Skip to content

Sashi's Real Plan (supposedly)

The Browns Board
96 35 4.3k
  • I see what you're saying but I think the #1 pick is the goal, not a mere byproduct. No way to really know unless we can get our spy suits on and sneak into Berea though, and it's likely to happen regardless of the intention of course.

  • Meet you in the middle at "desirable byproduct?"

    The problem of course is that barring a standout QB prospect,which appears to be the case at present, then the first pick is not worth what it otherwise would be.

    Of course were there a standout QB prospect, I can't imagine us not tabbing him...

  • I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

  • I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    @mudfly said:

    I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    I agree Mud-I don't think anyone in the FO anticipated the extent of the effects of a major rebuild. And I have a theory on that concerning the differences between baseball and football. In baseball you can go a long way with pitching and middle of the road players whereas in football the opposition is always seeking the weak link to exploit which can lead to a win. It only takes one or two not so great players (or loss of them to injury) to provide that weakness that leads to losses. It's far more of a team sport in that there must be a unified 11 on two sides of the ball to succeed. Baseball-not so much. You can have 2-3 guys who might be decent fielders but not so great at hitting, but with very good pitching, you can still win a lot of games. We have a baseball FO still trying to figure out how analytics can be adapted to football.

  • i will ad this even tho i am sure it has been said,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,FUCK TRADING DOWN what has it ever got us,,,,,I will tell you ,,,,not a FUCKING THING,,,except shit players who are no longer in the league OR if one of those players do stand out we just end up letting them walk

    so thank you and carry on

  • Meet you in the middle at "desirable byproduct?"

    The problem of course is that barring a standout QB prospect,which appears to be the case at present, then the first pick is not worth what it otherwise would be.

    Of course were there a standout QB prospect, I can't imagine us not tabbing him...

    @tour2ma said:

    Meet you in the middle at "desirable byproduct?"

    The problem of course is that barring a standout QB prospect,which appears to be the case at present, then the first pick is not worth what it otherwise would be.

    Of course were there a standout QB prospect, I can't imagine us not tabbing him...

    @mudfly said:

    I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    I don't think we are tanking the season, I think we just stink. But, for the sake of conversation, what if that was the plan before the season started, when Watson was a stone cold lead pipe lock to be number one and now, near the end of the college football season, that's changed and it's too late to change course? Maybe we positioned ourselves well for the next draft and then Watson played himself out of the top spot, leaving us with our peters in our hands.

  • Find it bizarre that people honestly think the likes of Podesta and Sashi are stupid enough to have walked in and thought let's just do the same as baseball.

    Everything you've thought of they've thought of and a lot more. They're not idiots. The total opposite.

  • But they're not genius' either.....

    Next year we better show improvement. If hue goes 0-20 next year to 0-40, then jimmy better give us a presser.

  • Find it bizarre that people honestly think the likes of Podesta and Sashi are stupid enough to have walked in and thought let's just do the same as baseball.

    Everything you've thought of they've thought of and a lot more. They're not idiots. The total opposite.

    @londonbrown said:

    Find it bizarre that people honestly think the likes of Podesta and Sashi are stupid enough to have walked in and thought let's just do the same as baseball.

    Everything you've thought of they've thought of and a lot more. They're not idiots. The total opposite.

    And yet here we sit at 0-9 with a ton of built in holes that other teams have exploited to the max. I wonder if that figure ever came into their calculations.

    Yep, sheer geniuses. I'm impressed.

  • @londonbrown said:

    Find it bizarre that people honestly think the likes of Podesta and Sashi are stupid enough to have walked in and thought let's just do the same as baseball.

    Everything you've thought of they've thought of and a lot more. They're not idiots. The total opposite.

    And yet here we sit at 0-9 with a ton of built in holes that other teams have exploited to the max. I wonder if that figure ever came into their calculations.

    Yep, sheer geniuses. I'm impressed.

    @texasag1969 said:

    And yet here we sit at 0-9 with a ton of built in holes that other teams have exploited to the max. I wonder if that figure ever came into their calculations.

    Yep, sheer geniuses. I'm impressed.

    No signs of improvement either. Stupid? Genius? The only real difference is that Genius has it's limits.
  • @londonbrown said:

    Find it bizarre that people honestly think the likes of Podesta and Sashi are stupid enough to have walked in and thought let's just do the same as baseball.

    Everything you've thought of they've thought of and a lot more. They're not idiots. The total opposite.

    And yet here we sit at 0-9 with a ton of built in holes that other teams have exploited to the max. I wonder if that figure ever came into their calculations.

    Yep, sheer geniuses. I'm impressed.

    @texasag1969 said:

    And yet here we sit at 0-9 with a ton of built in holes that other teams have exploited to the max. I wonder if that figure ever came into their calculations.

    Yep, sheer geniuses. I'm impressed.

    Yes you said it yourself. Nine games.

  • @mudfly said:

    I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    I agree Mud-I don't think anyone in the FO anticipated the extent of the effects of a major rebuild. And I have a theory on that concerning the differences between baseball and football. In baseball you can go a long way with pitching and middle of the road players whereas in football the opposition is always seeking the weak link to exploit which can lead to a win. It only takes one or two not so great players (or loss of them to injury) to provide that weakness that leads to losses. It's far more of a team sport in that there must be a unified 11 on two sides of the ball to succeed. Baseball-not so much. You can have 2-3 guys who might be decent fielders but not so great at hitting, but with very good pitching, you can still win a lot of games. We have a baseball FO still trying to figure out how analytics can be adapted to football.

    @texasag1969 said:

    I agree Mud-I don't think anyone in the FO anticipated the extent of the effects of a major rebuild. And I have a theory on that concerning the differences between baseball and football. In baseball you can go a long way with pitching and middle of the road players whereas in football the opposition is always seeking the weak link to exploit which can lead to a win. It only takes one or two not so great players (or loss of them to injury) to provide that weakness that leads to losses. It's far more of a team sport in that there must be a unified 11 on two sides of the ball to succeed. Baseball-not so much. You can have 2-3 guys who might be decent fielders but not so great at hitting, but with very good pitching, you can still win a lot of games. We have a baseball FO still trying to figure out how analytics can be adapted to football.

    Thought provoking post...

    The games are different. The analytics are different. In baseball you have to balance offense and defense by assessing both in each player. Not so in football. So in someways individual player evaluations will be simpler while team assembly will be far more complex due to the very interdependence you cite.

    Prompted one additional thought/question... I wonder if DePo produced an expected win range for Jimmah much as he did in the Moneyball scene for the A's owner?

    @stillmotion said:

    But they're not genius' either.....

    Based upon games in season 1?

    You must be a genius.

  • The variables in a baseball pitch compared to a football snap cannot even be compared. To think people like Podesta and Sashi haven't contemplated this is beyond ridiculous.

  • Nor would you have to tell the players. Play calls on both sides of the ball are more than enough to tank a game in a half.

    That said.... ummmmm... no.... not buying it.

    @tour2ma said:

    Nor would you have to tell the players. Play calls on both sides of the ball are more than enough to tank a game in a half.

    That said.... ummmmm... no.... not buying it.

    After watching the TNF game, I'm beginning to wonder ... They've looked like a football team in the 1st half of most games this season, even winning at half ( 5 games ), and then looked like total garbage and have gotten blown out.

    They look like they've mailed it in and are just going through the motions.

    And lastly .... why would you take out Kessler of the Balt game, put in McCown who promptly starts taking huge losses on sacks, as well as throwing INTs ( yes, one was forced by fuckhead Suggs. )

  • @tour2ma said:

    Nor would you have to tell the players. Play calls on both sides of the ball are more than enough to tank a game in a half.

    That said.... ummmmm... no.... not buying it.

    After watching the TNF game, I'm beginning to wonder ... They've looked like a football team in the 1st half of most games this season, even winning at half ( 5 games ), and then looked like total garbage and have gotten blown out.

    They look like they've mailed it in and are just going through the motions.

    And lastly .... why would you take out Kessler of the Balt game, put in McCown who promptly starts taking huge losses on sacks, as well as throwing INTs ( yes, one was forced by fuckhead Suggs. )

    @john.r.brown1968 said:

    After watching the TNF game, I'm beginning to wonder ... They've looked like a football team in the 1st half of most games this season, even winning at half ( 5 games ), and then looked like total garbage and have gotten blown out.

    They look like they've mailed it in and are just going through the motions.

    And lastly .... why would you take out Kessler of the Balt game, put in McCown who promptly starts taking huge losses on sacks, as well as throwing INTs ( yes, one was forced by fuckhead Suggs. )

    Because they're purposely trying to lose

    How many mind boggling decisions is it going to take for you guys to see?

    How many games of us being competitive in the first half, and looking like a completely different team in the 2nd half is it going to take?

  • Cody Kessler: 2 turnovers all season

    Josh McCown: 3 turnovers today

  • Still not buying the tank...

    Also still can't believe the FO is "shocked"...

  • I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    @mudfly said:

    I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    What a joyous 2nd half.

    @tour2ma said:

    Still not buying the tank...

    Also still can't believe the FO is "shocked"...

    Tour- I'm gonna spew in a new thread. I thought another loss wouldn't hurt. But this is BS, it sucks, and I can't take it anymore.

  • @mudfly said:

    I cant get with the idea that they are trying to lose or that the #1 was their goal.....not seeing it.....Especially since there is no clear target at the #1.....ala an Andrew Luck or something...that is worth losing a whole season over.....

    (and, as Tour so astutely pointed out, the value drops w/o a super prospect at the top)....so tank a whole season for ???? who?

    Grossi was on the radio yesterday and played a Shashi sound bite from earlier this season....and the basic gist was Shashi saying they are planning to win this year and show immediate, measurable improvement......and when asked how many wins would be an improvement 4 or 5?.....his reply was "any less than that would be a major disappointment.....soooo, less than 4-5 wins are a major disappointment, as per Shashi(the plans architect)....so, what would that make 0-16, a major what?....success?.....nope

    I dont think he would have said that if tanking all the games was his plan......he woulda talked around it......

    Honestly think "he" thought they would win......and was wrong....simple as that

    What a joyous 2nd half.

    @tour2ma said:

    Still not buying the tank...

    Also still can't believe the FO is "shocked"...

    Tour- I'm gonna spew in a new thread. I thought another loss wouldn't hurt. But this is BS, it sucks, and I can't take it anymore.

    @hoorta said:

    Tour- I'm gonna spew in a new thread. I thought another loss wouldn't hurt. But this is BS, it sucks, and I can't take it anymore.

    Ya gotta do what ya gotta do...

  • @ballpeen said:

    I agree. We don't need any more picks. We need players.

    Here's an idea....how about trading some of those picks to move up?

    Screw trading down.

    Do you mean so we can get 'better' players instead of backups and special teamers?

    Blasphemy!

    ...how are you ballpeen? It's me, aka VetteDawg...

    @orion said:

    Do you mean so we can get 'better' players instead of backups and special teamers?

    Blasphemy!

    ...how are you ballpeen? It's me, aka VetteDawg...

    Dang Vette.....how the heck are you?? Well I hope! I am doing fine...well....except for the Browns, but in the big scheme, that is small potatos.