FO report card
-
In order to answer that question I have to ask this 1. How any of the players they drafted anywhere close to being in contention for rookie of the year? Any of them? - Steve
Vince Young was a Rookie of the Year and so was RG3. Did that guarantee long term success in either case? Ironically, both came here. 1 of them couldn't even make the team while the other never stayed long enough for a second cup of coffee. - Flugel
So...let's hope that a guy that went 0-8 his first year turns out to be a superstar in the long run? Fine with me.
We don't need no 'flash in the pan".
So...let's hope that a guy that went 0-8 his first year turns out to be a superstar in the long run? Fine with me.
We don't need no 'flash in the pan".
LOL! You mean like the Dallas Cowboys had to after Troy Aikman went 0-11 as a rookie with only 9 TD to 18 INT in 1989? Did he make the top 50 rookies or come close? In 1991 (his 3rd year), he made the Pro Bowl in the first of 6 consecutive Pro Bowls in route to 3 Superbowl Championships and a Hall of Fame career. So, your criteria says it was more important to evaluate the draft Dallas had in 1989 right there in 1989 rather than in 1991 so it could race to give the Dallas FO an F for its selection of Aikman at #1 overall and all those other rookies chipping in their growing pains.
Moving forward, at least hopefully... Did we or didn't we just draft a QB in round 2? Would we do that if we were ecstatic or sure about what we landed from the 2016 supply of QB? Nobody knows for certain what way Kess will go so after drafting 3 guys in the 1st round - they drafted Kizer in round 2 right? This means we can start the year with the somewhat experienced QB kind of like we did with Charlie Frye back in 2007. When that didn't work in the train wreck of an opener - we looked to the little known DA with a stronger arm (than Frye) the next week and won 10 of our last 15 games.
Next year we have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds in what is supposed to be a stronger QB class than 2017 in the event we learn we should still be looking.
Today, we're just as 1-15 as the Dallas Cowboys were in 1989 so I'll remind you when the more appropriate time was to evaluate the 89 draft (in 91). I recommend we evaluate the 2016 draft after the 2018 season.
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!" -
If it's been said it takes at least 3 years to properly evaluate a draft - why do you want to join those that can't wait to race to conclusions? Antonio Brown didn't make the top 50 of his draft class while Vince Young and RG3 topped their's with ROTY awards. Tom Brady threw only 3 passes and wore blue jeans to most of his games as a rookie. What did we learn about any of them as rookies?
Fluges....no one is racing to conclusions.....we're grading as we go.....and for year 1, compared to the other rookies also in year 1, our guys didnt perform as well......it's that simple....
Is that a conclusion that they wont improve?.....nope.....Does that mean people want them cut?.....nope......It just means that there were a bunch of rookies who performed better for other teams, than our guys did for us....
So, the only "conclusion", is that in year 1, our guys didnt rate that well......lets see what year 2 brings.....and we will rate that too.....
(as you've listed) There are exceptions to every rule, so some guys blossom late....some guys do well early, then drop off.....and, IDEALLY, some guys do great right out of the gate.....(we just didnt have one of those).....
Id also add that 2 years seems to be the norm....at least with some teams.....IE: DBG, Gilbert, Richardson, Manziel, Weeden and Jamar Taylor, quickly come to mind as Browns who were all dumped at 2 yrs or less....
Fluges....no one is racing to conclusions.....we're grading as we go.....and for year 1, compared to the other rookies also in year 1, our guys didnt perform as well......it's that simple....
Is that a conclusion that they wont improve?.....nope.....Does that mean people want them cut?.....nope......It just means that there were a bunch of rookies who performed better for other teams, than our guys did for us....
So, the only "conclusion", is that in year 1, our guys didnt rate that well......lets see what year 2 brings.....and we will rate that too.....
(as you've listed) There are exceptions to every rule, so some guys blossom late....some guys do well early, then drop off.....and, IDEALLY, some guys do great right out of the gate.....(we just didnt have one of those).....
Id also add that 2 years seems to be the norm....at least with some teams.....IE: DBG, Gilbert, Richardson, Manziel, Weeden and Jamar Taylor, quickly come to mind as Browns who were all dumped at 2 yrs or less....
Fair enough Mud. I won't mind rating the young guys after their 2nd year so I can see who at least shows progress over a more significant span than 1 season.
I really think Shon Coleman is going to be a really good tackle for us and injury slapped a big old incomplete on him. Nassib looked to be off to a great start week 1 vrs Philly and PFF will back this. What happened? He broke his hand, which is a huge nullifier of some very important fundamentals/techniques in the trenches rendering him more exclusive to swim moves and rips. Some times these guys need to 2 hand shiver some 330 lb tackles in the trenches and I can assure that this is very difficult with a broken hand. On top of that, his college career foreshadowed he might be a 2nd year or 3rd year emergence in this level change thanks in large to an insatiable work ethic. Ogbah was kind of raw IMO but I saw some improvement and expect plenty more ahead-especially if we get more talented upfront.
We all know WR isn't an easy gig to learn especially when some of them come in rounds where some degree of patience needs to be held. The last game Corey Coleman played before he broke his hand he had 5 receptions for 100 yards and 2 TDs. That looked to be the exception to the rule/disappointment he showed otherwise.That said, I saw something that a broken hand would prevent any momentum for 6 consecutive weeks after.
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to sell tanning beds in the tropics here. I know I'm probably sounding like the ultimate homer looking for a game face but I think we could very well see some sophs from our 2106 draft class emerge. Meanwhile, we'll hope the 2nd draft class of this FO has more sudden impact than their first one. We shall see.
-
In order to answer that question I have to ask this 1. How any of the players they drafted anywhere close to being in contention for rookie of the year? Any of them? - Steve
Vince Young was a Rookie of the Year and so was RG3. Did that guarantee long term success in either case? Ironically, both came here. 1 of them couldn't even make the team while the other never stayed long enough for a second cup of coffee. - Flugel
True enough. Still they were good for at least a season which is probably better than not ever being good.In order to answer that question I have to ask this 1. How any of the players they drafted anywhere close to being in contention for rookie of the year? Any of them? - Steve
Vince Young was a Rookie of the Year and so was RG3. Did that guarantee long term success in either case? Ironically, both came here. 1 of them couldn't even make the team while the other never stayed long enough for a second cup of coffee. - Flugel
And keep in mind that while it may work out eventually we passed on the best prospects at the positions we supposedly needed, safety, qb and tight end and went to The Bargain Bin.
Which only means grading the front office needs to be done down the road.
WSS
-
True enough. Still they were good for at least a season which is probably better than not ever being good.In order to answer that question I have to ask this 1. How any of the players they drafted anywhere close to being in contention for rookie of the year? Any of them? - Steve
Vince Young was a Rookie of the Year and so was RG3. Did that guarantee long term success in either case? Ironically, both came here. 1 of them couldn't even make the team while the other never stayed long enough for a second cup of coffee. - Flugel
And keep in mind that while it may work out eventually we passed on the best prospects at the positions we supposedly needed, safety, qb and tight end and went to The Bargain Bin.
Which only means grading the front office needs to be done down the road.
WSS
True enough. Still they were good for at least a season which is probably better than not ever being good.
And keep in mind that while it may work out eventually we passed on the best prospects at the positions we supposedly needed, safety, qb and tight end and went to The Bargain Bin.
Which only means grading the front office needs to be done down the road.
WSS
We passed up some guys that had 1-2 injuries like the 1 year starter Malik Hooker. Hooker had surgery on a torn labrum. While that may sound like no big deal especially to our Buckeye fans, NFL physics mean he'll be playing in space colliding with bigger, faster, stronger all the time. He also needed surgery for a hernia. That's a lot of wear and tear for a guy that only started 1 season. Turns out, he slid to Indy at #15 overall. He probably would have gone in the top 7 if he didn't have an injured flipper.
We weren't the only team that passed on Reuben Foster either, who had a shoulder injury that needed reconstructive surgery with rumor lingering he may need another. SF drafted him at #31 after drafting a healthy Solomon Thomas much earlier. The guy I really wanted us to draft at #12 was OJ Howard (who wasn't injured); but he wasn't drafted until 19th overall by Tampa. So, there's 3 prospects many of us were eyeing at #12 that didn't come off the board until #15, #19 and #31 overall.
Try to think about how frustrated you are about Garrett for a second while we factor why they played it safe avoiding some prospects coming off injuries/surgeries. Like I said recently, I don't think Njoku will be that big of a drop off from Howard. And I liked Mud's reply to me that he thinks he has a bigger upside than Howard. Their biggest difference at this time is Howard played 4 years of college ball while Njoku only played 2 (Howard is 22 & Njoku is 20). Howard returned to work on his consistency blocking while Njoku will have to improve his blocking at the next level. The other 1st round pick was Peppers that has played Safety, Corner and LBer roles aside from what he did on Special Teams and Offense. Sounds like nice gridiron chess piece...
As for the QB position, this draft might have been the biggest crapshoot of my life at the position. Just about any QB prospect invited polarization. Meanwhile, Bears' fans looked miserable when they traded up for Trubisky at #2. We'll see...
-
We are talking here about a "Front Office Report Card"...so my post simply says that after the first grading period, they are not doing that well (if you go by the no rookies in top 50 report).....there are a number of other grading periods to go. And maybe they can do some voluntary detention and pick up some extra credit along the way.
If it's been said it takes at least 3 years to properly evaluate a draft - why do you want to join those that can't wait to race to conclusions? Antonio Brown didn't make the top 50 of his draft class while Vince Young and RG3 topped their's with ROTY awards. Tom Brady threw only 3 passes and wore blue jeans to most of his games as a rookie. What did we learn about any of them as rookies?
If it's been said it takes at least 3 years to properly evaluate a draft - why do you want to join those that can't wait to race to conclusions? Antonio Brown didn't make the top 50 of his draft class while Vince Young and RG3 topped their's with ROTY awards. Tom Brady threw only 3 passes and wore blue jeans to most of his games as a rookie. What did we learn about any of them as rookies?
Hello! I said it was early....only the first grading period. While they may have only about a D or C- so far, there is time to pull up their grades. I am simply going along with the gist of the thread. This is grade school....where you get a report card every 6 weeks or so....not law school...where you study from September to June then take one test at the end to determine your grade. (yep, that is the way it is in law school)
-
So...let's hope that a guy that went 0-8 his first year turns out to be a superstar in the long run? Fine with me.
We don't need no 'flash in the pan".
LOL! You mean like the Dallas Cowboys had to after Troy Aikman went 0-11 as a rookie with only 9 TD to 18 INT in 1989? Did he make the top 50 rookies or come close? In 1991 (his 3rd year), he made the Pro Bowl in the first of 6 consecutive Pro Bowls in route to 3 Superbowl Championships and a Hall of Fame career. So, your criteria says it was more important to evaluate the draft Dallas had in 1989 right there in 1989 rather than in 1991 so it could race to give the Dallas FO an F for its selection of Aikman at #1 overall and all those other rookies chipping in their growing pains.
Moving forward, at least hopefully... Did we or didn't we just draft a QB in round 2? Would we do that if we were ecstatic or sure about what we landed from the 2016 supply of QB? Nobody knows for certain what way Kess will go so after drafting 3 guys in the 1st round - they drafted Kizer in round 2 right? This means we can start the year with the somewhat experienced QB kind of like we did with Charlie Frye back in 2007. When that didn't work in the train wreck of an opener - we looked to the little known DA with a stronger arm (than Frye) the next week and won 10 of our last 15 games.
Next year we have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds in what is supposed to be a stronger QB class than 2017 in the event we learn we should still be looking.
Today, we're just as 1-15 as the Dallas Cowboys were in 1989 so I'll remind you when the more appropriate time was to evaluate the 89 draft (in 91). I recommend we evaluate the 2016 draft after the 2018 season.
LOL! You mean like the Dallas Cowboys had to after Troy Aikman went 0-11 as a rookie with only 9 TD to 18 INT in 1989? Did he make the top 50 rookies or come close? In 1991 (his 3rd year), he made the Pro Bowl in the first of 6 consecutive Pro Bowls in route to 3 Superbowl Championships and a Hall of Fame career. So, your criteria says it was more important to evaluate the draft Dallas had in 1989 right there in 1989 rather than in 1991 so it could race to give the Dallas FO an F for its selection of Aikman at #1 overall and all those other rookies chipping in their growing pains.
Moving forward, at least hopefully... Did we or didn't we just draft a QB in round 2? Would we do that if we were ecstatic or sure about what we landed from the 2016 supply of QB? Nobody knows for certain what way Kess will go so after drafting 3 guys in the 1st round - they drafted Kizer in round 2 right? This means we can start the year with the somewhat experienced QB kind of like we did with Charlie Frye back in 2007. When that didn't work in the train wreck of an opener - we looked to the little known DA with a stronger arm (than Frye) the next week and won 10 of our last 15 games.
Next year we have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds in what is supposed to be a stronger QB class than 2017 in the event we learn we should still be looking.
Today, we're just as 1-15 as the Dallas Cowboys were in 1989 so I'll remind you when the more appropriate time was to evaluate the 89 draft (in 91). I recommend we evaluate the 2016 draft after the 2018 season.
Why are you being obtuse over this Fluges? It is a simple one year, interim issue. And all I did was relate what others have reported: that no Browns rookie was in the Top 50 in production last year.
It is raw data, make of it what you wish.
-
LOL! You mean like the Dallas Cowboys had to after Troy Aikman went 0-11 as a rookie with only 9 TD to 18 INT in 1989? Did he make the top 50 rookies or come close? In 1991 (his 3rd year), he made the Pro Bowl in the first of 6 consecutive Pro Bowls in route to 3 Superbowl Championships and a Hall of Fame career. So, your criteria says it was more important to evaluate the draft Dallas had in 1989 right there in 1989 rather than in 1991 so it could race to give the Dallas FO an F for its selection of Aikman at #1 overall and all those other rookies chipping in their growing pains.
Moving forward, at least hopefully... Did we or didn't we just draft a QB in round 2? Would we do that if we were ecstatic or sure about what we landed from the 2016 supply of QB? Nobody knows for certain what way Kess will go so after drafting 3 guys in the 1st round - they drafted Kizer in round 2 right? This means we can start the year with the somewhat experienced QB kind of like we did with Charlie Frye back in 2007. When that didn't work in the train wreck of an opener - we looked to the little known DA with a stronger arm (than Frye) the next week and won 10 of our last 15 games.
Next year we have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds in what is supposed to be a stronger QB class than 2017 in the event we learn we should still be looking.
Today, we're just as 1-15 as the Dallas Cowboys were in 1989 so I'll remind you when the more appropriate time was to evaluate the 89 draft (in 91). I recommend we evaluate the 2016 draft after the 2018 season.
Why are you being obtuse over this Fluges? It is a simple one year, interim issue. And all I did was relate what others have reported: that no Browns rookie was in the Top 50 in production last year.
It is raw data, make of it what you wish.
Why are you being obtuse over this Fluges? It is a simple one year, interim issue. And all I did was relate what others have reported: that no Browns rookie was in the Top 50 in production last year.
It is raw data, make of it what you wish.
Don't mean to be Gips. The negativity just gets so infectious sometimes that I thought I would intervene to say a year conclusion about the draft was very premature. That said, when the team went 1-15 - I'm probably sounding as full of shit as Eddie Haskill telling Mrs.Cleaver how nice she looks about 60 seconds after he broke their back basement window.
-
The other point Id make with our FO is that, for us to catch up with the rest of the league, they actually have to be better than everyone else.....Not just better than the last FO, or do the same as other teams, or meet league averages.....they have to be better....period
We are in a 32 team race and, right now, are in last place.........waaaaaaaaaayyyyy behind everyone else......so an OK performance or an average performance will not be enough to catch the leaders,,,,,
So, while I do see improvement from year 1 to year 2, I dont see us doing enough to catch anyone, let alone the leaders......maybe we'll catch up to a couple/few teams......but we need to take giant leaps to win it all....GIANT leaps.....
Think about the last time we were good(but, still not good enough to win it all)......in 3-4 drafts, we filled our roster with lots of good talent.....and it still wasnt enough......so, we better get started and nail that draft several years in a row......
Early 80's, we already had a solid core and a fairly decent team, including Dixon, Mathews, Ozzy, Eddie Johnson, Chip Banks, Baab, Farren, Delliamelluire, Puzzolli, etc.....and this was BEFORE we aced the 1984-85 drafts with a landslide of talent, including....
Matt Bahr, Rogers, Rockins, Brennan, Byner, Kosar, Mack, Mike Johnson, Minnefield, Langhorne, Hairston, etc etc....
So....most of the above(and a few FA's Ive forgotten, were all obtained in a 3-4 year period....we are now 2 years into this build, with a much much weaker core group to start....
One only needs to do the math........
So....Shashi and Depo need to rise above the rest of the league and out perform them, if they plan to catch up or pass them.....and that will take several years, in a row, of solid and PLENTIFUL talent additions to this team.....
This years draft has potential to add a few(perhaps)....last years draft?.....not so much......we will be lucky to get maybe 3 decent players and, honestly, see no stars in that group......and with ALL the picks we had, the indicators are we will get "below the league average" talent from that first 14 picks......and if we get 3-4 good one from this years draft?>....that will be about average.....so, eh.....
-
What they need to do is to have Trubisky suck. Then they need Kizer to be solid. They need Hooker and Howard to be disappointments.
And they really really can't afford Miles being anything but a starter and a contributor on game number one.
WSS
-
Right....with all the trade backs(passing on premium players) to collect picks....they need those picks to be stars.....
NFL average is about a 30% hit rate on drafts......we had 14 picks, 2 years running now......thats 28 x 30%, means we need 9 guys to emerge as viable quality players and 3-4 Pro-bowlers.....from 2016-17 drafts....
Then we need to do it again(18).....and again(19).....with some quality FA's sprinkled in.....
-
And I wouldn't blame the front office if Myles Garrett turns out to be a flop and this injury is something that's been hidden all along. It's not like we took a risk on him he was the consensus best player in the draft according to just about everybody. It would be shity luck but it wouldn't be stupidity. On the other hand if any of those other guys go on to be stars and our gambles don't pay off they will look pretty bad.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
The other point Id make with our FO is that, for us to catch up with the rest of the league, they actually have to be better than everyone else.....Not just better than the last FO, or do the same as other teams, or meet league averages.....they have to be better....period
We are in a 32 team race and, right now, are in last place.........waaaaaaaaaayyyyy behind everyone else......so an OK performance or an average performance will not be enough to catch the leaders,,,,,
So, while I do see improvement from year 1 to year 2, I dont see us doing enough to catch anyone, let alone the leaders......maybe we'll catch up to a couple/few teams......but we need to take giant leaps to win it all....GIANT leaps.....
Think about the last time we were good(but, still not good enough to win it all)......in 3-4 drafts, we filled our roster with lots of good talent.....and it still wasnt enough......so, we better get started and nail that draft several years in a row......
Early 80's, we already had a solid core and a fairly decent team, including Dixon, Mathews, Ozzy, Eddie Johnson, Chip Banks, Baab, Farren, Delliamelluire, Puzzolli, etc.....and this was BEFORE we aced the 1984-85 drafts with a landslide of talent, including....
Matt Bahr, Rogers, Rockins, Brennan, Byner, Kosar, Mack, Mike Johnson, Minnefield, Langhorne, Hairston, etc etc....
So....most of the above(and a few FA's Ive forgotten, were all obtained in a 3-4 year period....we are now 2 years into this build, with a much much weaker core group to start....
One only needs to do the math........
So....Shashi and Depo need to rise above the rest of the league and out perform them, if they plan to catch up or pass them.....and that will take several years, in a row, of solid and PLENTIFUL talent additions to this team.....
This years draft has potential to add a few(perhaps)....last years draft?.....not so much......we will be lucky to get maybe 3 decent players and, honestly, see no stars in that group......and with ALL the picks we had, the indicators are we will get "below the league average" talent from that first 14 picks......and if we get 3-4 good one from this years draft?>....that will be about average.....so, eh.....
The other point Id make with our FO is that, for us to catch up with the rest of the league, they actually have to be better than everyone else.....Not just better than the last FO, or do the same as other teams, or meet league averages.....they have to be better....period
All that said, it's just the beginning of their 2nd year so it's important to be somewhat realistic instead of being pissed we aren't already a dynasty.
-
And I wouldn't blame the front office if Myles Garrett turns out to be a flop and this injury is something that's been hidden all along. It's not like we took a risk on him he was the consensus best player in the draft according to just about everybody. It would be shity luck but it wouldn't be stupidity. On the other hand if any of those other guys go on to be stars and our gambles don't pay off they will look pretty bad.
WSS
And I wouldn't blame the front office if Myles Garrett turns out to be a flop and this injury is something that's been hidden all along. It's not like we took a risk on him he was the consensus best player in the draft according to just about everybody. It would be shity luck but it wouldn't be stupidity. On the other hand if any of those other guys go on to be stars and our gambles don't pay off they will look pretty bad.
WSS
I think we all can agree where the question marks are, Corey Coleman & Jalapeño Peppers. Those 2 are the first rounders that many have questioned positioning and timing.
-
And I wouldn't blame the front office if Myles Garrett turns out to be a flop and this injury is something that's been hidden all along. It's not like we took a risk on him he was the consensus best player in the draft according to just about everybody. It would be shity luck but it wouldn't be stupidity. On the other hand if any of those other guys go on to be stars and our gambles don't pay off they will look pretty bad.
WSS
I think we all can agree where the question marks are, Corey Coleman & Jalapeño Peppers. Those 2 are the first rounders that many have questioned positioning and timing.
I think we all can agree where the question marks are, Corey Coleman & Jalapeño Peppers. Those 2 are the first rounders that many have questioned positioning and timing.
Yeah you shouldn't miss on a first round receiver or safety.
WSS
-
I think we all can agree where the question marks are, Corey Coleman & Jalapeño Peppers. Those 2 are the first rounders that many have questioned positioning and timing.
Yeah you shouldn't miss on a first round receiver or safety.
WSS
Yeah you shouldn't miss on a first round receiver or safety.
WSS
What kills is they could've stayed put and taken Bosa or traded out once and taken Floyd, Apple or Hargraves in 2016. If they still made the Eagles trade they could've taken any number of players this year at 12.
-
Yeah you shouldn't miss on a first round receiver or safety.
WSS
What kills is they could've stayed put and taken Bosa or traded out once and taken Floyd, Apple or Hargraves in 2016. If they still made the Eagles trade they could've taken any number of players this year at 12.
What kills is they could've stayed put and taken Bosa or traded out once and taken Floyd, Apple or Hargraves in 2016. If they still made the Eagles trade they could've taken any number of players this year at 12.
I'm pretty sure that Williams had some input on taking Peppers for the way he wants to run his defense. Bring this thread back when the season is done and we have a better idea what that D really looks like in action for a year.
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