Move Over Sashi .....
-
Seems like Dee Haslam keeps getting left out of the equation. She gets the same vote as Jimbo. I'm just guessing but I bet their votes carry more weight than Stosh's vote.
-
*** sigh ***
I quit...
"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 fully understand that the Browns entire scouting staff has input into the decisions that are made. But it is still Sashi with the final decision.
If 9 out of 10 scouts say we need to take X player, I suspect Sashi says, yes, lets take X.
But if 4 say lets take Y, and 3 say lets take Z and 2 say lets take Q, and one says lets take # then Sashi will likely be the one to say that we are taking the guy he chooses....his final word. (after he runs it past the owner....at least for the first round picks)
No... Sashi is not the judge... not "The Decider"... and he is not polling 10 scouts. Stop trying to put him into the "weeds". This is consensus driven, organizational decision making, not the hierarchical dictate-driven system of Paul Brown or Bill Polian that you have stuck in your head.
- He has two heads of Scouting to produce two boards: one draft, one FA.
- He has an Analytics group to produce the same two boards.
- He facilitates the merging of the boards with Cap input to develop a Player Personnel Strategy.
In the first two activities, he won't be in the working sessions. On those he'll get progress reports. He will sit in the independent meetings to formulate each group's final board. He may or may not participate in these, but to the extent he does it will be to drive the process, not its product. He will take a ton of notes.
In the third activity, the merger process, he'll not only be in the meeting, he will drive it, run it looking for:
- unanimity, either pro or con, which he will test for "groupthink" error.
- general, but not strong, agreement that he needs to flesh out.
- strong disagreement to probe.
This is when his notes will come out. He'll use them to:
- surface dissenting views he heard in the pre-meetings to test what he now hears... especially if unanimity is now all he is hearing.
- develop general agreements in to solid positions all can live with, i.e., form consensus.
- facilitate strong disagreement discussion to develop the each side's understanding of the others position and see if there's hope for consensus and recognize when there is no hope.
Consensus may come in many forms. In the discussion one side might "win over" the other... as in "convince", not "beat". More likely would be adjusting a player's grouping on the final board... as in "if he falls to us here," or "if he accepts this lower offer."
But sometimes consensus will not be reached; a significant divide will persist. The default position for that case should be to pass on a player and in his stead go after a consensus choice.
I guarantee you it will not be Sashi mulling a split-decision case over and then taking it to Jimmah. Simply is not Sashi's role and he knows it. He also knows it's not Jimmah's role.
Jimmah? His can be any role he wants it to be, but hopefully he's learned his limitations. And the above process is our greatest hope that Jimmah remembers lessons of the past.
The above process means that when the full Player Personnel Strategy (including budget) is presented to Jimmah by Sashi and the departments heads, if/when Jimmah asks, "Why is Player X (who he just read Mel Kiper rave about on the flight to Berea) is so low on our Board?" The group can respond, "WE don't think he's worth the higher pick/offer because..."
No... Sashi is not the judge... not "The Decider"... and he is not polling 10 scouts. Stop trying to put him into the "weeds". This is consensus driven, organizational decision making, not the hierarchical dictate-driven system of Paul Brown or Bill Polian that you have stuck in your head.
- He has two heads of Scouting to produce two boards: one draft, one FA.
- He has an Analytics group to produce the same two boards.
- He facilitates the merging of the boards with Cap input to develop a Player Personnel Strategy.
In the first two activities, he won't be in the working sessions. On those he'll get progress reports. He will sit in the independent meetings to formulate each group's final board. He may or may not participate in these, but to the extent he does it will be to drive the process, not its product. He will take a ton of notes.
In the third activity, the merger process, he'll not only be in the meeting, he will drive it, run it looking for:
- unanimity, either pro or con, which he will test for "groupthink" error.
- general, but not strong, agreement that he needs to flesh out.
- strong disagreement to probe.
This is when his notes will come out. He'll use them to:
- surface dissenting views he heard in the pre-meetings to test what he now hears... especially if unanimity is now all he is hearing.
- develop general agreements in to solid positions all can live with, i.e., form consensus.
- facilitate strong disagreement discussion to develop the each side's understanding of the others position and see if there's hope for consensus and recognize when there is no hope.
Consensus may come in many forms. In the discussion one side might "win over" the other... as in "convince", not "beat". More likely would be adjusting a player's grouping on the final board... as in "if he falls to us here," or "if he accepts this lower offer."
But sometimes consensus will not be reached; a significant divide will persist. The default position for that case should be to pass on a player and in his stead go after a consensus choice.
I guarantee you it will not be Sashi mulling a split-decision case over and then taking it to Jimmah. Simply is not Sashi's role and he knows it. He also knows it's not Jimmah's role.
Jimmah? His can be any role he wants it to be, but hopefully he's learned his limitations. And the above process is our greatest hope that Jimmah remembers lessons of the past.
The above process means that when the full Player Personnel Strategy (including budget) is presented to Jimmah by Sashi and the departments heads, if/when Jimmah asks, "Why is Player X (who he just read Mel Kiper rave about on the flight to Berea) is so low on our Board?" The group can respond, "WE don't think he's worth the higher pick/offer because..."
OK, well, this description perhaps tells why they are considered a mamby pamby bunch. No one is in charge, they all sing Kumbaya (or is that Brad Kaaya). Its a circle jerk the way you call it. Does it work? Not great results so far.
Maybe we do need a Sonny Weaver.
-
-
No... Sashi is not the judge... not "The Decider"... and he is not polling 10 scouts. Stop trying to put him into the "weeds". This is consensus driven, organizational decision making, not the hierarchical dictate-driven system of Paul Brown or Bill Polian that you have stuck in your head.
- He has two heads of Scouting to produce two boards: one draft, one FA.
- He has an Analytics group to produce the same two boards.
- He facilitates the merging of the boards with Cap input to develop a Player Personnel Strategy.
In the first two activities, he won't be in the working sessions. On those he'll get progress reports. He will sit in the independent meetings to formulate each group's final board. He may or may not participate in these, but to the extent he does it will be to drive the process, not its product. He will take a ton of notes.
In the third activity, the merger process, he'll not only be in the meeting, he will drive it, run it looking for:
- unanimity, either pro or con, which he will test for "groupthink" error.
- general, but not strong, agreement that he needs to flesh out.
- strong disagreement to probe.
This is when his notes will come out. He'll use them to:
- surface dissenting views he heard in the pre-meetings to test what he now hears... especially if unanimity is now all he is hearing.
- develop general agreements in to solid positions all can live with, i.e., form consensus.
- facilitate strong disagreement discussion to develop the each side's understanding of the others position and see if there's hope for consensus and recognize when there is no hope.
Consensus may come in many forms. In the discussion one side might "win over" the other... as in "convince", not "beat". More likely would be adjusting a player's grouping on the final board... as in "if he falls to us here," or "if he accepts this lower offer."
But sometimes consensus will not be reached; a significant divide will persist. The default position for that case should be to pass on a player and in his stead go after a consensus choice.
I guarantee you it will not be Sashi mulling a split-decision case over and then taking it to Jimmah. Simply is not Sashi's role and he knows it. He also knows it's not Jimmah's role.
Jimmah? His can be any role he wants it to be, but hopefully he's learned his limitations. And the above process is our greatest hope that Jimmah remembers lessons of the past.
The above process means that when the full Player Personnel Strategy (including budget) is presented to Jimmah by Sashi and the departments heads, if/when Jimmah asks, "Why is Player X (who he just read Mel Kiper rave about on the flight to Berea) is so low on our Board?" The group can respond, "WE don't think he's worth the higher pick/offer because..."
OK, well, this description perhaps tells why they are considered a mamby pamby bunch. No one is in charge, they all sing Kumbaya (or is that Brad Kaaya). Its a circle jerk the way you call it. Does it work? Not great results so far.
Maybe we do need a Sonny Weaver.
OK, well, this description perhaps tells why they are considered a mamby pamby bunch. No one is in charge, they all sing Kumbaya (or is that Brad Kaaya). Its a circle jerk the way you call it. Does it work? Not great results so far.
Maybe we do need a Sonny Weaver.
A "strong man" at the top does not make an organization strong... it makes it compliant, dependent. How'd Holmgren work out? Farmer? Lombo? How many "strong", football-knowlegable GMs are there in the league right now? How many successful ones? Great ones?
We've fished in that lake for decades now with little to show for it. We've (Jimmah has) simply decided to fish in a different lake... and the pond next to it... simultaneously.
Sashi is in charge... of the process... of the organization. In no way is it a "circle jerk". It's a new approach. Its success is not guaranteed, but its failure is far from obvious.
You base your assessment on a single year... an as of yet incomplete single year. A year where I'm still not sure we have a certifiable bust in the 14-player haul. One where in my old, "Bust" thread you managed to mention one player, Shon Coleman, who was still rehabbing at the time. And in the process ignore a trade that gives us our only shot a landing one of the prize UFAs of 2017.
2. you must be pretty good at black jack.
The game where you tag folks with a leather pouch filled with lead shot?
I'd be better at that than the card game. Last time I sat at a table I had a couple Korean women cussing me out... in two languages.Thanks for the positive feedback...
"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 -
OK, well, this description perhaps tells why they are considered a mamby pamby bunch. No one is in charge, they all sing Kumbaya (or is that Brad Kaaya). Its a circle jerk the way you call it. Does it work? Not great results so far.
Maybe we do need a Sonny Weaver.
A "strong man" at the top does not make an organization strong... it makes it compliant, dependent. How'd Holmgren work out? Farmer? Lombo? How many "strong", football-knowlegable GMs are there in the league right now? How many successful ones? Great ones?
We've fished in that lake for decades now with little to show for it. We've (Jimmah has) simply decided to fish in a different lake... and the pond next to it... simultaneously.
Sashi is in charge... of the process... of the organization. In no way is it a "circle jerk". It's a new approach. Its success is not guaranteed, but its failure is far from obvious.
You base your assessment on a single year... an as of yet incomplete single year. A year where I'm still not sure we have a certifiable bust in the 14-player haul. One where in my old, "Bust" thread you managed to mention one player, Shon Coleman, who was still rehabbing at the time. And in the process ignore a trade that gives us our only shot a landing one of the prize UFAs of 2017.
2. you must be pretty good at black jack.
The game where you tag folks with a leather pouch filled with lead shot?
I'd be better at that than the card game. Last time I sat at a table I had a couple Korean women cussing me out... in two languages.Thanks for the positive feedback...
A "strong man" at the top does not make an organization strong... it makes it compliant, dependent. How'd Holmgren work out? Farmer? Lombo? How many "strong", football-knowlegable GMs are there in the league right now? How many successful ones? Great ones?
We've fished in that lake for decades now with little to show for it. We've (Jimmah has) simply decided to fish in a different lake... and the pond next to it... simultaneously.
Sashi is in charge... of the process... of the organization. In no way is it a "circle jerk". It's a new approach. Its success is not guaranteed, but its failure is far from obvious.
You base your assessment on a single year... an as of yet incomplete single year. A year where I'm still not sure we have a certifiable bust in the 14-player haul. One where in my old, "Bust" thread you managed to mention one player, Shon Coleman, who was still rehabbing at the time. And in the process ignore a trade that gives us our only shot a landing one of the prize UFAs of 2017.
Well.....we will see. So far, there are putrid results from this experiment. But maybe as had been said elsewhere, we have just sown some seeds with all this, and one day those seeds will grow to be might trees.
The game where you tag folks with a leather pouch filled with lead shot?
I'd be better at that than the card game. Last time I sat at a table I had a couple Korean women cussing me out... in two languages.Thanks for the positive feedback...
-
A piece about the front office adding young under the radar guys, churning the roster to try to find more talented castoffs
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/cleveland-browns-front-office-effectively-working-fringes-121516
-
Thanks for the help, Chris...
To me, this consensus thing is another word for compromise.....and Shashi does more than the speaking....he is the bottom line....period
Sounds like something an autocratic businessman used to making decisions would say...
if sashi is the 'bottom line' and get's final say then the consensus argument goes right out the window doesn't it?
bottom line someone has to have the title of GM......not co-GM or assistant GM, but GfuckingM.
If that's the way it works, yes, but there' nothing that says that is our way and plenty that says it is not.
For one thing, no one in our FO has the title, "GM". You can look for yourself...
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/front-office.html
What was Sashi praised for when Haslam (or the Haslams) selected him? Facilitation... bringing minds together... driving consensus building. That is his job #1.
Can minds meet in every instance? No. And when that happens his role is to recognize it and decide when it is time to close the book on the discussion, and move the FO onto the next decision. This is the nature of the vast majority of his decisions.
But remember the definition of consensus... it is a position, a decision, that all can accept. That all can at minimum "live with". All do not have to embrace it, love it to the same degree, but all must be at least "OK with it". It is not the same as "settling" or "compromising". And it is not good enough that all are merely "OK with it".
Will there ever come a time when Sashi weighs the pros and cons of deadlocked staff and makes a decision in the absence of a consensus? Yes... but only if one side's argument is far stronger than the others is AND if there is no consensus alternative available. This will be rare and it will not involve Sashi alone in a closet with a DVD of a player's game tape.
How do I "know" the above? Because I did this job for about seven years... and I was damn good at it... at least that was the consensus of my "stakeholders", my internal customers and even my peers.
One last point... but it's an important one. Folks here can't get their head around a non-football guy in Sashi's role. I will tell you that the biggest obstacle to his job, the biggest threat to our FO's decision process is if its Facilitator comes into the process with an opinion. A strong "football guy" couldn't do what Sashi is charged with doing.
I've been there, too. Keeping a constant check that as Facilitator you do not steer or otherwise inject yourself, your opinion, your bias into the decision significantly adds to what is already an taxing job... a mentally, and occasionally even physically, exhausting job.
Sorry, Gip... I ended up explaining it again anyway... albeit in a slightly different way... hopefully a better way.
Although I doubt there will be consensus on that point...
Thanks for the help, Chris...
Sounds like something an autocratic businessman used to making decisions would say...
ok....thats fair....
A piece about the front office adding young under the radar guys, churning the roster to try to find more talented castoffs
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/cleveland-browns-front-office-effectively-working-fringes-121516
Something weve been doing all along.....of course, prior to this season, it was considered "focusing on the bottom of the roster"....which was deemed as bad FO-ing.....
-
Thanks for the help, Chris...
Sounds like something an autocratic businessman used to making decisions would say...
ok....thats fair....
A piece about the front office adding young under the radar guys, churning the roster to try to find more talented castoffs
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/cleveland-browns-front-office-effectively-working-fringes-121516
Something weve been doing all along.....of course, prior to this season, it was considered "focusing on the bottom of the roster"....which was deemed as bad FO-ing.....
ok....thats fair....
Something weve been doing all along.....of course, prior to this season, it was considered "focusing on the bottom of the roster"....which was deemed as bad FO-ing.....
I've explicitly said that elsewhere. I'm not here to talk about how amazing this FO and how Gabe Ikard and Tyrone Holmes will lead us to the superbowl, but there have been at least a couple of guys that have turned into contributors in this way. Boddy-Calhoun and Reynolds come to mind, along with that one game wonder at center, Reiter.
I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any of Ray Farmer's guys doing the same to any degree, or Mike Lombardi.
-
ok....thats fair....
Something weve been doing all along.....of course, prior to this season, it was considered "focusing on the bottom of the roster"....which was deemed as bad FO-ing.....
I've explicitly said that elsewhere. I'm not here to talk about how amazing this FO and how Gabe Ikard and Tyrone Holmes will lead us to the superbowl, but there have been at least a couple of guys that have turned into contributors in this way. Boddy-Calhoun and Reynolds come to mind, along with that one game wonder at center, Reiter.
I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any of Ray Farmer's guys doing the same to any degree, or Mike Lombardi.
I've explicitly said that elsewhere. I'm not here to talk about how amazing this FO and how Gabe Ikard and Tyrone Holmes will lead us to the superbowl, but there have been at least a couple of guys that have turned into contributors in this way. Boddy-Calhoun and Reynolds come to mind, along with that one game wonder at center, Reiter.
I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any of Ray Farmer's guys doing the same to any degree, or Mike Lombardi.
Taylor Gabriel, Jamie Meder and Willie Snead come to mind
-
Jamie Meder, yeah I'll give you that one. Gabriel and Snead were basically post draft UDFAs, no?
-
Jamie Meder, yeah I'll give you that one. Gabriel and Snead were basically post draft UDFAs, no?
Jamie Meder, yeah I'll give you that one. Gabriel and Snead were basically post draft UDFAs, no?
Isn't that what we're talking about? Striking on UDFA's and turning them into contributors?
-
Isn't that what we're talking about? Striking on UDFA's and turning them into contributors?
Mid-season roster churning was what I was going for. But it's not a huge divide, and you have to attribute Crowell to Farmer while you're at it.
Having said that, some of the guys we've picked up were drafted by other teams this year, so couldn't have signed as UDFAs.
-
Isn't that what we're talking about? Striking on UDFA's and turning them into contributors?
Mid-season roster churning was what I was going for. But it's not a huge divide, and you have to attribute Crowell to Farmer while you're at it.
Having said that, some of the guys we've picked up were drafted by other teams this year, so couldn't have signed as UDFAs.
Mid-season roster churning was what I was going for. But it's not a huge divide, and you have to attribute Crowell to Farmer while you're at it.
Having said that, some of the guys we've picked up were drafted by other teams this year, so couldn't have signed as UDFAs.
Ah, i misunderstood
-
Mid-season roster churning was what I was going for. But it's not a huge divide, and you have to attribute Crowell to Farmer while you're at it.
Having said that, some of the guys we've picked up were drafted by other teams this year, so couldn't have signed as UDFAs.
Ah, i misunderstood
Ah, i misunderstood
And owned up to it? Fuck, the browns board is reaching new heights!
-
Ah, i misunderstood
And owned up to it? Fuck, the browns board is reaching new heights!
-
ok....thats fair....
Something weve been doing all along.....of course, prior to this season, it was considered "focusing on the bottom of the roster"....which was deemed as bad FO-ing.....
I've explicitly said that elsewhere. I'm not here to talk about how amazing this FO and how Gabe Ikard and Tyrone Holmes will lead us to the superbowl, but there have been at least a couple of guys that have turned into contributors in this way. Boddy-Calhoun and Reynolds come to mind, along with that one game wonder at center, Reiter.
I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any of Ray Farmer's guys doing the same to any degree, or Mike Lombardi.
Youd almost swear Shashi wrote that article...
Now...lets be honest...100%.....the article sites Darius Jackson, who was just acquired and has done absolutely 100% zero as a Brown(or Cowboy).....and Tyrone Holmes, who has been here since "pre-season" and has exactly 2 tackles on the year(so not what Id call a mid season coup OR good player).......and Dan Vitale, who's only play was a blatant drop of an easy TD.......and Anthony Fabiano, who??....has he even played?......and Trea Elston....again, who???.....and then Boddy-Calhoun, who has played well, but was also a pre-season pick up.....
So....reality is....these guys have NOT contributed or proven themselves to be quality players or pick ups.....and the ONE who looks decent, wasnt some type of mid-season roster churn......
I've explicitly said that elsewhere.
I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any of Ray Farmer's guys doing the same to any degree, or Mike Lombardi.
We've gotten guys, every year, who have contributed as well as this group(in the article) has.....in addition to Meder, Gabe and Crow(also pre-season freebie pick ups)....Id add Pryor and Austin Paztor as 2 "real" contributors that fit the mold.....and, as comparables to the guys in the articles, we've also picked up "short term" contributors like Ishmail Kitchen, Gaines, Nelson, Fua, etc....
Id also point to KWaun Williams who performed at a top level(not just ok) and then was, basically, run outta town by this current staff.....
and ALL of these guys have performed longer and better(so far), than those 6 nobodies the article talks about.....
Mid-season roster churning was what I was going for. But it's not a huge divide, and you have to attribute Crowell to Farmer while you're at it.
Having said that, some of the guys we've picked up were drafted by other teams this year, so couldn't have signed as UDFAs.
I think the article is a year or 2 early for this group.....
-
it's the staff's fault K'Waun isn't on the team anymore?
-
yes war, it is. we definitely mishandled him. we tried to make him play against the packers when he clearly had a fucked up foot. then we fined him when he wouldn't play.
the staff definitely isn't perfect, so enough of the "they can do no wrong" or "in sashi we trust shit".
but i'm optimistic about this draft from here. we can only get better moving forward.
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