

I think Polian is being a crusty old turd here. HIS tank job of going with Curtis Painter was much more egregious than what the Browns did or what the Jets are going to do. The Colts were only bad because they had an awful QB situation - awful even by our standards. That team was recently a playoff contender during the 'tank for Luck' season. He tanked on Painter for Luck while having had a decent team otherwise.

We tanked an already poor team due to a tear-down and re-build and that resulted in the 1st overall pick. He tanked a decent team to to get the once-in-a-decade player.

In the end, both entities did their job...but he is the LAST guy who should be throwing stones here.

You're 100% correct.

Read the comments on that story. Nobody is buying Polian's BS. A handful of people were sneaking in shots on the Browns, but yeah...

My favorite was the guy that said, "If the Browns were actually trying to tank they probably would've gone 14-2 because they can't even get tanking right..." That one was pretty funny.

j/c

The Colts were intentionally tanking from the beginning of the season. The Browns were trying to win but lost 15 games due to injury and a seriously horrible team. There's a distinct difference. Polian just doesn't want be alone living on his moral low ground. If any trend gets started, it was started by him. He can take heart that the Jets paid close attention to his "success".

I agree, and we actually should have won 2-3 more. At least we had a real shot to win them.

Two former GM's, Polian and Kirwin, bashed the Browns front-office every opportunity. Last thing these two guys want is baseball people and stat geeks making good. I think one of them posts here regularly...mac!!!!

Seriously, former GMs don't want anything messing up the good'ol boy club. Browns show any signs of hope owners will venture that direction. The very thought stat guys can duplicate or even better football guys...oh boy!!

I agree. They don't like change.

Just like offensive football is having to change because most QBs are now spread QB's, the FO types are now fearful the way business is being done is changing.

The old, wrinkled, "football guy" is being shown that maybe he doesn't know so much.

You are about to take a backseat, fella's.

LOL........you guys are funny.

What's tragically funny about this is that if you look at what the Browns are doing and how Sashi and DePo have begun a system of creating so much Draft capital, you'd think this would be a GM's dream! I mean, being part of a system that will net you 3-5 picks in the first 2 rounds almost every year? That's 3-5 chances every year to look like a genius.

The flip side of that is that in the past leagues have had to create rules to STOP Owners/GMs from trading away all their picks..

Sup Ted.

Wouldn't "1 and a half year effort" be more accurate? You're asking him to offer his opinion/analysis of the past yet your premise requires him to predict what will happen in the future i.e year 2.

Incomplete....because you can't fill every damn hole in two offseasons. I'm sure you can recall all the holes we had on this team, right? Some self-inflicted others not so much.

I'm with u tabber ... huge difference between tanking and re-building ...

Faced with our situation we did what was right for US LONG TERM and not what was conducive for us to win a few games in the short term ... we tried to stay a tad competitive ...

IMO this is our first true TEAR DOWN ... Past regimes tip toed a line and talked a good game ... but never truely tore it completely down ... they "tried" to win a few games by not tearing it down ... they basically did renovations ... *LOL* ..... this time WE DID IT RIGHT ...

Tanking is the bi-product of tearing the team down for a re-build. The two go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other.

Not that anything anyone will reply with will matter.

Might as well just post the response you probably already had written up.