Skip to content

FA's worth a look?

The Browns Board
64 23 2.2k
  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by The Gipper
    #52

    You know, that sorcerer bears a striking resemblance to Banner...if Banner had a beard and were bald.

    f05_00.jpg

    8692186_600x338.jpg

  • @cleinchi said:

    I think they will cut him because since this is a match-up type of defense and not a base defense system... DQ's physical abilities do not provide enough return for his cap number and bonus number. DQ has been one of my favorite players since 99' but he is much better suited for a system that run a more traditional 4-3 as a system as he will not create the positive match up for this system to be it's most effective.

    As Phil Jackson has been the zen master to controlling egos Banner (whether you like him or not) has been the zen master of managing salary cap ...below is a link to a story from 2012..the quotes from Joe Banner tell me that he takes a very analytically approach to connecting value to a player... when I let go of what I like about DQ as a leader I would be shocked to see us retain him....

    http://articles.mcall.com/2012-04-28/sports/mc-eagles-salary-cap-0428-20120428_1_salary-cap-desean-jackson-eagles-president-joe-banner

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    CLEinCHIC CLEinCHI wrote on last edited by
    #53

    @the-gipper said:

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    I think people have the tendency to assign blame or praise on individuals too quick too often. Andy Reid and Joe Banner individually were not the reason for the sustained success of Philly nor was Andy Reid the reason for the Chiefs success or Banner (or Lombardi) for the Browns failures... they are all pieces in a bigger puzzle. Andy Reid was the right piece to a puzzle which included 8 probowlers and a #1 pick and the addition of a solid QB...

    Lombardi seems to be running his department like the majority of other GM's in the league...stay behind the scenes, collect the information and recommendations from your staff and communicate your recommendations to the rest of the FO, Ray Farmer by most accounts is in charge of another team of people looking at the draft (who everyone is so high on) while Lombardi seems to do more with FA... I personally prefer an organization that goes through a process to make decisions than have a GM who wants to just make decisions. So we can only measure Lombardi's success not on individual decisions but how he is managing the process to give the right decision.

    The Browns just need to win. Getting rid of Lombardi/Banner?Haslem is not the solution any of us should want...everything they have done since coming in tells me that there are consistently good times ahead... but it will not be perfect (when is it ever) but I am bought in to the FO when they saw a mistake, fired chud and took on all of the fallout for the sake of doing what they think is the way to give us a consistently winning team.

  • You know, that sorcerer bears a striking resemblance to Banner...if Banner had a beard and were bald.

    f05_00.jpg

    8692186_600x338.jpg

    CLEinCHIC CLEinCHI wrote on last edited by
    #54

    @the-gipper said:

    You know, that sorcerer bears a striking resemblance to Banner...if Banner had a beard and were bald.

    f05_00.jpg

    HAHA

  • @the-gipper said:

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    I think people have the tendency to assign blame or praise on individuals too quick too often. Andy Reid and Joe Banner individually were not the reason for the sustained success of Philly nor was Andy Reid the reason for the Chiefs success or Banner (or Lombardi) for the Browns failures... they are all pieces in a bigger puzzle. Andy Reid was the right piece to a puzzle which included 8 probowlers and a #1 pick and the addition of a solid QB...

    Lombardi seems to be running his department like the majority of other GM's in the league...stay behind the scenes, collect the information and recommendations from your staff and communicate your recommendations to the rest of the FO, Ray Farmer by most accounts is in charge of another team of people looking at the draft (who everyone is so high on) while Lombardi seems to do more with FA... I personally prefer an organization that goes through a process to make decisions than have a GM who wants to just make decisions. So we can only measure Lombardi's success not on individual decisions but how he is managing the process to give the right decision.

    The Browns just need to win. Getting rid of Lombardi/Banner?Haslem is not the solution any of us should want...everything they have done since coming in tells me that there are consistently good times ahead... but it will not be perfect (when is it ever) but I am bought in to the FO when they saw a mistake, fired chud and took on all of the fallout for the sake of doing what they think is the way to give us a consistently winning team.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #55

    @cleinchi said:

    I think people have the tendency to assign blame or praise on individuals too quick too often. Andy Reid and Joe Banner individually were not the reason for the sustained success of Philly nor was Andy Reid the reason for the Chiefs success or Banner (or Lombardi) for the Browns failures... they are all pieces in a bigger puzzle. Andy Reid was the right piece to a puzzle which included 8 probowlers and a #1 pick and the addition of a solid QB...

    Lombardi seems to be running his department like the majority of other GM's in the league...stay behind the scenes, collect the information and recommendations from your staff and communicate your recommendations to the rest of the FO, Ray Farmer by most accounts is in charge of another team of people looking at the draft (who everyone is so high on) while Lombardi seems to do more with FA... I personally prefer an organization that goes through a process to make decisions than have a GM who wants to just make decisions. So we can only measure Lombardi's success not on individual decisions but how he is managing the process to give the right decision.

    The Browns just need to win. Getting rid of Lombardi/Banner?Haslem is not the solution any of us should want...everything they have done since coming in tells me that there are consistently good times ahead... but it will not be perfect (when is it ever) but I am bought in to the FO when they saw a mistake, fired chud and took on all of the fallout for the sake of doing what they think is the way to give us a consistently winning team.

    IF you say the word "process" one more time, I and a couple of dozen other people on here are going to want to kick you in the gonads.

    You can defend Lombardi all you want.....but he has a track record of failure....of making poor choices, and he has to live with the consequences of his past and present failures. Those consequences are: mistrust by the fan base.....and a period of trial and tribulation.

    So....bottom line, you are right. Whatever fucking process he wants to engage in has to be successful....has to be successful now. We no longer need post middle age sorcerer's apprentices mucking stuff up here. His apprenticeship is over. He MUST make magic and make it now. He has until about December 31st this year, otherwise he can be shipped off to Azkhaban or wherever they imprison failed sorcerers.

  • @cleinchi said:

    I think people have the tendency to assign blame or praise on individuals too quick too often. Andy Reid and Joe Banner individually were not the reason for the sustained success of Philly nor was Andy Reid the reason for the Chiefs success or Banner (or Lombardi) for the Browns failures... they are all pieces in a bigger puzzle. Andy Reid was the right piece to a puzzle which included 8 probowlers and a #1 pick and the addition of a solid QB...

    Lombardi seems to be running his department like the majority of other GM's in the league...stay behind the scenes, collect the information and recommendations from your staff and communicate your recommendations to the rest of the FO, Ray Farmer by most accounts is in charge of another team of people looking at the draft (who everyone is so high on) while Lombardi seems to do more with FA... I personally prefer an organization that goes through a process to make decisions than have a GM who wants to just make decisions. So we can only measure Lombardi's success not on individual decisions but how he is managing the process to give the right decision.

    The Browns just need to win. Getting rid of Lombardi/Banner?Haslem is not the solution any of us should want...everything they have done since coming in tells me that there are consistently good times ahead... but it will not be perfect (when is it ever) but I am bought in to the FO when they saw a mistake, fired chud and took on all of the fallout for the sake of doing what they think is the way to give us a consistently winning team.

    IF you say the word "process" one more time, I and a couple of dozen other people on here are going to want to kick you in the gonads.

    You can defend Lombardi all you want.....but he has a track record of failure....of making poor choices, and he has to live with the consequences of his past and present failures. Those consequences are: mistrust by the fan base.....and a period of trial and tribulation.

    So....bottom line, you are right. Whatever fucking process he wants to engage in has to be successful....has to be successful now. We no longer need post middle age sorcerer's apprentices mucking stuff up here. His apprenticeship is over. He MUST make magic and make it now. He has until about December 31st this year, otherwise he can be shipped off to Azkhaban or wherever they imprison failed sorcerers.

    CLEinCHIC CLEinCHI wrote on last edited by
    #56

    @the-gipper said:

    IF you say the word "process" one more time, I and a couple of dozen other people on here are going to want to kick you in the gonads.

    You can defend Lombardi all you want.....but he has a track record of failure....of making poor choices, and he has to live with the consequences of his past and present failures. Those consequences are: mistrust by the fan base.....and a period of trial and tribulation.

    So....bottom line, you are right. Whatever fucking process he wants to engage in has to be successful....has to be successful now. We no longer need post middle age sorcerer's apprentices mucking stuff up here. His apprenticeship is over. He MUST make magic and make it now. He has until about December 31st this year, otherwise he can be shipped off to Azkhaban or wherever they imprison failed sorcerers.

    "Mucking stuff up" implies that there was something positive to "muck up" - but hey you are right he does have until about December 31st this year to show things are working. Process is crap unless there are results...

    That brings up a good question though... It is Dec 31 2014 what does success look like to you, or anyone?

    What would it take for you to say, "OK this is working"?

  • @the-gipper said:

    IF you say the word "process" one more time, I and a couple of dozen other people on here are going to want to kick you in the gonads.

    You can defend Lombardi all you want.....but he has a track record of failure....of making poor choices, and he has to live with the consequences of his past and present failures. Those consequences are: mistrust by the fan base.....and a period of trial and tribulation.

    So....bottom line, you are right. Whatever fucking process he wants to engage in has to be successful....has to be successful now. We no longer need post middle age sorcerer's apprentices mucking stuff up here. His apprenticeship is over. He MUST make magic and make it now. He has until about December 31st this year, otherwise he can be shipped off to Azkhaban or wherever they imprison failed sorcerers.

    "Mucking stuff up" implies that there was something positive to "muck up" - but hey you are right he does have until about December 31st this year to show things are working. Process is crap unless there are results...

    That brings up a good question though... It is Dec 31 2014 what does success look like to you, or anyone?

    What would it take for you to say, "OK this is working"?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #57

    @cleinchi said:

    "Mucking stuff up" implies that there was something positive to "muck up" - but hey you are right he does have until about December 31st this year to show things are working. Process is crap unless there are results...

    That brings up a good question though... It is Dec 31 2014 what does success look like to you, or anyone?

    Ask me on Dec. 30

    What would it take for you to say, "OK this is working"?

  • @cleinchi said:

    I think they will cut him because since this is a match-up type of defense and not a base defense system... DQ's physical abilities do not provide enough return for his cap number and bonus number. DQ has been one of my favorite players since 99' but he is much better suited for a system that run a more traditional 4-3 as a system as he will not create the positive match up for this system to be it's most effective.

    As Phil Jackson has been the zen master to controlling egos Banner (whether you like him or not) has been the zen master of managing salary cap ...below is a link to a story from 2012..the quotes from Joe Banner tell me that he takes a very analytically approach to connecting value to a player... when I let go of what I like about DQ as a leader I would be shocked to see us retain him....

    http://articles.mcall.com/2012-04-28/sports/mc-eagles-salary-cap-0428-20120428_1_salary-cap-desean-jackson-eagles-president-joe-banner

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    Tim Couch Pulls OutT Tim Couch Pulls Out wrote on last edited by
    #58

    @the-gipper said:

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

  • @the-gipper said:

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #59

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

    Fair enough. I do think there is a lot to that. Is our defense that good that an efficient QB, be that Hoyer or Cousins or a rookie make that difference?

  • @the-gipper said:

    OK, that all sounds good.....but what really kept the Eagles winning? Was it Banner's machinations with the salary cap, or the coaching of Andy Reid. Reid took the 2-14 Chiefs to like a 12-4 record this year. And whatever wizardy it may be thought that Banner brings to the salary cap situation, it didn't keep this team from going 4-12. But, of course, they blame that all on Chudzinski.

    Well, here is the deal.....though you may have a wizard at the salary cap....and I think that Banner may very well be that.....you have to have the right guy putting the right talent in front of that wizard, and right now, it could be say that Banner's Apprentice (Lombardi), may be more in the order of this:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

    bbedwardB bbedward wrote on last edited by
    #60

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

    I think Alex smith is a very average but efficient QB.

    I think Andy Reid had a lot more to do with it than smith.

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    I think the acquisition of Alex Smith had a little to do with it.

    When you have a good defense, an efficient quarterback makes all the difference.

    I think Alex smith is a very average but efficient QB.

    I think Andy Reid had a lot more to do with it than smith.

    Tim Couch Pulls OutT Tim Couch Pulls Out wrote on last edited by Tim Couch Pulls Out
    #61

    @bbedward said:

    I think Alex smith is a very average but efficient QB.

    I think Andy Reid had a lot more to do with it than smith.

    Maybe, in that he realized the wealth of talent on his defense and let them win games.

    When you have a defense as talented as the Chiefs' defense, you don't need a high powered offense to win. You don't need a quarterback to take unnecessary risks. You just need an efficient game manager, which Alex Smith is.

    Smith had plenty of strong, strong performances this year (Oakland coming to mind), but his biggest asset is the limited amount of turnovers he yields.

    Its a similar situation as Seattle's, hence the reason they are #1 and #2 in turnover differential.

    Reid recognized the strong points of this team and played to their advantages. There wasn't a lot of roster turnover from the previous regime, which points to better coaching. Their main acquisition was Smith, a guy who had been written off as falling short of expectations.

    Put any other quarterback from their history behind center this year and the Cheifs don't fare as well, I'm sure of it. Same goes for coaching, put any other coach on their sidelines and I don't think they are quite as successful. This was the perfect marriage.

  • tml1138T tml1138 wrote on last edited by
    #62

    There's some talk now that Knowshon Moreno isn't expected to re-sign with the Broncos, and will be FA in 2014 season.

  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #63

    Interesting to see how the FA's are ranked here

    http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/45947/309/2014-nfl-free-agents

  • cdl15C cdl15 wrote on last edited by
    #64

    I'm sure we'll hit a homerun like last year. Throwin goobs of money to Kruger and Cliff Avril going to Seattle for a song.