The Browns Strategy Meeting
-
Thats my pick. You cant pick or sign a franchise QB that doesn't even exist
Build a bullet proof core with 2 solid lines added to that bad ass defensive backfield, and we should be fine.....
A great team will make an average QB much better......(rarely works the other way though)
Hm.
I don't think that's the case at all.
How many average QB's have made it to the Super Bowl in the past 10 years?
Brady, Wilson, Manning, Flacco, Kaepernick, Roethlisberger, Manning, Rodgers, Warner, Brees, Grossman, Hasselbeck, McNabb
Outside of Kaepernick, Grossman and maybe Hasselbeck, seems like the common denominator has been a consistently productive to elite quarterback. There aren't many one-and-done teams in that list, but it's no coincidence that the ones that are are the ones that have the "average" quarterbacks.
While building two badass lines and a solid running game sounds great on paper, it's a lot harder in implementation. That's anywhere from 8-10 contracts that you have to both align and pay. If you want 8-10 badass players, that's 8-10 badass contracts. Say you finally get those 8-10 players all signed for varying contracts. It's highly unlikely that they'll all be rookies. It's more likely you'll have to supplement with experienced, and overpaid, veterans. Now your window is even smaller to win a championship.
You sign a guy who's 28, you have 2-3 years on him at best. You sign 2 guys that are 28, one guy that's 27, a few that are 25, and then you have 3 or 4 rookies that take time to develop? By the time the rookies develop and, the two 28 year olds and the 27 year old are done, and the 25 year olds are now 27-28. Now you've got to replace those guys that are gone with new rookies, which means they're going to take a few years to develop.
While that above system is great, it's nothing to rely on. That's what you do when you have an established, solid franchise quarterback. Not when you're trying to mask an average QB.
It's actually much easier to find a franchise quarterback.
How many average QB's have made it to the Super Bowl in the past 10 years?
It's actually much easier to find a franchise quarterback.
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
It's not as if the goal of this retreat is to set a "Big Board" and an FA list. The lack of football detail at that meeting would likely stun you.
Not that there will be no discussion of the on-field performance, but the focus will likely be how the entire organization performed in support of the on-field product... where it succeeded and failed. This should be a high-level, cornerstone, organizational review focusing on goals, budgets, processes and resources (people, services, etc.).
If Haslam is anywhere near the businessman I think he is, then he sets the tone at the opening, delivers his impressions at the closing and in between asks a ton of tough, pointed questions.
I agree....sounds like a typical "year end review" type of meeting.... with an eye on "where are we going next?"....and who's doin what?....
Nothing like being on the same page.....
The only dysfunction i see with this group is in the imagination of the fans who dont understand how well run operations work.......
I agree....sounds like a typical "year end review" type of meeting.... with an eye on "where are we going next?"....and who's doin what?....
Nothing like being on the same page.....
The only dysfunction i see with this group is in the imagination of the fans who dont understand how well run operations work.......
Yup... I've both participated in and facilitated what I'm guessing this meeting is. Sounds like you've been in them as well.
The biggest struggle of them is staying at the appropriate, "strategic" level. The pull is always there to dive into tactical issues, get into the proverbial weeds, in part because those issues are more tangible.
This should be about the Scouting/ Coaching alignment checks I mentioned in an above reply. Not what do we do about our "muddy QB situation".
This should be about player support systems to help prevent more Manziel, Gilbert and Gordon-like failures, and not "do we cut one or all?" You do not need a retreat to answer that question.
-
And now find a wr we can count on being there. I'd sure love to be a fly on the wall for this meeting now.
What's Amari Cooper going to cost us?
What a crock of shit.. If they need 3 days to put a strategy together.. Then all 3 morons should just pack up and leave town.. Dumb!
Nah- a lot to discuss. More than just strategy. You can bet every player on the team, plus coaches are on the table.
Hm.
I don't think that's the case at all.
How many average QB's have made it to the Super Bowl in the past 10 years?
Brady, Wilson, Manning, Flacco, Kaepernick, Roethlisberger, Manning, Rodgers, Warner, Brees, Grossman, Hasselbeck, McNabb
It's actually much easier to find a franchise quarterback.
Easy? Sure, if it's so damn "easy" why haven't the Browns been able to find one since 1999, and counting? Most of the "elite" QBs were high first round picks- or a team got hit by lightning. Brady, Wilson, (who I don't consider "elite") but his team is, Warner.
The multi time SB qbs come along every three years or so- and you had better be incredibly sucky (Indy twice with Manning and now Luck) - or incredibly lucky with everyone else.
Dumb luck says we should have guessed right at least once instead of Quinn, Wee-Done, and Manzielf. McCoy or Frye. And a raft of FA retreads.
What's Amari Cooper going to cost us?
Nah- a lot to discuss. More than just strategy. You can bet every player on the team, plus coaches are on the table.
Easy? Sure, if it's so damn "easy" why haven't the Browns been able to find one since 1999, and counting? Most of the "elite" QBs were high first round picks- or a team got hit by lightning. Brady, Wilson, (who I don't consider "elite") but his team is, Warner.
The multi time SB qbs come along every three years or so- and you had better be incredibly sucky (Indy twice with Manning and now Luck) - or incredibly lucky with everyone else.
Dumb luck says we should have guessed right at least once instead of Quinn, Wee-Done, and Manzielf. McCoy or Frye. And a raft of FA retreads.
The reading comprehension on this board is subpar, at best. It's easy in comparison to signing ten studs across both lines and aligning those contracts, saving cap space for other positions, etc.
Maybe a good rule of thumb is "don't place your franchise hopes on a QB that took a monumental fall on the first day of the NFL Draft." Maybe another good rule of thumb is "don't place your franchise hopes in mediocre, game-managing mid round project quarterback". We've tried both of those methods multiple times...didn't seem to work out for us.
You don't plan on finding a Brady. You don't plan on finding a Wilson. Neither the Patriots nor the Seahawks drafted their respective quarterbacks with the intention of them starting immediately. They were project QB's that had certain intangibles that outweiged their negatives, in Wilson's case it outweighed his height issues and in Brady's case it outweighed his slightly mediocre statistical performance and child-like look.
-
How many average QB's have made it to the Super Bowl in the past 10 years?
It's actually much easier to find a franchise quarterback.
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
3-Day meeting to discuss strategy and direction with an Owner that has little knowledge of football can only mean one thing.
"Fail"
It's just like trying to talk football with you.
It's just like trying to talk football with you.
Right Johnny Manziel lover. HOw did that draft pick work out for you?
You got talent picking the "fail".
-
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Not even going to bother reading a post from someone that think Manziel was going to be a star in this league.
Go ahead. Watch a few youtube videos and think you know something.
-
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Rodgers- fixed it.
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Thanks for making my point- How many of those guys were the #1 overall, or a top 10? How many years between when they were drafted? So yeah- unless you get lucky with a Brady, Romo, or Warner- draft a qb high and cross your fingers that you get a Luck instead of an RG III, a Manning instead of a Ryan Leaf. It's not an exact science. If you could re-do the immortal 1983 draft Dan Marino would have been a top 5 pick.
BTW- Rodgers, Flacco and Brees all were all drafted at roughly the same unlucky #22 spot we used, some even lower. So a ton of qb needy teams didn't recognize their potential greatness either.
-
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Rodgers- fixed it.
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Thanks for making my point- How many of those guys were the #1 overall, or a top 10? How many years between when they were drafted? So yeah- unless you get lucky with a Brady, Romo, or Warner- draft a qb high and cross your fingers that you get a Luck instead of an RG III, a Manning instead of a Ryan Leaf. It's not an exact science. If you could re-do the immortal 1983 draft Dan Marino would have been a top 5 pick.
BTW- Rodgers, Flacco and Brees all were all drafted at roughly the same unlucky #22 spot we used, some even lower. So a ton of qb needy teams didn't recognize their potential greatness either.
Thanks for making my point- How many of those guys were the #1 overall, or a top 10? How many years between when they were drafted? So yeah- unless you get lucky with a Brady, Romo, or Warner- draft a qb high and cross your fingers that you get a Luck instead of an RG III, a Manning instead of a Ryan Leaf. It's not an exact science. If you could re-do the immortal 1983 draft Dan Marino would have been a top 5 pick.
BTW- Rodgers, Flacco and Brees all were all drafted at roughly the same unlucky #22 spot we used, some even lower. So a ton of qb needy teams didn't recognize their potential greatness either.
There are plenty of 'serviceable' QBs that have been taken lower than we've been drafting forever - not just Romo, Warner, Brady, but also the likes of Wilson, Rodgers, Brees, Kaepernick and even Flacco and Dalton were outside top-10 picks.
-
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Not even going to bother reading a post from someone that think Manziel was going to be a star in this league.
Go ahead. Watch a few youtube videos and think you know something.
Not even going to bother reading a post from someone that think Manziel was going to be a star in this league.
Go ahead. Watch a few youtube videos and think you know something.
Do you have me confused for someone else?
I know it's hard for you to retain facts in that big water head of yours, you dumb fucking dolt.
-
What is your definition of "franchise"?
During your hiatus we got into this question and it became clear definitions ranged from "above average" to "elite". I suspect you're closer to the former, but some reading what you wrote are more towards the latter.
As for the comparative difficulty of finding "franchise" QBs and building otherwise dominant teams... I agree... theoretically. In theory it's easier to find one player than find (and hold) a dozen or more in their prime. More so in today's cap and FA era than ever. Denver seems to be an excellent example of how hard it is compressed into three seasons.
So finding talent at QB, or any position, is easy in theory... not so much in practice... at least not for us. Why? Scouting and coaching would seem to be the answer. Quality of both obviously, but also likely are stability and alignment and maybe more factors such as flexibility/ versatility.
Someone has to have evaluated NFL organizations and the factors separating those with high success rates and those with high failure rates.
Also defined would be how high those rates are.
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Face of the franchise?
Consistent team success?
Consistent individual success?
Dynamic or unique skill set?
Strong leadership?
Some are quantifiable, some are not. But all are common traits among franchise QB's throughout history. Based off of that list, franchise QB's are as follows:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
Scouting and coaching have always been an issue for the Browns, but I think it goes deeper than "we had shit scouts and shit coaches". People like to claim that Cleveland has been monumentally terrible at drafting QB's, that nothing we can do is right...which is true, to an extent. But it's not nearly has bad as it's made out to be.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Weeden was never meant to be a first round pick. That was a panic move and a large reach. There were numerous questions about him. His offensive system. His lack of mobility. Playing in a weak defensive conference. Having a top WR. His age. His leadership.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Anderson wasn't one of our draft picks. Ravens drafted him (had to look up the round, it was in the sixth of 2005 draft) and dropped him, then the Browns picked him up.
-
In a perfect world, a franchise quarterback is the key cog of your team. Floor- Flacco, Ceiling- Brady. It's a nebulous concept, I understand. I kind of look at it this way:
Tier 1 - (Can't do without)
Brady
Manning
Rodgers- fixed it.
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Wilson
Luck
Brees
Tier 2- (Probably can't do without)
Dalton
Newton
Stafford
Ryan
Other Manning
Romo
Tier 1 quarterbacks are interchangeable among themselves. Tier 2 quarterbacks are, predictably, only beaten by Tier 1 quarterbacks. So on and so forth.
We've only tried drafting one high-level franchise savior - Tim Couch. For reasons beyond Couch's control, he failed. Any QB would have failed with that team. No line help, no receiver help, no runningback help. It was a very poor Browns team.
Our other first round QB's (Quinn, Weeden, and Manziel) were taken in the late first, after 20 or more teams had passed on them. Quinn and Manziel had monumental slides, falling from Top 5 prospects to late first round fliers. That's not "franchise material". Those were scared, ill-informed picks. Quinn fits into maybe two of the aforementioned criterium of franchise QB's - unique and team success. He wasn't a leader and he's a very vanilla prospect. Nothing stood out about him except his wonky throw. Manziel... we could talk for days about what qualities he does and doesn't possess.
Like Rodgers, all three of those guys should have waited. Unfortunately, they couldn't. Due to not having other QB's or simple age limitations, those first round projects were thrust into the spotlight and, predictably, collapsed. Not a recipe for success.
Frye and McCoy were never meant to be franchise saviors. They were third round prospects with some qualities and a lot of knocks. They were projects. Yet, due to poor play from our other quarterbacks, they became the "unlikely saviors". Then, once the magic wears off, we're left with mediocre talented game managers on a team devoid of playmakers. Also not a recipe for success.
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Thanks for making my point- How many of those guys were the #1 overall, or a top 10? How many years between when they were drafted? So yeah- unless you get lucky with a Brady, Romo, or Warner- draft a qb high and cross your fingers that you get a Luck instead of an RG III, a Manning instead of a Ryan Leaf. It's not an exact science. If you could re-do the immortal 1983 draft Dan Marino would have been a top 5 pick.
BTW- Rodgers, Flacco and Brees all were all drafted at roughly the same unlucky #22 spot we used, some even lower. So a ton of qb needy teams didn't recognize their potential greatness either.
Thanks for making my point- How many of those guys were the #1 overall, or a top 10? How many years between when they were drafted? So yeah- unless you get lucky with a Brady, Romo, or Warner- draft a qb high and cross your fingers that you get a Luck instead of an RG III, a Manning instead of a Ryan Leaf. It's not an exact science. If you could re-do the immortal 1983 draft Dan Marino would have been a top 5 pick.
BTW- Rodgers, Flacco and Brees all were all drafted at roughly the same unlucky #22 spot we used, some even lower. So a ton of qb needy teams didn't recognize their potential greatness either.
Totally spaced on Rodgers, which is crazy because his is the only non-Browns jersey I own and wear. One of my favorites of all time.
People like to compare Luck vs. RG3, but they were never in the same league. Luck was by-and-large the best QB in that draft, a full on can't-miss prospect. RG3 was an intriguing prospect with seemingly limitless upside and, because of which, an elevated injury risk. Turns out the worry about his health was well-founded.
Manning v. Leaf was a much closer debate, I'll allow, but even then there were more questions about Leaf's character than there were Manning's abilities.
What those two cases are showing is that off-the-field and injury concerns are solid concerns. High-risk/high-reward rarely ends well for first round QB's.
I'm not saying that QB's drafted in the 20's are doomed for failure. What I'm saying is that, if a QB is taken in that position, there's a reason why. Both Quinn and Manziel were slotted for Top 5-Top 10...then they magically slid. So that means there were 20 or so other teams that knew something about them that the Browns didn't or wouldn't acknowledge. Weeden was slotted as a second-round project, not a first round franchise QB.
Flacco, Rodgers and Brees all had their concerns but were, for the most part, drafted near their projections. Brees, it was his height. Flacco, it was his lack of production against quality FBS schools. Rodgers was thought to be a product of a Jeff Tedford system. None of those were concerns about maturity, leadership, mental makeup, skills, etc.
Finding a franchise guy doesn't mean you have to take him first overall. It means you find a guy who possesses many of the same qualities of former or current franchise QB's, fits your offensive identity, and then you do whatever it takes to go and get him. It doesn't mean taking a flier on someone who can run around and play backyard football, it doesn't mean taking the 6'7" guy just because he can throw it 90 yards while sitting, it doesn't mean taking the thin-framed running QB, it doesn't mean taking the guy who threw 90% completion percentage in college with a 5.4 YPA in D-III. Those are projects. If you're going to take a project, at least make sure you have a viable quarterback to man the fort while the project sits.
It's not an exact science, you're right. But it's also not rocket science, nor are the Browns cursed. We've just tried every which way but the right way. Don't bargain basement shop. Don't try and force a project into a starting role too early. Don't try to change the game. If there's not a clear and present favorite for your franchise, then don't waste a pick on a quarterback on a wing and a prayer.
The Browns have only swung on for one franchise player since coming back - Couch. Unfortunately, it failed. Manziel was a project. Weeden was a project. Quinn was a value pick. Frye was a developmental guy. McCoy was a developmental guy. None of those were "This guy is going to change our franchise, let's stop at nothing to get him" picks.
-
Anderson, of all of our draft picks, may have honestly been the best QB pick in terms of value, franchise potential and talent. Unfortunately, he got run out of town. Now he's the best backup in the league.
Anderson wasn't one of our draft picks. Ravens drafted him (had to look up the round, it was in the sixth of 2005 draft) and dropped him, then the Browns picked him up.
-
It's not as if the goal of this retreat is to set a "Big Board" and an FA list. The lack of football detail at that meeting would likely stun you.
Not that there will be no discussion of the on-field performance, but the focus will likely be how the entire organization performed in support of the on-field product... where it succeeded and failed. This should be a high-level, cornerstone, organizational review focusing on goals, budgets, processes and resources (people, services, etc.).
If Haslam is anywhere near the businessman I think he is, then he sets the tone at the opening, delivers his impressions at the closing and in between asks a ton of tough, pointed questions.
I agree....sounds like a typical "year end review" type of meeting.... with an eye on "where are we going next?"....and who's doin what?....
Nothing like being on the same page.....
The only dysfunction i see with this group is in the imagination of the fans who dont understand how well run operations work.......
I agree....sounds like a typical "year end review" type of meeting.... with an eye on "where are we going next?"....and who's doin what?....
Nothing like being on the same page.....
The only dysfunction i see with this group is in the imagination of the fans who dont understand how well run operations work.......
I agree. There are lot's of issues to discuss. I know Pettine wants to take training camp out of Berea. I am sure that was a topic of discussion.
It's not uncommon to go off site for planning sessions. It is a less formal enviornment. People tend to loosen up and think outside the box in a more relaxed environment.
-
I;m in the school of thought that we should keep building this team with BPAs, and adding depth to both lines and the defense.. Acquire a bigWR in FA or the draft and keep the same QBs as last year.
I don't see any Andrew Luck's in this draft, besides Jameis (who still has a lot to prove) and he'll be long gone by 12.
Brian Hoyer was leading a playoff team before the injuries started piling up.
Run game and Defense
We will find our franchise QB soon enough
-
I;m in the school of thought that we should keep building this team with BPAs, and adding depth to both lines and the defense.. Acquire a bigWR in FA or the draft and keep the same QBs as last year.
I don't see any Andrew Luck's in this draft, besides Jameis (who still has a lot to prove) and he'll be long gone by 12.
Brian Hoyer was leading a playoff team before the injuries started piling up.
Run game and Defense
We will find our franchise QB soon enough
I;m in the school of thought that we should keep building this team with BPAs, and adding depth to both lines and the defense.. Acquire a bigWR in FA or the draft and keep the same QBs as last year.
I don't see any Andrew Luck's in this draft, besides Jameis (who still has a lot to prove) and he'll be long gone by 12.
Brian Hoyer was leading a playoff team before the injuries started piling up.
Run game and Defense
We will find our franchise QB soon enough
You're right about Famous Jameis. He has all the measurables Manziel doesn't. But the same off-field concerns- maybe worse. We're not swinging for the fences two years running on a character risk. Mariota has the same concerns as JFF- gimmick system, can he convert to a pro-style offense? I thought Cardale Jones clearly outplayed him in the National Championship.
Don't get me wrong- I love Brian Hoyer- but he's limited. Arm strength is adequate, but his deep ball accuracy frankly sucks. Opposing teams know this, and they'll crowd the box on him now that they have tape, and dare him to beat them over the top with a misguided missile.
-
This club at one point in the season was 7-4 and ended up 7-9. That is what I would like to see diagnosed. How and why did we collapse? I thought our running game wasn't good after Mack went down. I hope Hoyer stays with team for next season. I think he is a good QB and I wonder just how good he can be with improvements made on the offense?
This club at one point in the season was 7-4 and ended up 7-9. That is what I would like to see diagnosed. How and why did we collapse? I thought our running game wasn't good after Mack went down. I hope Hoyer stays with team for next season. I think he is a good QB and I wonder just how good he can be with improvements made on the offense?
because our run stoppers on the DL got injured and our center on the OL went down. those are the 2 major reasons IMO.
-
I'd like to see Hoyer return too, but I suspect he is asking too much money. But then again he kind of has the Browns over a Barrel in the QB position.
Would you bet your team on essentially two guys who have just over two games between them in the NFL?
It will be interesting to see how they handle the QB and now WR questions.
Will it be to the detriment of building from the lines up? That is the real question.
-
I;m in the school of thought that we should keep building this team with BPAs, and adding depth to both lines and the defense.. Acquire a bigWR in FA or the draft and keep the same QBs as last year.
I don't see any Andrew Luck's in this draft, besides Jameis (who still has a lot to prove) and he'll be long gone by 12.
Brian Hoyer was leading a playoff team before the injuries started piling up.
Run game and Defense
We will find our franchise QB soon enough
You're right about Famous Jameis. He has all the measurables Manziel doesn't. But the same off-field concerns- maybe worse. We're not swinging for the fences two years running on a character risk. Mariota has the same concerns as JFF- gimmick system, can he convert to a pro-style offense? I thought Cardale Jones clearly outplayed him in the National Championship.
Don't get me wrong- I love Brian Hoyer- but he's limited. Arm strength is adequate, but his deep ball accuracy frankly sucks. Opposing teams know this, and they'll crowd the box on him now that they have tape, and dare him to beat them over the top with a misguided missile.
You're right about Famous Jameis. He has all the measurables Manziel doesn't. But the same off-field concerns- maybe worse. We're not swinging for the fences two years running on a character risk. Mariota has the same concerns as JFF- gimmick system, can he convert to a pro-style offense? I thought Cardale Jones clearly outplayed him in the National Championship.
Don't get me wrong- I love Brian Hoyer- but he's limited. Arm strength is adequate, but his deep ball accuracy frankly sucks. Opposing teams know this, and they'll crowd the box on him now that they have tape, and dare him to beat them over the top with a misguided missile.
I think the character concerns are much less concerning with Jameis than Manziel.
Obviously the rape issue is huge. That goes without saying. According to his account, which wasn't necessarily outright denied by the accuser, it sounds like a dumb college kid who got drunk at a party and hooked up with a girl while she was very drunk. Creepy and wrong, certainly. Morally questionable, absolutely. A forceful rapist, probably not. This kind of "hookup" happens thousands of times every weekend across the country. Then the shitstorm came about and FSU tried to sweep it under the rug, which made matters infinitely worse.
I know close personal friends who have literally uttered the statement "I was so drunk last night, I barely even (or don't) remember having sex with him/her". My generation loves to get stupid hammered, meet a person or two from Tinder, then go hook up. That's just what happens now. I don't pretend to like it, but I know it's the case.
As for standing up and yelling an obscenity at a cafeteria table? Wouldn't even be talked about if the other issue didn't exist. Jameis would be a consensus #1. Kid hasn't done even half of the immature shit Manziel did or is still doing.
Obviously I'm not condoning or excusing his behavior. It is concerning. But if you've read the documents available, it's not nearly what it's made out to be. It was a stupid kid who made a stupid mistake and then someone possibly attempting a shakedown.
-
You're right about Famous Jameis. He has all the measurables Manziel doesn't. But the same off-field concerns- maybe worse. We're not swinging for the fences two years running on a character risk. Mariota has the same concerns as JFF- gimmick system, can he convert to a pro-style offense? I thought Cardale Jones clearly outplayed him in the National Championship.
Don't get me wrong- I love Brian Hoyer- but he's limited. Arm strength is adequate, but his deep ball accuracy frankly sucks. Opposing teams know this, and they'll crowd the box on him now that they have tape, and dare him to beat them over the top with a misguided missile.
I think the character concerns are much less concerning with Jameis than Manziel.
Obviously the rape issue is huge. That goes without saying. According to his account, which wasn't necessarily outright denied by the accuser, it sounds like a dumb college kid who got drunk at a party and hooked up with a girl while she was very drunk. Creepy and wrong, certainly. Morally questionable, absolutely. A forceful rapist, probably not. This kind of "hookup" happens thousands of times every weekend across the country. Then the shitstorm came about and FSU tried to sweep it under the rug, which made matters infinitely worse.
I know close personal friends who have literally uttered the statement "I was so drunk last night, I barely even (or don't) remember having sex with him/her". My generation loves to get stupid hammered, meet a person or two from Tinder, then go hook up. That's just what happens now. I don't pretend to like it, but I know it's the case.
As for standing up and yelling an obscenity at a cafeteria table? Wouldn't even be talked about if the other issue didn't exist. Jameis would be a consensus #1. Kid hasn't done even half of the immature shit Manziel did or is still doing.
Obviously I'm not condoning or excusing his behavior. It is concerning. But if you've read the documents available, it's not nearly what it's made out to be. It was a stupid kid who made a stupid mistake and then someone possibly attempting a shakedown.
Obviously I'm not condoning or excusing his behavior.
No, it isn't obvious. Nearly everything you wrote sounds like an excuse.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Haslam, Farmer and Pettine off on a 3 day retreat to discuss strategy. It will be interesting to see what their strategy going forward will be? I keep seeing hints about going after the franchise qb. I don't know. We have had big problems in this area. I thought Mariota might be worth going after but I agree with some who have posted here about him playing in a gimmicky offense at Oregon. Winston has the personal issues but looks like he would be a good qb. The other option I see is trying to improve the team with our draft, signing Hoyer as a FA, Shaw as back up. That is the one I like.
Haslam, Farmer and Pettine off on a 3 day retreat to discuss strategy. It will be interesting to see what their strategy going forward will be? I keep seeing hints about going after the franchise qb. I don't know. We have had big problems in this area. I thought Mariota might be worth going after but I agree with some who have posted here about him playing in a gimmicky offense at Oregon. Winston has the personal issues but looks like he would be a good qb. The other option I see is trying to improve the team with our draft, signing Hoyer as a FA, Shaw as back up. That is the one I like.
If Manziel is not on this team I think the best decision was made, however someone from the Haslam/Farmer duo needs to go on TV and say they fucked up.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login