DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Losing Culture

Well - the salary cap isn't an issue thankfully. I've been told that many, many, many times. In fact when I have been in conversations about it before some posters thought it was funny. Berry is a cap guru and smarter than the other NFL GM's - he'll have a plan I am sure. 6 years to build the worst roster in the NFL - but he had a good draft this year so, things are turning around.

GTFOH

Come on now let's be realistic here. Solutions are never actually given. Just the "concept of a plan". Complaints are many and answers are nonexistent.

I'm not the one on here claiming everyone needs to be fired and acting like I have the answers to every problem confronting this team. I leave that to self appointed experts like yourself. Once again when push comes to shove you just threw out generalities while refusing to give specifics or name names.

I mean "there are 31 other NFL franchises and all have understudies working under NFL GMs. The talent pool is currently deep" is just a bunch of gibberish. So are you suggesting all 31 of those "understudies" makes a deep talent pool? You don't at least wish to exclude those "understudies" in FO's of teams that don't even make the playoffs?

How many NFL GM's do you think are out there training the people who work beneath them how to do their jobs anyway? After all that is what it means to be an understudy.

So you still gave no answer to the questions. No surprise there. The Patriots also drafted a good QB. Do you think Vrabel would have that same record with these QB's, these WR's and this OL?

It's easy to claim a HC wins "just because he's good" when the big picture is so much deeper. You can look at all the bad teams across the NFL to see finding these "good people" isn't as easy as you make it sound.

You went from "there are 31 other NFL franchises and all have understudies working under NFL GMs" to "look I have one example of it". Impossible? No it's not. Highly unlikely? Yes it is.

So let mee get this straight. The Browns handed Berry and Stefanski a playoff capable team for their 1st year. Since that first year, the next 5 plus years, those two have delivered a 31-77 record at a .402 record percentage inclusive with only 1 winning season after being handed a playoff caliber team. Of the seven players drafted in Berry's first draft (2020), only Delpit remains with the team. Thus, the beginning of the total dismantling of the team handed to them.

Now some want to blame this all on Berry or Haslam. However, remember that Stefanski was hired first and according to Haslam, Berry was hired because he could collaborate with Stefanski. IMHO, trying to give Stefanski a bye in this whole mess is just wishful wishing. Haslam has admitted to the hiring thought process, I highly doubt any of those major moves were made without significant Stefanski input. Secondly, even if Haslam is responsible for the ultimate package for Watson, I don't believe that he offered that contract without Berry's input on whether the Browns could manage the Cap hit or not. I think it's foolish to think that Haslam offered a contract without the ok that Berry could still manage the contract and cap. Besides, Haslam owns the team so there is no repercussion for him on the deal so get over it. Berry and to a lesser point Stefanski (due to their collaboration setup) will shoulder the eventual ramifications.

Which brings me back to the original point, Berry and Stefanski were handed a playoff capable team that they have destroyed in the last 5 plus years. Now we have people campaigning for these two to collaborate in another draft after the last 5 plus years of failure. That's called a losing culture, just keep doing the same thing and eventually you'll get it right, LMAO!

Didn't you get this straight 320 posts ago??

Asking for a friend.

Can you now explain what who got hired first has to do with anything? Haslam hired both of them. He hired each one to do a different job and handle the responsibility of the job he hired them to do. One coaches the roster while the other one controls the salary cap which helps determine which FA's they can afford to sign. He uses input from the analytics department and scouting department to hep set the draft board. Trying to blur the lines changes none of that.

It's rather odd how you openly admit this was all on Haslam to begin with and then turn around and try to present a different argument............

"according to Haslam, Berry was hired because he could collaborate with Stefanski." "Haslam has admitted to the hiring thought process"

So you openly admit that Haslam is the one who thought they could collaborate on everything and that's the process he used in making the hires. Haslam also said he listened to input for everyone and then made the decisions. But now you think the makeup of the roster is on Stefnaski?

In you world why would they need an analytics department and scouting department if Stefanski was already doing what they're being paid millions upon millions of dollars to do?

Your math isn't mathing.

Allow me to pose something to you. Since you seem to think that Stefanski helps in some role as some type of assistant GM who has a say in everything because "everything" is collaborative, do you also think that Berry is involved in the HC'ing decisions as well? I mean do you also think Berry is helping Stefanski coach the team? Maybe has a say in the game plans, the play calling duties?

And if not, why? Why would it only apply to Stefanski playing a role in the decisions of a GM and the GM having no say in the coaching part? Either everything in both directions are collaborative or they're not. Life isn't a one way street you can walk down only one direction without paying attention to oncoming traffic.

Yeah, but .......

The coach has certain types of players that fir his scheme. You don't draft zone blocking linemen for man blocking schemes. (for example) If the scheme calls for a lot of passes to the RB, you need to draft one who is a good receiver. (and so on)

It is collaborative, but within limits. The coach lets the GM know what kind of players fit, and what kind do not ... and the GM makes the determination as to who fits these parameters and who does not, since he has all of the work and info done for the draft and free agency.

I certainly think the HC tells the FO the "type of players" they need to fit their scheme. I think that's a very reasonable conclusion to reach.

Fate, you could not pay me enough money to get me to trust the guys who built our qb room the past 4 years or so to build our new qb room that will carry us forward the next five years.

It would be like asking the doctor who botched your first surgery to do your second surgery.

You will trust them... and you will trust them for free!

I agree with your post but tell me this:

How many GM's and/or HC's survived failing with two top 12 first round picks in 6 seasons? In addition, name me an owner that has ever allowed a GM or HC to get a shot at another 1st round pick QB after two failures with 1st round QB's? Excuses are like aholes, everyone has one!

Good example would be, I believe it was Mangini, who came out blatantly and said the Browns would be looking to draft/sign/trade for players tough enough to whip the Steelers. Some of that took place, but Mangini wasn't allowed to see it through. I think this needs to be weighed. This committee product of a roster doesn't match our division, at least the same lame game Ski trots out week after week Being tough enough mentally and physically to win weekly is not in this roster's culture. I think Mangini other coaches were on the right track. KS is the factvortr consistently present who moves the bar lower. Do something different Changing 1st down calls might help.