DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Rush to Judgement

Television and radio airwaves are full of sports talk shows where analysts opine obsessively on all the "hot" topics. Social media has been instrumental in the rush to judgement mindset.

Here is one example: Daniel Jones was taken sixth overall. The TV and radio response was outraged. Social media blew up. The narrative was that Daniel Jones sucked. This, despite he had not yet taken a snap in the NFL. Fast forward to Daniel Jones coming in and playing well for a game or two. All the dudes who were trashing him were now heaping praise on him and calling him "Danny Dimes." The last two weeks, "Danny Dimes" has struggled, and those very same folks are contemplating whether or not the Giants should turn back to Eli. LOL...........this is a true recap.

We have seen it right here in Cleveland. When Baker was drafted first overall, many folks screamed about it being a bad pick. Then, he had some success and many folks were talking about him as a guy who would win multiple Super Bowls, end up in the HOF, and be better than Farve because he has the same physical gifts but is a harder worker and smarter. Fast forward, and some are questioning if he is a bust and if he should be replaced or if the Browns should have taken Darnold instead.

Personally speaking, I think it is cool to evaluate players in college. It's fun. However, it is hard to judge QBs and offensive linemen because of college offenses. We have no idea if they can quickly go through their progressions or not. But, outside of it being fun....there is not a whole lot to it. Likewise, it is a huge mistake to declare a guy as a franchise qb who will be one of the best in the game after only seeing a small sample size.

GM and Diam always maintained that you need three years before making a strong evaluation. I agree. I think it is okay to talk about what you see as it is unfolding, but making summative evaluations early on is a mistake.

The same can be said for coaches. Think about all the positive talk about Freddie last year and this off-season, and now, there is talk of firing him and we are not even half way through the season.

Relax.

I agree that media and the public are ridiculous in their rush to immediate crown or criticise players, but I think the bigger issue and one that is worth discussing is the college system not preparing players for the next level. If colleges know that NFL QBs need to know how to throw in the pocket or at least have a solid understanding of the fundamentals of a pocket presence... then why do so many colleges go to shotgun and refuse to coach their QBs to work from center and learn to navigate within the pocket? If we know that the LT is the hardest position to evaluate then why are colleges not working harder to prepare their LT's to be able to make that jump to NFL? I understand that in ANY job their is a curve....the first year you learn, 2nd year you often correct mistakes, 3rd year you should be flying solo. But, the problem is many players, especially those in the 1st and some in the 2nd, find it very difficult to make the jump from college to the NFL.

This is completely akin to a high school not preparing students to be successful in college. If high schools know what a 1st year student needs to know how to do, then they HAVE to prepare their students to be successful or at least give them the foundations needed to be successful. I honestly don't believe many college football systems are doing this and it makes it harder for evaluators and scouts to get it right.

We have yet to look consistently competent against elite competition this season. This rests squarely on the coach in lack of preparation.

A coach, much like a teacher, is expected to get their players ready to perform under any sort of adversity. Freddie has consistently failed at getting us to perform against elite competition, and it shows on both sides of the ball.

Colleges are more concerned with winning bowl games than building players for the future.

Which is a problem considering college is the main feeder system for the NFL.

Because college coaches are paid to win football games, not groom kids for the NFL. If the best game plan for them is a spread offense due to the type of defenses they are facing, they are going to run a spread. If its easier for a kid to work out of the shotgun - why wouldn't you want him to work out of the shotgun?

College ball maybe the lifeline of the NFL, but the coaches earn a living for winning games, and the NFL isn't writing those checks.

Exactly. This isn't baseball where the MLB teams have minor league teams. College football programs are trying to win games instead of developing players for the NFL.

My biggest issue is when you start making excuses for a player poor play...

Struggling is normal.

Also its not only about the time it takes to develop, its how is the development and improvement of a player going.

If the kid is improving and learning, sure give him more time. If the kid refuses to learn and starts regressing, that is a big issue.

This is true - and it's worth discussion.

But Freddie went from position coach to interim OC to HC .. from 1 season to the next. Regardless of the talent on the team - growing pains and learning curve is 100% to be expected. Give the guy time. We don't need to hold back on the criticism of what we see (4 plays with goal to go and an empty back field will perhaps be the most absurd series I will ever see) ... but realize this is expected. And much like performance of Baker is affected by multiple aspects - so to is Freddie's performance.

Personally I would like to see him pass on the OC duties ... there is so much he can do to be a better game day HC and double dipping on OC duties and HC duties has to restrict his time and prep as HC regardless of what he says. That's the only thing I would advocate for. Even with a 8-8 or worse season, if I see some good things and improvement from FK I will want him back next year as HC.

Which generates income for the colleges.... there is nothing owed to the NFL.

j/c

When it comes to the media, they change like the weather. They want hits on their web sites, viewers to their shows, readers to their articles and listeners on radio. Their concern is ratings and clicks, not consistency or accuracy. Sports journalism as we knew it years ago is pretty much dead.

Fans opinions are most often based on pure emotions. Lift players when they're up and kick them when they're down. Fan expectations are often far too lofty. As such, when a team doesn't meet their expectations they look to choose a lamb to slaughter. This year is a prime example.

The baffling part in all of this is the need some feel to defend the indefensible. I'll use Baker as an example. He's a second year QB and as such, growing pains are to be expected. There's nothing wrong with pointing out that he's struggling and to point out where those struggles are.

I can only speak for myself, but that doesn't mean that I think Baker is a bust. That doesn't mean I don't believe he can improve. It's simply speaking about where things stand at the moment. It is what it is. Yet some make that something personal. They feel the need to defend him even when he is playing poorly. They look to blame everyone but Baker.

Let's get this straight. Young QB's and young coaches struggle. There's nothing wrong about pointing that out. That doesn't mean they won't get better and improve. Of course you do have a certain segment of the fan base who goes off the deep end calling for people's jobs without being fair about it. They'll stand by Baker and call for Freddie to be fired when both are struggling. They think one deserves more time while the other should be fed to the wolves.

There's only one real difference here I believe. Hue ended up being a terrible HC. No matter what anyone says that was hard to figure out one way or the other with the QB's he had and the overall poor talent on those rosters. But once the talent was there, it became obvious. And at that point his leash became very short.

I fear that may also be Freddie's fate. A huge investment has been put into building this roster. I think we have a window with which to win. Haslam and Dorsey may do whatever they feel they need to in order to make that happen. I'm not sure how that would be rational considering the circumstances, but never the less. I don't think you take a second year QB and a HC who had his first stint at OC last year for half a season, elevate him to HC and expect instant success.

So we're all going to have to see how this pans out. I think some patience should be given to both Baker and Freddie. Both are early in this stage of their careers. I don't see anything wrong with pointing out the struggles they are having. But that doesn't mean you think they'll fail in the long haul.

Except for some who have no patience, have a rush to judgement and a penchant for constant turnover.

I have heard college structured as it is to be the NFL farm system, and I see some validity to that comparison, especially if students can earn money at that level before the NFL. I think colleges groom better for some positions skills than others. Which is best at QB production? Which one is LB University? Part of the answer has to be the coaching and the program. I expect FK and BM to be better later. You don't learn to walk without falling down some, some more than others. I think a great step would be less FK and more OC during games; that can always change later. Our last game BM played better. But I respect the learning curve and nobody likes falling down. Help them up.

I just want Fred to find an offense that wins.

Good post. I want to reiterate something in that it works both ways. Some folks are way too quick on slamming a player or a coach. On the other hand, some folks are way too quick to anoint a guy as a franchise player and start talking about how he is better than some HOFers.

Works both ways, bro.

Then your original question is answered. There will always be a rush to judgement because the learning curve is huge and it is under a microscope thanks to college programs not preparing the players to be successful beyond their own W/L record, colleges to profit and the coaches to bank $$$$.

i thought we did against Baltimore, then for some reason got away from it

Never mind.

Practice what you preach, bro.

Having patience since 1998, or earlier take your pick.

I'm over the continuity thing.

We have a team loaded with talent.
The coaches don't seem to know what to do with it.

It's like getting filet mignon to prepare for dinner and then cooking it in a microwave.

I want a coach (chef) who knows what he's doing.

I give Freddie a pass for having to deal with a difficult schedule up front this season.

If he still can't get it together during the easy part of the schedule, then I'm all for finding other coaches. Ones with actual experience.

Continuity of sucking is just sucking for a long time.

J/C

If some recall, there used to be a time in the NFL where you drafted a kid and sat him for a year or two. You groomed him to take over. Over the last IDK, 10 maybe 15 years or so - you had guys like Big Ben who came in right away (even though he was SUPPOSED to sit) and contribute right away.

Now, those with even SOME football knowledge understand that circumstances make things like this happen. He had a HOF RB in the Bus along with Duce Staley ( they ran for like 2400 yards as a team that year and those two combined for like 1700), and a Def that was loaded with pro bowlers and HOF talent, as a brink HOF WR in Hines Ward.

So even then, he wasn't asked to do much back then. They still played defense and ran the ball. Turn the clock forward, and FANS EXPECT these kids to come in and throw for 4500 yards and 25 TDs and carry teams. Its just the instant gratification mindset we live in now. And if a player doesn't meet those unrealistic standards they want to move on the next guy that will. Not realizing that the same guy they given up on, probably would have if they just gave him a little patience and time.

Just my .02

I don't disagree with you in principal, but "probably" may be a bit strong.

I mean even if you look back at the time frame you laid out, the boom to bust ratio among draft picks really wasn't much better.

I think where much of the problem lies with, at least on this board, is the perception some gather rather than the reality of it.

Let's just look at Freddie and Baker.

I don't see anything wrong with pointing out their weaknesses. That doesn't mean you want them fired or are hating on them. It means that these are the issues at this point of their careers.

Freddie has only been a HC for less than half a season. There is a learning curve that should be expected there. Yet at this point he is having difficulty and it should be expected.

The same goes for Baker. I agree with those that say it takes three years to come to a conclusion on a player. Baker isn't half way through that process at this time. Yet pointing out his issues at this stage of that process and what he needs to work on I don't see as a problem.

You certainly do have those on the fringes that go to the extreme on both of those guys. Such people do exist. But by and large it doesn't. It's just that people read more into it than what actually exists.

I agree, I am not saying pointing out his weaknesses means you think he needs benched, but there are looneys on this board who have said we need to trade him and a first round pick for cam newton (even tho cams prolly getting cut and not worth a first let alone BAKER and a first).

Then there are those that just throw out false information saying he has a below average arm and wont succeed because he cant make throws (which is about just as crazy as the last post).

But honestly, I was talking more about in general, than just our situation. People see teams have instant success with their rookie qbs, and expect that not from just about EVERY rookie Qb. Then are made when those QBs don't follow up right away or the next year and they are write them off. It happens every year.

The NFL fanbase and media are so "week to week" on evaluations and expectations, it blows my mind.

I think this is totally wrong.

I don't know how you define "elite", but we have played 4 teams with winning records and we are 1-3. We have looked totally unprepared ONE TIME.

We played the 49ers, who are 6-0, and they blew our doors off. We looked like we were stuck in the mud all day.

We played the Seahawks, who are 5-2, we lost by 4 points and had the ball at the end to win the game and a pass tipped by one of our RBs bounced into the hands of a defender.

We played the Rams, who are 4-3, we had the ball inside the 5 yard line at the end with a chance to take the game to OT and failed to score.

We played the Ravens, who are 5-2, we beat them soundly by multiple scores and it was never really all that close.

You don't play good teams to that level if you are incompetent and unprepared.... I don't like moral victories either and there have been questionable decisions made during each game.. there have been poor mistakes by players in each of those games.. there is no single reason we came up short in those games..

Freddie is still on the learning curve as a HC... and I'm sure he would be the first to admit he's made some in-game mistakes... but the drivel about us being consistently unprepared is inaccurate.

What is preparation if not being ready to execute in all those situations you listed?

Remember when the Patriots beat the Seahawks in the Super Bowl?

Stupid Pete Caroll decided to pass the ball at the goal line, something nobody would expect them to do?

Well the Patriots had been drilling that exact protection all week in practice, that's how Butler made the INT.

Tom Brady always knows where to throw, the WRs are always on the right route, they practice in all weather conditions (some simulated even), they have different plays ready to execute flawlessly from the 2 yard line vs the 2.5 yard line vs the 3 yard line etc and so on.

They are PREPARED.

When a team constantly wins by seemingly 1 play that means they were PREPARED.

We have not been PREPARED to win any game this season yet except the Ravens (the Jets just didn't have a team to field so hard to tell).

The good news is, we can still get there, and if we do, there will be much winning and fun to be had

I agree w/you. But again, it is just as wrong to anoint a guy as a true franchise qb and say things like he is going to win multiple Super Bowls and will be better than the HOFer Brett Farve.

Same w/Freddie. There are folks blaming him for most of our problems and talking about trading for a new HC. That's crazy. Then again, it was crazy when some folks were acting like he was already a great HC before the season. There was even one thread about him where I said I would wait to see him actually coach in real games before I evaluated him.

People jump the gun. Both good and bad. That's why I started this thread.

Is there a reason you edited that post and then edited it again to make it look like it wasn't edited, bro? You have a history of it. You're not trying to deceive folks......right, bro?

Vers, one thing I've been wondering about and would like your thoughts. I've noticed that Baker is holding the ball a long time. He appears to have trouble reading coverages. Thoughts on this? It doesn't seem to be a topic that is covered much on here.

My thoughts ... and i don’t know near as much about this as Vers or a few others ...

- in college he did the RPO and guys were running wide open all over the field ... he didn’t learn how to read d’s past a rudimentary level ... he didn't need to ...

- last year when Freddie took over he made it basically a one read O and took half the field away ... that did Bake no favors in regards to reading D’s ...

Now this year he’s facing things he’s never seen ... its a learning curve and its hard to do in season ...

He also stays on his primary target way way to long ... that may be because he is learning how to read d’s or a combo of a few other things ..

Thats my 2 cents ... looking forward to what the dudes that know this way better than i do have to say ... on this one .... vers and bone ... wish tabber was around .... and we allready know what device thinks ... it has nada to do with Bake and its everyone else’s fault ...

The post I was responding to stated that we weren't consistently competent.. that's not about making the one game winning play.. competent is about showing up with a plan to play the game..


They are also long tenured veteran coaches and veteran QBs with a ton of veteran players in systems that have been consistent for years (decades)... if you are expecting us to be "prepared" to that degree at this point in time.. then I understand why you are disappointed.


In Bill Belichick's first year with the Browns, he was 6-10.. 8 of his 10 losses were by one score or less... He was competing, but wasn't PREPARED to win close games...

In his second season we were 7-9.. we were 7-6 but lost our last 3 games.. of our 9 losses, 5 of them were by 1 score or less.. He was still learning how to be PREPARED..

Now whether Freddie ever approaches the stratosphere of Belichick, which nobody has.. remains to be seen.. but this notion that he should be there, or even close to there, 6 games into his NFL head coaching career is absolutely insane.

If what you say is true, why did Dorsey even gave Freddie a chance?

Shouldn't he just do what the Patriots did with BB, hire a HC with some experience and lots of potential?

Why hire someone who is going to take 5-6 years to deliver?

Diam, Rish wasn't asking me. He was making fun of me because he thinks I talk about it too much. Of course, he doesn't say a thing to the guys who are always bashing the OL. Also, I guess that holding the ball too long and struggling to read coverages is not a big deal and/or worthy of conversation.

I can't answer those questions.. Every coach had to start somewhere and some succeed sooner than others and some never do. I don't think 5-6 years is necessarily a given.. Belichick was 11-5 in his 4th year and that was with turning over QB and everything else.. Some coaches, McVay and Pederson, did well in their 1st or 2nd year...

There is no formula or everybody would do it that way. A lot of coaches get rehired after an initial stint and find out they just weren't that good, that's why I hate using Belichick as the bar or the example, literally he is in a league by himself.

I was in the keep Williams as HC and Freddie as OC camp.. others felt sure if we did that we would lose Freddie almost immediately and he was too important to Mayfield.. Some wanted Arians but he's almost 70 years old and has health issues and they wanted a young coach that could grow with our young team..

I just hope that when selecting Freddie, that Dorsey saw something other than he was good for Baker... and that Dorsey knew going in that there would probably be a learning curve of a year or so and that he was prepared to hold tight through it.

Can u either respond to his “question” in here or PM me ...

Love to hear what u have to say ... bone also ...

Turn his mocking of u into a teaching moment for those of us that want to learn or in this case understand better ...

Havent posted much because I kinda expected the mass rush of judgment. I didnt like what I was seeing in preseason with no one playing and this being such a young team and a new staff fir the most part.

This is a not ready for prime time team. The last half will reveal who we have. This is true for Baker, Beckham and Freddie.

We wasted preseason so now it's on the job learning. No excuses let's play football.

I was in the keep Williams as HC and Freddie as OC camp as well. But the same concern in that scenario about Freddie leaving after one year I think is the same reason why we pulled the trigger on him as HC. Freddie was billed as part of this new generation of coaching and innovative schemes.

I expect a learning curve with Freddie in some areas. But I don't think he deserves as much time and patience for the simple fact that we have seen very little of the reason why he was hired out of him. Here we are mid way through the season with 6 games under our belt and to date literally NOBODY can describe what our offensive identity is. I mean, even when you factor in poor execution, you should still be able to describe what we are trying to be.

Except for the few times we've switched back to what we were doing at the end of last year, there's been absolutely nothing innovative about our offense.

I'd argue that it looks like every other time we've started with a rookie HC and said we needed to be patient because there's a learning curve. The difference is, this organization wasn't in such a shambles as before where we didn't have a choice but to bring in a rookie HC because no one wanted the job.

So when it comes down to it, if someone is critical of Freddie and even calling for him to be fired, it's not like they don't have the basis for feeling that way. So I don't think it's necessarily a rush to judgement unless he was showing us why he was hired.

Personally I'm not calling for him to be fired, but not having an offensive identity this far in to the season alone should justify him getting canned. I'mm hoping for a huge turnaround starting this Sunday, but how far in to the season do we have to go without having established an identity before it's considered reasonable to believe it's not going to happen?

My biggest problem with Freddie is his inability to make in game adjustments. So far I think that's his biggest hinderence. And to me it's one of the most important attributes that a true NFL coach needs.

Impress me Sunday Freddie and coach with one of the NFL big boys, and I'll change my tune.

I am not saying this in a confrontational way, but I think folks should be careful when they talk about identity. It can often lead or be linked to predictability.

I think our identity was to have more offensive talent surrounding our young stud qb than any team in the league. We implemented a personnel package that the Rams used and that had every other team, sans NE, salivating. 11 Personnel and let your young qb sling it all over the field to superior talent.

The problem came when we found out two things:

--Baker can not swiftly go through his progressions. Thus, he holds the ball too long or panics when he gets confused and bails clean pockets.

--The OTs are not capable of holding out edge rushers for a lot longer than what is typically asked of OTs, especially w/out help.

Of course, we are married to Baker and we have to ride it out w/him and hope he improves next year and the following campaigns. Right now, we are in the process of trying to find scapegoats for the inadequacies of our qb and our HC.

I agree with your first point about the relationship between identity and the potential for being predictable. And even in an 'established' offense you still need room to be flexible.

But how do we describe this team Vers?

We've assumedbased upon Baker holding the ball much longer this year is because we are trying to run an offensive with longer, slower developing plays. But then when you look closer he's missing other wide open receivers.

It's also been postulated that whether it's Freddie or Baker or both, that maybe they're trying to play too much hero ball. Possibly.

In the face of calls for more Nick Chubb I've seen viewpoints that statistically he's getting a sufficient amount of touches.I don't know how you feel, but personally I don't see a RB who's averaging what, between 19 and 23 touches in a game as indicative that he's the focal point of your offense. (In my view an offense centered around a RB is upwards of closer to 30 touches a game).


I don't know man. I'm just demoralized I guess because I don't know what the heck it is that we are trying to do or be. I feel like I'm starting to see the same old story we seen in the past: we have some talent, we've seen ways we can win, but instead we steer clear of all of that pushing a system or scheme that we're just not ready to execute.

Yes, I would agree with you 1000% that Baker has to progress and become more than a quick, 1 read QB. But you know what that quick, 1 read scheme gets us? Wins.