DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Andrew Berry & FO Continued

I can't get over the Trent Richardson trade or ignoring the OL while in Indy. The rest wasn't too bad.

IMO, as far as drafts go, his first one was the only worth anything (2012). The rest...blah.

Definitely a "good ol boys club" hire.

Hand him his paycheck and keep his input to a minimum.

I'll maintain that the 3rd point on your list (Team Chemistry affected by strong-willed goofballs) wasn't as big a deal as people are making it out to be. I think coaching played far and away the biggest role in our crappy team chemistry. While the player culture certainly isn't a strength, I think the players bear too much of the blame when we talk about team culture. OBJ wasn't here, but when Williams was running the show, Baker wasn't nearly the snot he was this year, and even Randall kept quiet (and played).

I'll argue that point until a strong HC comes in and we still have attitude problems.

Or, he's just here as an extra pair of heads to help catch up on this offseason. With the FO still rounding into shape, they're getting further and further behind in terms of prepping for FA and the draft.

That is the NFL. Stefanski brought in a bunch of guys he worked with. Comfort zone. Guys you can trust.

I see this no different. Berry has worked with the guy and trusts his opinion on players. It's always good to have someone you can trust to bounce thoughts around.

We may be behind a little, but not much. I would say our initial big board is set. All the scouting reports have their grade and all the draftable players are ranked from the best to the last player with a draftable grade. The others are guys who could be UDFA targets

The combine will change some of those ranking. Maybe a few move up on their own, but several to many may drop or even be taken off the board. Possible a few we ranked undraftable are moved back up to the board.

We are probably a little behind on grading out our current team and setting our needs. Who we hope to keep and who we hope to replace or let go.

Bingo.

Win football games.

The NFL would cease to exist if guys couldn’t hire their buddies.

I would consider that a slight problem. Seems too incestuous and narrows the window of talented, capable people.

Every team’s entire coaching staff is littered with their buddies. Same with the front offices. It’s just how it works. For example, Monte Kiffin works for the Buccaneers. Joe Woods works for the 49ers. Woods leaves for the Vikings because he knows Mike Tomlin and he is the new defensive coordinator. In Minnesota Woods runs into Kevin Stefanski. Woods goes a bunch of different places and ends up back in Cleveland with Stefanski. He hires Chris Kiffin as defensive line coach. The cycle continues. (Not to mention all the times in between Chris Kiffin got jobs because of who is dad/brother are.)

It is a slight problem because sometimes guys are hired just because they are friends with an important person. But it’s hard to argue with wanting to hire people you are familiar with. There needs to be a balance.

And that is all I am saying.

Like I said above, it is possible that Ryan Griffin is good at his job and that he’s just not meant to be a GM (he worked for the Seahawks for the last two years and they didn’t collapse). I would prefer he didn’t work for me team.

Well that's certainly a ringing endorsement.

Considering some of the hand-wringing going on because of this hire it is.

Well a turd is a turd no matter how much you polish it.

It happens every time like this,, nothing new

Except last year -- when we had what seemed like an arranged marriage... Kitchens had never worked with Monken or Wilks. Wonder how that happened...

I agree the talent is there. If they can produce some kind of discipline and present a coherent gameplan, the team has enough talent to win.

We hired Ryan Grigson before, I wanted to see what people said. We/they said basically the same thing we are saying now:

https://www.dawgtalkers.net/ubbthreads.ph...ive#Post1275344

That was never really addressed. Probably Dorsey making some recommendations. That isn't a knock. Seems I recall talk of giving Freddie some experienced coaches.

At any rate, it is probably a good example of why new coaches and GM's like to bring in their own people. People they have worked with in the past. You don't want to spend a year getting to know people, at least those in the key positions.

The CEO wants some VP's s/he can lean on knowing they will get it done.

The process engineer in the plant needs a maintenance manager who will get the job done.

The maintenance manager needs a lead man.

A restaurant manager needs a first assistance manager who gets things done.

Exactly. The Peter Principal. People reach the level of their incompetence. Just because this guy wasn't a good GM doesn't mean he wasn't a good talent guy. Look at Freddie. He isn't a head coach, but he is a darn good assistant coach.

Just because you aren't good at some job doesn't mean you aren't good at what got you there.

j/c:

A couple of posters who complained about Dorsey regime all the time are trying to sugar coat the Grigson hiring and the way the new FO is being built.

I ask that folks do a quick search on Grigson and have a look for yourselves instead of listening to their opinion or the polar opinion from folks like me.

It won't take long to find article after article on how much dysfunction was in the Colt's building while he was there. You will see many comments from players and coaches that might give you some insight. You will see his draft record and how he treated people. You will see that most folks blame him more than anyone for the sad story of Andrew Luck.

Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of some others on this board that spin things out of control. Look for yourselves. It won't take long to form your own opinion. I promise.

There are folks trying to paint Dorsey as a bad guy and that he was the guy who couldn't work w/others. My contention is that a load of hog wash and it was the "analytic guys" and their hires that were the true sources of the dysfunction.

This is not going to end well.

It does happen all the time. However, some guys bring in guys that can really help and there are are other guys who are brought in who are absolute trash.

Once again, do a quick search for yourself on Grigson. There's all kinds of information about him. Check out his relationship w/his former HC and some of his players.

I did. I see all sorts of run ins with players etc. I earlier said he wasn't a good GM and possibly he isn't a good person.

What I can't find is info that got him promoted to GM with the Colts. I am sure the Colts didn't pick his name out of a hat.

I agree. I don't want him in a operations type position where he is dealing with players etc. He is here as a consultant.

I might be there with you if he starts gaining authority. I will just wait and see what he is going to do before I get upset about it. Berry likes the guy and has some trust in his opinions.

As I said in another post, right now Berry and Stefanski have to concentrate on our own players and upcoming free agency. They don't have all that much time to focus on the draft.

My guess he is here to help set the initial draft board...using our scouting reports. My guess is he was a pretty good scout. Most GMs came up from the scouting side of the game. A few not...Banner is one who I think didn't come up the scouting path.

Grigson could be similar to Dorsey where neither were good as GMs but better in secondary roles.

"Einhorn is Finkle?"

"Finkle is Einhorn?!"

"A couple" is a rather accurate sum.



Lolz.

I wouldn't say Dorsey wasn't good as a GM...he apparently did have issues dealing with people if they weren't under his thumb. He seemed to have the same deal in KC.

So he's a good General, just not a good Manager?

I think this idea of Dorsey not being able to work w/others is extremely exaggerated by quite a few folks who backed the analytics guys from the get-go and ran w/one freaking opinion piece.

The Brown's current FO and the one before Dorsey got here are the ones who have more incidents of not working well w/others.

I do not have proof, but I do believe that Depo and the remaining analytics guys turned on Dorsey right away. I can understand why. They believed in what they were doing. I also believe that Dorsey was not all that receptive to listening to a group of guys w/almost no experience running a football team and who orchestrated a 1 and 31 record w/the worst roster in the league. Thanks Jimmy.


I believe Depo and company were all up in Jimmy's head after this season didn't meet the expectations of the media and fan base.

There were a few of us who warned of the dangers of such lofty expectations. Of course, we were called haters and other such names. I maintain that it is so very hard to overcome a losing culture in football. This isn't the MLB or NBA where so many games are played. Even the worst teams win games in those leagues.

It was doomed to fail. Thanks Jimmy.

And it boggles my mind that people are happy w/going back to the guys who were 1 and 31 vs the guys who went 13-18-1. LOL..........that is so freaking crazy.

It reminds me of the quote by John Stuart Mill, who way back in the mid 1800's, said:

I agree.

I also find it hard to believe that we are a better team without Dorsey, Wolf, and Highsmith. (who all seemed to work well together)

Good point.

I think it would have been much wiser to keep Dorsey, Highsmith, and Wolf and send the Depo crew packing.

It would have been much easier to hire new analytics specialists than a new GM and supporting FO staff.

I think sometimes [not you] misunderstand my position. I actually believe in analytics. I just don't believe in the Brown's analytic guys. There are guys who are good in all fields. There are guys who are okay in all fields. There are guys who suck in all fields. Just because you embrace analytics doesn't make you good. Our analytic guys have sucked beyond belief.

They should all have been shown the door when Sashi was fired and replaced w/new analytic guys.

I think that analytics can be a useful tool .... just not always the 1st tool out of the toolbox. It has its uses, and can be very effective when used properly ... but it's not a universal tool that works in all instances.

It's simple. Most everyone here understands that there was a multi-year plan, the first 2 of those years (1 and 31) were the tear down years. That was no secret even if no one from the Browns ever officially confirmed it.

We also understand that last year and this year are about building it up.

So we're pretty confident that the tear down has already been done.

Another thing... you suggest we'd have been better off with Dorsey, Alonzo, and Wolf... we had that combination. Maybe DePo was able to get in Jimmy's ear after the fact but all appearances indicate that Dorsey was in full control while he was here (with maybe the exception of Hue being here when he came in). Past that? I'd really like to see at least one example of where prior to Freddie flopping that Dorsey was stymied by DePo.

A player, a coach, a trade... something that Dorsey really wanted but DePo wouldn't let him.

I think you're missing the point. Haslam created a Depo vs Dorsey culture in the building. It became less about doing the right thing and more about beating the other guy. Dorsey was trying to prove how good he was without the help of someone like Depo and Depo was just waiting for Dorsey to screw up. Dorsey won some battles, Depo won the war.

I don't think Kitchens is the coach at all if Depo had been shown the door prior to Kitchens being hired. Depo didn't want him so Dorsey did and he "flexed his muscles". And if he had hired Freddie even if Depo wasn't a part of the organization I think he would have been quick to correct his mistake. But with Depo there he wanted to stick with Freddie and give him more time. Again, nothing was done for the good of the Browns. It was done to win personal battles. And it all goes back to Haslam.

And now Haslam chose to back the guys with the least amount of experience.

I hope for all our sakes he's right.

And nowhere has there been mention of it being the first option. Show me one example of anyone saying it WHO WORKS FOR THE BROWNS. No op-Ed pieces, no rumor-mongering, no third party.

The analytics guy picked the GM and NC. All Haslam talked about was the need to unify under one flag ...and the importance of analytics.