The Ftont office or the coaches?

[DizzyDean]

44 minutes ago, Aztec Hammer said:

I hope so.

I was more so assuming that had they dropped a 2nd and 3rd on McCarron, we probably wouldn't have used the #1 on a QB in the draft. 

A blessing in disguise that it fell through. It's surely time they went into a draft and picked the top QB.

I still hope we don't drop the 1st overall on a QB.  There are some very good prospects at the position next year.  Trade up from Houston's pick to get one if you don't think one falls.  Don't screw up, Barkley appears to be a generational type of talent.  Take him at 1 and be happy.  We can get him and get our QB.  If we take a QB at 1 overall there is no chance that we get Barkley.

[dawgattack]

If the reports are accurate that Jimmy H sided with Hue yesterday and ordered the nerds to trade for McCarron, Hue will most likely outlast the nerds.  Nothing good ever happens when Jimmy H gets involved in football personnel decisions.

[bruceb]

52 minutes ago, dawgattack said:

If the reports are accurate that Jimmy H sided with Hue yesterday and ordered the nerds to trade for McCarron, Hue will most likely outlast the nerds.  Nothing good ever happens when Jimmy H gets involved in football personnel decisions.

While I agree that Jimmy H being involved in anything is never good, I am not sure that you can go so far as to say that he "sided with Hue" and "ordered the nerds to trade for McCarron". 

Everything I have read says that he "approved" the deal.

That's a far cry from "siding" and "ordering".

[Iamcanadian]

1 hour ago, DizzyDean said:

I still hope we don't drop the 1st overall on a QB.  There are some very good prospects at the position next year.  Trade up from Houston's pick to get one if you don't think one falls.  Don't screw up, Barkley appears to be a generational type of talent.  Take him at 1 and be happy.  We can get him and get our QB.  If we take a QB at 1 overall there is no chance that we get Barkley.

You do realize that a RB has around a 5 year career in the NFL if he can avoid injuries and by the time we are possibly a contender, Barkley will be looking for a new contract and be near the end of his career in Cleveland. Ever since the NFL became a passing league where running the ball only accounts for 33% of a team's offense, great RB's can be had in later rounds, so why in the world would you want to waste the 1st overall pick on one. The last team to pick a RB as high as #6 I believe, was Minnesota and how many SB appearances did they make when he was on the team = 0.

On the other hand, of the last 29 SB winners 19 had franchise QB's, most of whom were drafted in the top 10 of the draft and you want to draft a RB who rarely go top 10, for good reasons.

The NFL is known as a QB/schedule league, where schedules are set up so it is very difficult for any team to make the playoffs 2 consecutive years unless they have a franchise QB capable of overcoming a very difficult schedule. A RB just will not overcome that tough schedule anywhere near what a QB can. If Barkley is indeed another Peterson, he just might carry us to 7 or 8 wins, but the result would be a disaster for our franchise, because we would draft so low, we might never get another shot at a true franchise QB.

[mtmmike]

2 hours ago, DizzyDean said:

I still hope we don't drop the 1st overall on a QB.  There are some very good prospects at the position next year.  Trade up from Houston's pick to get one if you don't think one falls.  Don't screw up, Barkley appears to be a generational type of talent.  Take him at 1 and be happy.  We can get him and get our QB.  If we take a QB at 1 overall there is no chance that we get Barkley.

given the fact we can draft the next Barry sanders plus get another edge in Arden plus ward at cornerback  you present a strong argument.

[dawgdish]

17 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Andrew Berry had a very good reputation when we hired him and, while Grigson wasn't a good GM, he must have done something to get that job originally. 

Again, back to my earlier point that Cleveland fans think everyone is an incompetent fool despite them having a good track record prior to coming here.

You want an experienced front office guy instead of "lawyer Sachi" (sic) but when we hire a former exec of the year he's an idiot too. Kind of a no win situation, iyam.

Have you looked at the Colts drafts under Berry (good reputation in the puff pieces when we hired him) and Grigson? If you get exec of the year by hitting on a sure thing QB, than sure Grigson deserved it. But even putting all that skepticism aside, lets assume they are amazing personnel guys and we scored a real coup, we're back the the issue that Lawyer Sashi and not one of them has final say over the roster. It's ludicrous!

[dawgdish]

14 hours ago, DizzyDean said:

I still hope we don't drop the 1st overall on a QB.  There are some very good prospects at the position next year.  Trade up from Houston's pick to get one if you don't think one falls.  Don't screw up, Barkley appears to be a generational type of talent.  Take him at 1 and be happy.  We can get him and get our QB.  If we take a QB at 1 overall there is no chance that we get Barkley.

If there's a QB rated anywhere near #1 overall,  it would be absolutely ludicrous for us to punt on him. It would also be so typical of the Cleveland Browns that I'm going to go ahead and say that's probably what will happen.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

27 minutes ago, dawgdish said:

Have you looked at the Colts drafts under Berry (good reputation in the puff pieces when we hired him) and Grigson? If you get exec of the year by hitting on a sure thing QB, than sure Grigson deserved it. But even putting all that skepticism aside, lets assume they are amazing personnel guys and we scored a real coup, we're back the the issue that Lawyer Sashi and not one of them has final say over the roster. It's ludicrous!

We need a guy to find a franchise qb and Grigson has done that, regardless as to how easy the decision may have been.

He could have traded the pick for an epic haul, he could have drafted RGIII, but he didn't.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

You also keep assuming that because Sashi has control of the 53 he's out here pretending to scout ans everything else, which is almost assuredly not the case.

His job is to find the consensus of football guys and other execs and balance their views with organizational goals.

Lastly, he's not a lawyer, he has a law degree.  He's worked in NFL front offices (multiple) for years.  Are we dismissing Matt Patricia as an NFL coach because he's a "nerd engineer"?

Your hate for Sashi is unreal. 

[MWil23]

@candyman93 can you please get the official GDT Thread (bye week) going please? I feel like we need 1 specific thread to vent on. Navigating 5-8 different ones simultaneously has me all old and grumpy.

[sdrawkcab321]

God damnit horny fix the spelling in the title its bothering the hell out of me 

[big poppa pump]

I don't understand how people are not seeing the "flawed plan" that was put in place, either directly, or indirectly.  When you do not have a franchise QB, that becomes the number 1 priority.  The last two drafts, we have had the number 2 and 1 pick respectively.  On both occasions, we have decided to go in another direction.  The "trade down kings" found that it was more important to accumulate assets in year 1, but I would bet that all the assets we have accumulated from Philly, will not = the value of Carson Wentz.

We drafted Garrett 1 overall the very next year.  He, by all accounts, will be a very good football player.  His value will not = that of Deshawn Watson, and maybe even Mahomes, and Trubisky, if both become above average QB's.

The nerds broke the cardinal rule.  When you don't have a QB, you do whatever it takes to get one.  We didn't even have to trade a bunch of assets to move up.  There were QB's available BOTH years.

If the plan was to wait until year 3, how would they know they would be this terrible, and be in a position to get "their guy" in year 3???

As it turns out....they are THAT BAD, and should be able to get a top rated QB at the top of the upcoming draft....(which is what most people do)  It just seems they did it azz backwards.

If Hue was the one that said don't take these guys?????  Fire him now.  I would venture to guess it's the guy that has the decision on the final 53 that ultimately made those decisions

[MWil23]

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

I don't understand how people are not seeing the "flawed plan" that was put in place, either directly, or indirectly.  When you do not have a franchise QB, that becomes the number 1 priority.  The last two drafts, we have had the number 2 and 1 pick respectively.  On both occasions, we have decided to go in another direction.  The "trade down kings" found that it was more important to accumulate assets in year 1, but I would bet that all the assets we have accumulated from Philly, will not = the value of Carson Wentz.

I 100% agree with you on the bulk of it, but in their defense, they gave up 66 sacks the year that they would have gotten Wentz. I'm willing to give them more of a pass on this, as the state of the roster was as bad as I've ever seen any team in professional sports, including the expansion Browns.

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

We drafted Garrett 1 overall the very next year.  He, by all accounts, will be a very good football player.  His value will not = that of Deshawn Watson, and maybe even Mahomes, and Trubisky, if both become above average QB's.

We still could have had Watson at 12. I'll never forgive any of them for passing on him, unless I'm proven to be an idiot (always a possibility) if Watson falls off a cliff (he won't).

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

The nerds broke the cardinal rule.  When you don't have a QB, you do whatever it takes to get one.  We didn't even have to trade a bunch of assets to move up.  There were QB's available BOTH years.

Hard to disagree with this year especially.

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

If the plan was to wait until year 3, how would they know they would be this terrible, and be in a position to get "their guy" in year 3???

They couldn't possibly have known they'd be THIS bad this year. 2016 was a foregone conclusion, but this year???? They had to expect some improvement in the W/L columns. If they didn't, then they pulled off a 2 year full tank and that's unacceptable.

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

As it turns out....they are THAT BAD, and should be able to get a top rated QB at the top of the upcoming draft....(which is what most people do)  It just seems they did it azz backwards.

IF it all pans out and they fully right this ship, I'll go "FULL FAN MODE" and forgive them.

1 minute ago, big poppa pump said:

If Hue was the one that said don't take these guys?????  Fire him now.  I would venture to guess it's the guy that has the decision on the final 53 that ultimately made those decisions

If he willfully passed on Wentz and Watson while enamored with RGIII and Kizer, then he's a horrific talent evaluator and far from a QB Guru. That, or he can coach them up but can't evaluate them, which would be extremely bizarre. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

2 minutes ago, big poppa pump said:

I don't understand how people are not seeing the "flawed plan" that was put in place, either directly, or indirectly.  When you do not have a franchise QB, that becomes the number 1 priority.  The last two drafts, we have had the number 2 and 1 pick respectively.  On both occasions, we have decided to go in another direction.  The "trade down kings" found that it was more important to accumulate assets in year 1, but I would bet that all the assets we have accumulated from Philly, will not = the value of Carson Wentz.

We drafted Garrett 1 overall the very next year.  He, by all accounts, will be a very good football player.  His value will not = that of Deshawn Watson, and maybe even Mahomes, and Trubisky, if both become above average QB's.

The nerds broke the cardinal rule.  When you don't have a QB, you do whatever it takes to get one.  We didn't even have to trade a bunch of assets to move up.  There were QB's available BOTH years.

If the plan was to wait until year 3, how would they know they would be this terrible, and be in a position to get "their guy" in year 3???

As it turns out....they are THAT BAD, and should be able to get a top rated QB at the top of the upcoming draft....(which is what most people do)  It just seems they did it azz backwards.

If Hue was the one that said don't take these guys?????  Fire him now.  I would venture to guess it's the guy that has the decision on the final 53 that ultimately made those decisions

Well they kinda controlled the talent level by not spending any cap space, that's one way to assure you'll be picking high.  

Another would be to have the youngest team in the league. Check.

Another would be to trade away/cut aging vets. Check.

Another would be to start a rookie qb. Check.

"Flubbing" a trade deadline deal that reeks of desperation for a 3 win season. Check.

Kenny Britt.  Check.

I mean, this wasnt exactly an anomaly or a crazy set of circumstances, it was pretty much by design.

[sdrawkcab321]

fire the nerds