CLE hires John Dorsey as GM

[BleedTheClock]

Now I have no way of knowing this, but I'm willing to bet Sashi was VERY down on the idea of drafting Wentz or Watson. If he liked them but opted to go in another direction, he might still have a job. I have a feeling he missed HARD on his evaluation of those two and it cost him his credibility as a QB selector.

I'm guessing on this one, but that'd be my guess. If you can't evaluate QB's, you shouldn't be the GM of this organization--the team that's needed one for like 25 years.

[Iamcanadian]

16 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Haslam gets a bad rap because he's atrocious, not because of "the media".

Shurmur/Holmgren, Banner/Lombardi/Chud, Farmer/Pettine, Sashi.  4 regime changes in the 5 years he's owned the team.  

The Steelers, our "rival", by comparison have had 3 regimes since the 60's.

The moron then still has the balls to talk about the need for continuity with a straight face.

He's a damned abomination.

 

Could not agree more. He s the problem in Cleveland and now ranks as the worst owner in pro sports not just the NFL. Unfortunately, nothing is going to change in Cleveland as long as he owns the team!!!

[cooters22]

On ‎12‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 3:11 PM, DawgX said:

Apparently Kenny Britt was just released. Dorsey's already making good moves! 

Dam I was hoping he was going to come back home to Green Bay, but he's going to put his stamp on Cleveland and right the ship. Finally Cleveland does something right!

[Rod Johnson]

16 hours ago, buno67 said:

The biggest thing that hurt sashi was seeing two QBs he passed on turn out to be bonafide studs (wentz and potentially Watson, looked like it until the knee injury)

If Wentz or Watson didnt turnout as well they did, I believe Sashi would still be the GM. When you miss on the most important position like that, its going to hurt them. To me that is why Hue is also to blame. You never went to bat for either Wentz or Watson. If he truly loved those guys and thought they were franchise changing QBs, he prolly would of fought to have them. He the comes out and ties his name to Kessler, RGIII, and Kizer but wasnt willing to stick his neck out for those, to me shows he has as much fault for the QBs as Sashi. I also hope they can Hue at the end of the season. I hope they gave him that vote of confidence so it keeps the coaches in the mindset of wanting to win instead of looking for other jobs and it keeps the players focused on playing and trying to win a game. 

I view it as the philosophy that Hue will publicly go to bat for QB's that are on his team, and I think that's a strong philosophy.  If he held a presser that Watson/Wentz were going to save our franchise that would be publicly undermining the decision not to draft them.  We have to be agnostic about his evaluations about players not on this team.  That's not to deny Hue's fallibility in evaluating QB prospects, that's sort of evident in trades for AJ McCarron and Carson Palmer, but we can't really understand how he influenced not taking Wentz/Watson.

Sashi on the other hand, the decision not to draft those guys can be attributable to him by virtue of his position.

[43M]

15 hours ago, buno67 said:

I could careless about the steelers and their history. You would think they were some power house since the 60s because of that. You go from their steroid infused run from 72 to 79 and after that to 92' the Steelers werent special whatso ever.

Are you really that obtuse?  Im sure if it werent the Steelers he were citing, you might be more willing to see the point.   Wipe your tears away and figure out what your boy is trying to say.

Constant changeover is never a good thing.     Consistency in leadership and vision is crucial.   Hopping around from GM to GM and coach to coach is never going to lead anywhere...at least no where good.

Its funny that you highlight a 12 year stretch in 50 years where the Steelers were not that good.   But even during that stretch, they were usually just average/mediocre....which would be an upgrade over what your team has been in your lifetime.   

Steroid infused run?  Haha....you mean in an era when it was legal and every player used them?   Haha, okay guy....

 

[paul-mac]

Who’s to say Wentz/Watson wouldn’t have busted in Cleveland? Surely their good play is at least in part a FUNCTION of where they went. 

[Mazrimiv]

I have seen enough of both Wentz and Watson to be confident that either of them would have been major upgrades for CLE.  Yes, situation matters, but raw talent will always show to some degree.  Both Wentz and Watson have far more raw talent than any QB on the CLE roster.

[Broncofan]

31 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I have seen enough of both Wentz and Watson to be confident that either of them would have been major upgrades for CLE.  Yes, situation matters, but raw talent will always show to some degree.  Both Wentz and Watson have far more raw talent than any QB on the CLE roster.

There's no doubt either QB would be far, far, far, far better than anyone on CLE's current roster.

Again, though, without the Wentz trade you don't get 7 guys (of which 3 are starting and likely fixtures now, and 2 which have sarted) plus HOU's 1st round pick this year, and PHI's 2nd round pick this year.    Could have 5 2018 starters that Wentz would be playing without.   It's not that Wentz wouldn't be an upgrade - it's that he'd be playing by himself on an awful team.     Watson is a much better argument on a big mistake..but that's a purely hindsight call, no one had foreseen Watson would have been this good this early.   Most people called it a big reach to have to trade up that much TBH.   Remember, even Hue Jackson himself did NOT stump for either QB.  So it's not like it was the obvious call at the time for them, especially given how talent poor the Browns were overall heading into the 2016 draft.

You can definitely say they'd have a better shot to win more than 1-2 games in 2016-17 with Wentz or 2017 with Watson, it's not even a debate - but if the goal is 2019, as the 3-year plan was made out to be, then whether or not you get 1 W in 2016-17 is irrelevant - if anything, it gives them more ammo to get elite difference makers in the 2017-18 draft (which they certainly did with Garrett, and can now do with 1.1 in 2018).  You certainly can't win in 2019 without getting your long-term solution this draft or FA (Cousins)...but assuming they do that (and they have the cap room in 100M), let's see what their 2018 QB is before we pass judgment.

[Chiefer]

On 12/8/2017 at 3:01 PM, Jakuvious said:

Hell no.

I'm thinking like a GM here, as a fan I've been rooting for Berry since his college days. But a guy who's had an ACL, cancer, and Achilles issues before a big contract raises red flags.  

My heart wants him a Chief for life. But the mind tells me it was a risky proposal.

[Chiefer]

On 12/8/2017 at 3:31 PM, JBURGE25 said:

That is so rude. Have we forgotten the Chiefs 2-14 season already?

Dorsey has been one of the better drafters in the last few years. Cleveland should have someone in there who can help with the contact between ownership (good luck with Haslam) and is strong with contract structure. 

Not trying to be rude. In fact Dorsey was a godsend when all I wanted was to win a game.

[Mazrimiv]

5 hours ago, Broncofan said:

There's no doubt either QB would be far, far, far, far better than anyone on CLE's current roster.

Again, though, without the Wentz trade you don't get 7 guys (of which 3 are starting and likely fixtures now, and 2 which have sarted) plus HOU's 1st round pick this year, and PHI's 2nd round pick this year.    Could have 5 2018 starters that Wentz would be playing without.   It's not that Wentz wouldn't be an upgrade - it's that he'd be playing by himself on an awful team.     Watson is a much better argument on a big mistake..but that's a purely hindsight call, no one had foreseen Watson would have been this good this early.   Most people called it a big reach to have to trade up that much TBH.   Remember, even Hue Jackson himself did NOT stump for either QB.  So it's not like it was the obvious call at the time for them, especially given how talent poor the Browns were overall heading into the 2016 draft.

You can definitely say they'd have a better shot to win more than 1-2 games in 2016-17 with Wentz or 2017 with Watson, it's not even a debate - but if the goal is 2019, as the 3-year plan was made out to be, then whether or not you get 1 W in 2016-17 is irrelevant - if anything, it gives them more ammo to get elite difference makers in the 2017-18 draft (which they certainly did with Garrett, and can now do with 1.1 in 2018).  You certainly can't win in 2019 without getting your long-term solution this draft or FA (Cousins)...but assuming they do that (and they have the cap room in 100M), let's see what their 2018 QB is before we pass judgment.

I think you are misinterpreting my post.

[swede700]

On 12/8/2017 at 4:31 PM, JBURGE25 said:

That is so rude. Have we forgotten the Chiefs 2-14 season already?

Dorsey has been one of the better drafters in the last few years. Cleveland should have someone in there who can help with the contact between ownership (good luck with Haslam) and is strong with contract structure. 

The Chiefs' 2-14 season in 2012 was not a talent problem.  There were a lot of external forces, most notably the Jovan Belcher situation that derailed that season, as that was a division-winning team just 2 years earlier.  

[Kmart128]

Apparently Jeff Fisher is eyeing Browns job... Well when Jeff Fisher leads them to a 7-9 season I'm sure Cleveland would build a statue for him.

[Heimdallr]

8 hours ago, marshawn lynch said:

Apparently Jeff Fisher is eyeing Browns job... Well when Jeff Fisher leads them to a 7-9 season I'm sure Cleveland would build a statue for him.

Even Cleveland isn't Cleveland enough to hire Jeff Fisher

[JBURGE]

So, if (and when) Houston loses to Pitt this weekend, they will have a showdown with the Colts for the 3rd overall pick? Is Dorsey seriously gonna start his tenure with the Browns with #1 and #3? hahahaha