The... I am batting (maybe alone) for the front office thread
-
I think someone has posted it somewhere: they haven't really TRIED to get the franchise QB yet.
It is an interesting move since it is the hardest position to address, so if everytime you go to the draft, you draft one, but not in the first round, it's like stating that you obviously need a quaterback, while you don't take risks and gain some time. I was really glad they took Kizer in the 2nd round, because he was by some of the analysts I follow the top prospect, and you take him with your 4th pick, not putting so much pressure neither on him or on you (FO). If the QBs you draft don't make it, well, they're lower rounds. If they work out, you're a genius.
Anyway, the time to pass on QBs has gone. They have to take one in the first round (whether Kizer improves or not) and having someone such as Manning in the building as a consultant would be great.
I think someone has posted it somewhere: they haven't really TRIED to get the franchise QB yet.
It is an interesting move since it is the hardest position to address, so if everytime you go to the draft, you draft one, but not in the first round, it's like stating that you obviously need a quaterback, while you don't take risks and gain some time. I was really glad they took Kizer in the 2nd round, because he was by some of the analysts I follow the top prospect, and you take him with your 4th pick, not putting so much pressure neither on him or on you (FO). If the QBs you draft don't make it, well, they're lower rounds. If they work out, you're a genius.
Anyway, the time to pass on QBs has gone. They have to take one in the first round (whether Kizer improves or not) and having someone such as Manning in the building as a consultant would be great.
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
"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 -
I think someone has posted it somewhere: they haven't really TRIED to get the franchise QB yet.
It is an interesting move since it is the hardest position to address, so if everytime you go to the draft, you draft one, but not in the first round, it's like stating that you obviously need a quaterback, while you don't take risks and gain some time. I was really glad they took Kizer in the 2nd round, because he was by some of the analysts I follow the top prospect, and you take him with your 4th pick, not putting so much pressure neither on him or on you (FO). If the QBs you draft don't make it, well, they're lower rounds. If they work out, you're a genius.
Anyway, the time to pass on QBs has gone. They have to take one in the first round (whether Kizer improves or not) and having someone such as Manning in the building as a consultant would be great.
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
on November 8, Nero said in 'Two Picks in the Top Ten'...
<<I think it is more difficult to fit a rookie QB in a NFL team and make an impact in the first year if everything around him doesn't work well. I believe college QBs are less and less prepared to play in pro level with the systems they run on college. At least in their first year. Wentz didn't have a great rookie year with the drop circus he had around him last year, and Watson has played at an oustanding level in an offense which for years has only lacked a QB.
Will we see one of those top draft picks traded for a veteran QB? For me the clever move would be creating the least QB dependable team possible. Strong run game, stout defense. 20 years with no franchise quaterback and after two drafts drafting QBs in 3rd and 2nd round you wanna give a shoot in the first at the probably one draft you have left? Risky business...>>
Well, I have my doubts on what should be the move in the draft.
On the one side, if Coleman and Gordon play to what's expected of them (a game changer in Gordon's case), and Kizer improves greatly, it will be a matter of adding a WR and maybe a RB to get the attack going. You don't waste a pick in a QB because you already have one that could work, and that pick is used to fill other holes this roster still has.
But on the other side, I would also like to have a top QB prospect, due to some reasons:
A, you get more chances to get a franchise QB if you multiply the choices every year, not going 1 QB per year, because if the one you chose he doesn't work, you're doomed. I'm up for a fight for the spot between to young QBs or maybe even a veteran.
B, if Kizer improves in this season, and you make the choice not to draft a QB in the top of the draft in a 'good QB year', you're setting up yourself in a bad position. I mean, everyone in the league already thinks that this process is set up for failure, and there are many fans even in this very board that think the same, how long will it take for the Haslams to think it too and shut down everything? If you draft a QB in the top of the draft, and it doesn't work as planned (with the rookie or with Kizer) at least you can defend yourself saying that you TRIED and did what the rest of the league thought was logical. It's like taking Garrett this year, if he doesn't pan out as a great pass rusher, well THE WHOLE LEAGUE was wrong, and you cannot be blamed if he ends up being a bust, because everyone else would have made the same move.
I guess that I will see everything more clearly as the draft comes closer, and it is funny that though this season is already 'lost', the end of the season is of the utmost importance for the future of this team.
About the game in Madrid, heh, I don't see that happening. Maybe Germany, there's a good fanbade there.
-
Another European on the board is welcome news and especially one with such stout judgement as shown so far! Now, if you're a Real fan from Madrid lets talk about that Champions League game at Wembley the other week because boy, WE KICKED YOUR ARSES
-
I don't like Real Madrid. Maybe in Champions is the only place where I have rooted for them as being a Spanish team. But I don't care if they lose or win. I'm fan of Osasuna, my home town team, which is a humble team currently atop of the Segunda Division... Our only joy for years has been putting in trouble big teams in Primera Division, hehehe.
-
Oh Jesus-futbol.
How come they don't call it pelota de pie?
-
Oh Jesus-futbol.
How come they don't call it pelota de pie?
Oh Jesus-futbol.
How come they don't call it pelota de pie?
We call it balompie sometimes too.
-
Oh Jesus-futbol.
How come they don't call it pelota de pie?
We call it balompie sometimes too.
-
Do you play for keeps like these guys did?
Keeps? I don't understand. Like towers?
-
I don't like Real Madrid. Maybe in Champions is the only place where I have rooted for them as being a Spanish team. But I don't care if they lose or win. I'm fan of Osasuna, my home town team, which is a humble team currently atop of the Segunda Division... Our only joy for years has been putting in trouble big teams in Primera Division, hehehe.
I don't like Real Madrid. Maybe in Champions is the only place where I have rooted for them as being a Spanish team. But I don't care if they lose or win. I'm fan of Osasuna, my home town team, which is a humble team currently atop of the Segunda Division... Our only joy for years has been putting in trouble big teams in Primera Division, hehehe.
I know Osasuna from the north, and remember them playing in European competition too.
-
I don't like Real Madrid. Maybe in Champions is the only place where I have rooted for them as being a Spanish team. But I don't care if they lose or win. I'm fan of Osasuna, my home town team, which is a humble team currently atop of the Segunda Division... Our only joy for years has been putting in trouble big teams in Primera Division, hehehe.
I don't like Real Madrid. Maybe in Champions is the only place where I have rooted for them as being a Spanish team. But I don't care if they lose or win. I'm fan of Osasuna, my home town team, which is a humble team currently atop of the Segunda Division... Our only joy for years has been putting in trouble big teams in Primera Division, hehehe.
You are going to get into trouble with Z if you keep up the futbol talk.
-
I think someone has posted it somewhere: they haven't really TRIED to get the franchise QB yet.
It is an interesting move since it is the hardest position to address, so if everytime you go to the draft, you draft one, but not in the first round, it's like stating that you obviously need a quaterback, while you don't take risks and gain some time. I was really glad they took Kizer in the 2nd round, because he was by some of the analysts I follow the top prospect, and you take him with your 4th pick, not putting so much pressure neither on him or on you (FO). If the QBs you draft don't make it, well, they're lower rounds. If they work out, you're a genius.
Anyway, the time to pass on QBs has gone. They have to take one in the first round (whether Kizer improves or not) and having someone such as Manning in the building as a consultant would be great.
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
And we've done far too much panicking. Wheezy and the Party Boy. Rolling the dice in the lower rounds, Frye, McCoy, Kessler. But in this case- we have the picks Tour. I think one of the top qbs is going to emerge, and we're sitting atop the draft board again.
They valued picks more than talent in the past Tour. I was on the Wentz wagon- just a reminder. It's time to use some of that draft capital. I agree it's too early to get serious about the guys who are coming out- there's going to be months to hash that out.
-
I agree that you can't hold Dak Prescott against the Browns front office but clearly the Eagles needed a QB and moved into the Browns spot to draft him #2. Another front office evaluated Wentz and to this point he appears to be a franchise QB.
I know you have a typo there and did not mean to say Dak Prescott. But I do have an issue with the FO not taking Prescott and said he was a franchise maker from the beginning. I also wanted the Browns to take Watson, but only after they took Garrett.
So in my mind this FO f'd up the QB not once, but twice. They need help in picking just as much as Hue needs game day management help. Neither one (FO and /or HC) knows how to pick the right player when they are there for the taking at the QB position. Or if one of them knew but got overruled then fire the one(s) who overruled. Those were two big misses that even an amateur like me (and Tour at least on Prescott) could see well before the draft took place. And how they could take a 5th rounder like Kessler in the 3rd when Dak was sitting right there is unforgivable. Their due diligence research could have told them Dak's little run-in with DUI (which later did not hold up in court) was a one time thing even if it was real. That is what a good FO is supposed to be best at doing.
This year I see the best as Darnold and Rosen with the showdown this Saturday being the deciding factor. Allen I have now seen on multiple occasions and think he's career backup (if that). I have not really seen a full game from Lamar Jackson yet but plan to watch his game against Kentucky. I want to see the accurate arm and the progressions that I see in Darnold and Rosen.
I know you have a typo there and did not mean to say Dak Prescott. But I do have an issue with the FO not taking Prescott and said he was a franchise maker from the beginning. I also wanted the Browns to take Watson, but only after they took Garrett.
So in my mind this FO f'd up the QB not once, but twice. They need help in picking just as much as Hue needs game day management help. Neither one (FO and /or HC) knows how to pick the right player when they are there for the taking at the QB position. Or if one of them knew but got overruled then fire the one(s) who overruled. Those were two big misses that even an amateur like me (and Tour at least on Prescott) could see well before the draft took place. And how they could take a 5th rounder like Kessler in the 3rd when Dak was sitting right there is unforgivable. Their due diligence research could have told them Dak's little run-in with DUI (which later did not hold up in court) was a one time thing even if it was real. That is what a good FO is supposed to be best at doing.
This year I see the best as Darnold and Rosen with the showdown this Saturday being the deciding factor. Allen I have now seen on multiple occasions and think he's career backup (if that). I have not really seen a full game from Lamar Jackson yet but plan to watch his game against Kentucky. I want to see the accurate arm and the progressions that I see in Darnold and Rosen.
No typo every organization passed on Prescott and Dallas made a nice call getting him where they did but he obviously didn't impress anyone. Not saying he's not a solid QB but you can't hold a front office to blame for something that 31 teams passed on him multiple times.
I don't think a difference maker is in this years draft but I'm a fan not a paid NFL scout so we'll see come draft day.
-
Do you play for keeps like these guys did?
Keeps? I don't understand. Like towers?
-
I'm liking you more with every post... Here's to an NFL game in Madrid before decade's end!
My old saying has been, "You are always looking for your next QB." Only thing that changes is the urgency of the search and price you are willing to pay. Too often we have had panicked "football guys" fearful for their jobs reach for the Weedens (a/k/a Wheezies) and JFFs of the draft... and it's killed this franchise.
At the time I thought Kizer was the value QB pick of the first two rounds... and his value was only exceeded in the entire draft by Mr. Irrelevant 2017, Chad Kelly, my super sleeper, who has a real shot at being a star if he can keep his Sheet together. I had to drop the value of my 2017 Darkhorse, C.J. Beathard, who I thought was over-drafted in R3 by the 49ers, but he has won their starting job for now, so maybe he will end up worth the price they paid.
Agree the clock is rapidly running out to be sure enough on Kizer to declare him "the guy", but the draft is another issue entirely. And this is where we part ways in this exchange.
We can't go into the draft saying "we have to" and then take the QB we feel has the best shot at making it. We have to believe such a high pick will make it... or else it's just another panic move by a FO.
on November 8, Nero said in 'Two Picks in the Top Ten'...
<<I think it is more difficult to fit a rookie QB in a NFL team and make an impact in the first year if everything around him doesn't work well. I believe college QBs are less and less prepared to play in pro level with the systems they run on college. At least in their first year. Wentz didn't have a great rookie year with the drop circus he had around him last year, and Watson has played at an oustanding level in an offense which for years has only lacked a QB.
Will we see one of those top draft picks traded for a veteran QB? For me the clever move would be creating the least QB dependable team possible. Strong run game, stout defense. 20 years with no franchise quaterback and after two drafts drafting QBs in 3rd and 2nd round you wanna give a shoot in the first at the probably one draft you have left? Risky business...>>
Well, I have my doubts on what should be the move in the draft.
On the one side, if Coleman and Gordon play to what's expected of them (a game changer in Gordon's case), and Kizer improves greatly, it will be a matter of adding a WR and maybe a RB to get the attack going. You don't waste a pick in a QB because you already have one that could work, and that pick is used to fill other holes this roster still has.
But on the other side, I would also like to have a top QB prospect, due to some reasons:
A, you get more chances to get a franchise QB if you multiply the choices every year, not going 1 QB per year, because if the one you chose he doesn't work, you're doomed. I'm up for a fight for the spot between to young QBs or maybe even a veteran.
B, if Kizer improves in this season, and you make the choice not to draft a QB in the top of the draft in a 'good QB year', you're setting up yourself in a bad position. I mean, everyone in the league already thinks that this process is set up for failure, and there are many fans even in this very board that think the same, how long will it take for the Haslams to think it too and shut down everything? If you draft a QB in the top of the draft, and it doesn't work as planned (with the rookie or with Kizer) at least you can defend yourself saying that you TRIED and did what the rest of the league thought was logical. It's like taking Garrett this year, if he doesn't pan out as a great pass rusher, well THE WHOLE LEAGUE was wrong, and you cannot be blamed if he ends up being a bust, because everyone else would have made the same move.
I guess that I will see everything more clearly as the draft comes closer, and it is funny that though this season is already 'lost', the end of the season is of the utmost importance for the future of this team.
About the game in Madrid, heh, I don't see that happening. Maybe Germany, there's a good fanbade there.
on November 8, Nero said in 'Two Picks in the Top Ten'...
<<I think it is more difficult to fit a rookie QB in a NFL team and make an impact in the first year if everything around him doesn't work well. I believe college QBs are less and less prepared to play in pro level with the systems they run on college. At least in their first year. Wentz didn't have a great rookie year with the drop circus he had around him last year, and Watson has played at an oustanding level in an offense which for years has only lacked a QB.
Will we see one of those top draft picks traded for a veteran QB? For me the clever move would be creating the least QB dependable team possible. Strong run game, stout defense. 20 years with no franchise quaterback and after two drafts drafting QBs in 3rd and 2nd round you wanna give a shoot in the first at the probably one draft you have left? Risky business...>>
Well, I have my doubts on what should be the move in the draft.
On the one side, if Coleman and Gordon play to what's expected of them (a game changer in Gordon's case), and Kizer improves greatly, it will be a matter of adding a WR and maybe a RB to get the attack going. You don't waste a pick in a QB because you already have one that could work, and that pick is used to fill other holes this roster still has.
But on the other side, I would also like to have a top QB prospect, due to some reasons:
A, you get more chances to get a franchise QB if you multiply the choices every year, not going 1 QB per year, because if the one you chose he doesn't work, you're doomed. I'm up for a fight for the spot between to young QBs or maybe even a veteran.
B, if Kizer improves in this season, and you make the choice not to draft a QB in the top of the draft in a 'good QB year', you're setting up yourself in a bad position. I mean, everyone in the league already thinks that this process is set up for failure, and there are many fans even in this very board that think the same, how long will it take for the Haslams to think it too and shut down everything? If you draft a QB in the top of the draft, and it doesn't work as planned (with the rookie or with Kizer) at least you can defend yourself saying that you TRIED and did what the rest of the league thought was logical. It's like taking Garrett this year, if he doesn't pan out as a great pass rusher, well THE WHOLE LEAGUE was wrong, and you cannot be blamed if he ends up being a bust, because everyone else would have made the same move.
I guess that I will see everything more clearly as the draft comes closer, and it is funny that though this season is already 'lost', the end of the season is of the utmost importance for the future of this team.
About the game in Madrid, heh, I don't see that happening. Maybe Germany, there's a good fanbade there.
But I've already been to Germany...
Very close to your takes in the above... especially your self-quote. We've certainly taken the route of building a less QB dependent team, but in part that's because we haven't seen the QB as yet. Maybe this year we do... and the QB is...
I think we take a QB somewhere early this year... as in either Day one or two... all depending upon the talent evaluation. If we end up with two viable starters, then one can always be traded. QBs are second only to draft picks as trade currency.
As for the Haslams... no guarantees... only the hope, or at least my hope, is that they can stay the course at least thru the 2018 Draft and season. Hard to do given the wailing in the peanut gallery, but i find it hard to believe they did not sign on for at least three years come what may.
-
on November 8, Nero said in 'Two Picks in the Top Ten'...
<<I think it is more difficult to fit a rookie QB in a NFL team and make an impact in the first year if everything around him doesn't work well. I believe college QBs are less and less prepared to play in pro level with the systems they run on college. At least in their first year. Wentz didn't have a great rookie year with the drop circus he had around him last year, and Watson has played at an oustanding level in an offense which for years has only lacked a QB.
Will we see one of those top draft picks traded for a veteran QB? For me the clever move would be creating the least QB dependable team possible. Strong run game, stout defense. 20 years with no franchise quaterback and after two drafts drafting QBs in 3rd and 2nd round you wanna give a shoot in the first at the probably one draft you have left? Risky business...>>
Well, I have my doubts on what should be the move in the draft.
On the one side, if Coleman and Gordon play to what's expected of them (a game changer in Gordon's case), and Kizer improves greatly, it will be a matter of adding a WR and maybe a RB to get the attack going. You don't waste a pick in a QB because you already have one that could work, and that pick is used to fill other holes this roster still has.
But on the other side, I would also like to have a top QB prospect, due to some reasons:
A, you get more chances to get a franchise QB if you multiply the choices every year, not going 1 QB per year, because if the one you chose he doesn't work, you're doomed. I'm up for a fight for the spot between to young QBs or maybe even a veteran.
B, if Kizer improves in this season, and you make the choice not to draft a QB in the top of the draft in a 'good QB year', you're setting up yourself in a bad position. I mean, everyone in the league already thinks that this process is set up for failure, and there are many fans even in this very board that think the same, how long will it take for the Haslams to think it too and shut down everything? If you draft a QB in the top of the draft, and it doesn't work as planned (with the rookie or with Kizer) at least you can defend yourself saying that you TRIED and did what the rest of the league thought was logical. It's like taking Garrett this year, if he doesn't pan out as a great pass rusher, well THE WHOLE LEAGUE was wrong, and you cannot be blamed if he ends up being a bust, because everyone else would have made the same move.
I guess that I will see everything more clearly as the draft comes closer, and it is funny that though this season is already 'lost', the end of the season is of the utmost importance for the future of this team.
About the game in Madrid, heh, I don't see that happening. Maybe Germany, there's a good fanbade there.
But I've already been to Germany...
Very close to your takes in the above... especially your self-quote. We've certainly taken the route of building a less QB dependent team, but in part that's because we haven't seen the QB as yet. Maybe this year we do... and the QB is...
I think we take a QB somewhere early this year... as in either Day one or two... all depending upon the talent evaluation. If we end up with two viable starters, then one can always be traded. QBs are second only to draft picks as trade currency.
As for the Haslams... no guarantees... only the hope, or at least my hope, is that they can stay the course at least thru the 2018 Draft and season. Hard to do given the wailing in the peanut gallery, but i find it hard to believe they did not sign on for at least three years come what may.
As for the Haslams... no guarantees... only the hope, or at least my hope, is that they can stay the course at least thru the 2018 Draft and season. Hard to do given the wailing in the peanut gallery, but i find it hard to believe they did not sign on for at least three years come what may.
I don't know Buffalo Bob. Howdy (Jimmy) looks mighty shaky. And the coaching/FO look more and more like Clarabell's Clowns every game.
-
I think the most frustrating thing to consider is a QB taken in the upcoming draft might have a worse supporting cast NOW than hypothetically Wentz would have had two years ago...
At best, Thomas is a few years older now, coming off a season-ending injury. RB could have a big hole if Crowell isn't brought back (which I expect). WR is a vast wasteland. I am optimistic about Devalve and Njoku though.
This front office in the last two years, if they were waiting to go all-in on a franchise QB now, did a poor job getting the foundation around him set up.
-
As for the Haslams... no guarantees... only the hope, or at least my hope, is that they can stay the course at least thru the 2018 Draft and season. Hard to do given the wailing in the peanut gallery, but i find it hard to believe they did not sign on for at least three years come what may.
I don't know Buffalo Bob. Howdy (Jimmy) looks mighty shaky. And the coaching/FO look more and more like Clarabell's Clowns every game.
I don't know Buffalo Bob. Howdy (Jimmy) looks mighty shaky. And the coaching/FO look more and more like Clarabell's Clowns every game.
lol... Well... I have no issues defending the FO all day long, but Hue? Much harder...
Sad thing is that Hue has made it hard by trying to do two jobs.
I think the most frustrating thing to consider is a QB taken in the upcoming draft might have a worse supporting cast NOW than hypothetically Wentz would have had two years ago...
At best, Thomas is a few years older now, coming off a season-ending injury. RB could have a big hole if Crowell isn't brought back (which I expect). WR is a vast wasteland. I am optimistic about Devalve and Njoku though.
This front office in the last two years, if they were waiting to go all-in on a franchise QB now, did a poor job getting the foundation around him set up.
I assume that by selecting "two years ago" you are magically bringing Wentz together with our 2015 starters, rather than the 2016 squad which times up with Carson's rookie season. Certainly wistful, if not wishful, there.
The 2018 OL with a restored JT is vastly better than 2016. This is your "foundation"... and it's a sturdy one... with decent depth to boot.
I think Crow will boil down to "valuation" and I don't think retaining him is a given. In addition to the Draft, there's a pretty good list of FAs coming this off-season.
WR? Another good FA list, including a humbled TP, plus Josh and a healthy Corey has the potential turns that room around quickly.
Agree on TE... your 2015 choice obviously brings Barn's miracle year into the discussion, but I'll still roll with our kids going forward.
-
The NY Giants are 1-8 with their 2nd year HC Ben McAdoo.
Anyone willing to wager that WON’T get shitcanned at the end of the season?
I say he’s as good as gone...any takers?
The NY Giants are 1-8 with their 2nd year HC Ben McAdoo.
Anyone willing to wager that WON’T get shitcanned at the end of the season?
I say he’s as good as gone...any takers?
Interesting point CD. He sure looks like a Dead Man Walking just 1 season after going 11-5.
IMO, it often boils down to progress vrs regression. If there's enough regression to where a considerable portion of the veteran buy-in is lost - it's hard to save a staff that lost the team. That seems to be the case with the Giants.
Think about some of the things we've seen here. In 2007, we went 10-6. The next year we only won 4 or 5 games and our HC and FO were fired.
In 2014, the 7-4 start in Cleveland in spite of numerous injuries behind a rookie Head Coach was a GREAT story that had many of us thinking we finally turned the corner once and for all. When you're winning like that the players are buying in and the fans are high five'n. Unfortunately, over the next 21 games we only went 3-18. When you have that kind of a drop off - there's also going to be a similar drop off in the number of players buying into the coaching staff. The Head Coach and FO were fired.
And the new HC and FO are off to a 1-24 start. We're almost as good as we were in 1999 and 2000...
I welcome the only Defensive Coordinator to earn a Superbowl Ring in New Orleans while understanding Revenge of the Nerds is a sequel. "Come get some!" -
The NY Giants are 1-8 with their 2nd year HC Ben McAdoo.
Anyone willing to wager that WON’T get shitcanned at the end of the season?
I say he’s as good as gone...any takers?
Interesting point CD. He sure looks like a Dead Man Walking just 1 season after going 11-5.
IMO, it often boils down to progress vrs regression. If there's enough regression to where a considerable portion of the veteran buy-in is lost - it's hard to save a staff that lost the team. That seems to be the case with the Giants.
Think about some of the things we've seen here. In 2007, we went 10-6. The next year we only won 4 or 5 games and our HC and FO were fired.
In 2014, the 7-4 start in Cleveland in spite of numerous injuries behind a rookie Head Coach was a GREAT story that had many of us thinking we finally turned the corner once and for all. When you're winning like that the players are buying in and the fans are high five'n. Unfortunately, over the next 21 games we only went 3-18. When you have that kind of a drop off - there's also going to be a similar drop off in the number of players buying into the coaching staff. The Head Coach and FO were fired.
And the new HC and FO are off to a 1-24 start. We're almost as good as we were in 1999 and 2000...
And the new HC and FO are off to a 1-24 start. We're almost as good as we were in 1999 and 2000...
Jimmy sold us on the process and said we'd be competitive in 2018 and 2019 for sure. Let's hold him to that. If he's 60 million under the cap or more again next year Flugel, then that means the Browns don't have the intention to add free agent talent yet. We said we wanted to "build through the draft", but we desperately need someone besides Andrew Berry picking the talent. Otherwise, we could end up in a process where our franchise is considered toxic, and no one wants to go here. Also, the young guys we've signed would look to bounce elsewhere after their rookie contracts are up if we do not start winning next year. But what is considered winning? Is 5 games with this current regime considered a winning season or progress in 2018? Better yet, if we don't win 8 games in 2019, is that considered a failure?
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