The Truth about Sashi Brown

[bruceb]

27 minutes ago, Mind Character said:

If I had to put a percentage on it I'd say the issues are 35% Hue and Coaches; 45 % Talent Acquisitioner; 40% Players

Which is actually an interesting exercise b/c my percentage that I just came up clearly explain why my beliefs are in the minuscule minority.

Especially since that adds up to 120% of blame being assigned?

[Bonanza23]

10 minutes ago, bruceb said:

Especially since that adds up to 120% of blame being assigned?

Maths are overrated. 

[Mind Character]

15 minutes ago, bruceb said:

Especially since that adds up to 120% of blame being assigned?

hahaha...Classic...my bad

[bruceb]

1 minute ago, Mind Character said:

hahaha...Classic...my bad

All kidding aside, I think you must factor Hueball's Machiavellian politicking into your assignment of blame, especially since its underlying motivation was to save his butt and had nothing to do with the better interests of the team, the players or winning.

[buno67]

24 minutes ago, bruceb said:

Especially since that adds up to 120% of blame being assigned?

and thats how you get 0-16, when the blaming for the issue goes past 100% lol

[NateDawg]

51 minutes ago, Mind Character said:

If you had to quantify it based on percentages what percent blame is the players, head coach and coaches, and player acquisitioner (not easy to do)?

My sense is that Most say the blame is like 85% Hue; 5% talent acquisitioner, 5% players because "they're talented and saying they're not is a lie"; and. 5% other coaches.

Of course, coaching plays a role but for this team what is the right way to answer the age old football question (that I really don't have an answer for) of where does the line of bad coaching stop and the line of bad players' play begin.

At the end of the season, the takeaway for most is Hue has to be fired and he's the worst coach in NFL history.

The focus really hasn't been the players are talented but inexperience makes them terrible. It's been the coaching is awful and terrible and we have the talent to win.

I've heard stuff like this is 6 or 7 win team with better coaching. RBS did a poll and people thought this was a 7 to 8 win team if the coaches were better.

I just can't understand how so many really believe that. It's nuts to me.

And my confusion always is...Are the passing game struggles of Kenny Britt, Rashard Higgins, Corey Coleman, Ricardo Louis, rookie Deshone Kizer, and rookie David Njoku MOSTLY attributable to Hue and/or Al Saunders and/or Greg Seamon or is it the players.

I always ask myself not about Belichick but what would the majority  of NFL coaches accomplish with this team (Ron Rivera, Mike Mccarthy, John Fox, Harbuagh, etc...)

And my answer to that is that even the good ones might have at best won 1-3 games.

I'm cool with the Hue is trash stuff but it always puzzles me how it's so simple as to just say Hueball...and not Hueball and the players are garbage/rookies or something like that.

I get the playcalling things or not putting players in the best positions, but I have vivid memories of this season and so many of the big moments were Britt or Ricardo drops, or Kizer/Hogan redzone picks, or near redzone inaccurate picks, or fumbles, or rookie QB sneaks or missing a wide open Crowell out of the backfield or a wide open Njoku down the seam.

If I had to put a percentage on it I'd say the issues are 30% Hue and Coaches; 40 % Talent Acquisitioner; 30% Players

Which is actually an interesting exercise b/c my percentage that I just came up clearly explain why my beliefs are in the minuscule minority.

 

Front office gets 100% “ blame” for giving Hue a 4-12 caliber roster. Hue then shoulders 90% of the blame for allowing that 4-12 roster to go 0-16. Kizer shoulders the blame as part of the roster aspect. Good QB play could mean maybe 6 wins. He’s been, well....

Again though, even within the QB/roster performance aspect, that 4-12 level of roster underdeveloped, was misused, mismanaged, and was not used advantageously. Hence, again, 0-16. 

You deal with the cards you’re given. Hue was, in the short term, not provided a good team. However, decent coaching performs at the average level. In this case, 3-5 wins. Great coaching for a roster like this would be 6-8 wins.  0 wins though? Guy’s just out there stealing paychecks at this point. 

[bruceb]

6 minutes ago, NateDawg said:

Front office gets 100% “ blame” for giving Hue a 4-12 caliber roster. Hue then shoulders 90% of the blame for allowing that 4-12 roster to go 0-16.

Now we are up to 190%.

I think 0-16, 1-31 most likely explains everything.

[Mind Character]

3 minutes ago, bruceb said:

All kidding aside, I think you must factor Hueball's Machiavellian politicking into your assignment of blame, especially since its underlying motivation was to save his butt and had nothing to do with the better interests of the team, the players or winning.

Craziest stat this year though is that we are 22nd in Redzone scoring attempts but 31st in scoring efficiency meaning the largest differential also in the league.

That means for the most part we have moved the ball, but we lose our freaking mind when it comes to putting it in the endzone.

That really tells the story of our season. I mean if we just kicked field goals instead of catastrophic turnovers we might have pulled out a few of those 3 point losses.

Insanity...truly.

That also means we are better than 10 teams in terms of redzone scoring opportunities.

I've thought about it and the thing that I think underlies my unpopular belief is that its mostly players when I rewatch the games in every single game especially this year (last year it was hard to really make sense of anything with Austin Pazstor, Cam Erving, and Greco gettin there suck on) there's multiple moments where the play was there on offense but the throw was garbage, or the receiver was running wide open but was missed, or worse we drove all the way to the redzone then something disastrous occurs.

So, I guess more often than not I attribute a lot of the issues to catastrophic, nonsensical turnovers that I'm not sure coaching would've changed other than the 4 Interceptions that were thrown off of a 1st down pass play when we could've run and the 2 fumbles that happened in similar situations which were situational football coaching errors that did not factor in Kizer's youthful garbageness.

[mistakey]

3 hours ago, Kiwibrown said:

Biggest mistake as an evaluator of talent. 

I agree if we had McCown or even RG3 we would of been winning games.

Does everyone forget that Kenny Britt was a 1000 yard receiver and a first round WR... who’s currently on the patriots?  

Yeah he sucked for us but the dude does have 5000 yards in the nfl.  Guys got (or had) talent.  Maybe the talent got turned off by the head dude in charge . . .

[Mind Character]

53 minutes ago, NateDawg said:

Front office gets 100% “ blame” for giving Hue a 4-12 caliber roster. Hue then shoulders 90% of the blame for allowing that 4-12 roster to go 0-16. Kizer shoulders the blame as part of the roster aspect. Good QB play could mean maybe 6 wins. He’s been, well....

Again though, even within the QB/roster performance aspect, that 4-12 level of roster underdeveloped, was misused, mismanaged, and was not used advantageously. Hence, again, 0-16. 

You deal with the cards you’re given. Hue was, in the short term, not provided a good team. However, decent coaching performs at the average level. In this case, 3-5 wins. Great coaching for a roster like this would be 6-8 wins.  0 wins though? Guy’s just out there stealing paychecks at this point. 

Interesting points.

The difference between 0 wins versus 3 to me isn't that big to me as critical and catastrophic turnovers due to inexperience swing the pendulum one way or another.

The Colts, Jets, Packers, and Titans games all come to mind where a disastrous play handed those teams the win. The detroit game was another one.

For me, when you're "4-12" team but your QB's a rookie and 13 of 22 starters on your team are 1st and 2nd year players that 4-12 can become 0 or 1 wins in a hurry.

Part of me wonders if Jimmy said Hue was coming back for an unspoken reason; that is, to restore the faith of prospective coaches that they'll get at least 3 years.

That's important as much all Browns fans hate Hue, he is respected by his peers and believed to have been given a raw deal; Thus after the Chudsinski 1 year firing, Shurmer 2 year firing, and Mike Pettine 2 year firing, and Hue 2 year firing, no coach would believe they'd get longer than 2 years.

So, maybe Jimmy is trying to do a rebranding of sorts.

It is always so fascinating to me when top offensive coordinators have top minds/offenses in the league become head coaches and call plays but within a years time are believed to have lost all skill in playcalling.

Shurmur was thought to be a top playcaller....Chud was a top playcaller....and their offenses stunk and we all criticized their playcalling.

Hue had more success as an OC than either Chud or Shurmur and now it's believed he's playing tic tac toe on his play sheet during game day.

It's fascinating to be sure...then those coaches get fired and become top OCs in the league again.

I think no matter what Jimmy had to give whoever the next coach post Pettine was a 3 year time table and especially so b/c we let every single player we had go that year and tore the thing down to the studs.

Here's to hoping Dave Toub and John Dorsey can lead the way when next week Jimmy fires Hue.

Can't wait for the Gruden rumors as well.

[Bonanza23]

Hate to toot my own horn, but I said you’d be back @Mind Character 

[OhioG]

I always felt Nassib wasnt a good fit for either the 4-3 or 3-4 unless you are running a scheme where he doesnt need to have any bend to get to the QB or he took 2 years to fill into his frame and become a 3-4 DE.

I think Joe S was projected to be a middling 3-4 OLB. I think hes a solid 4-3 LB but unless im remembering correctly he was projected to be a WILL in a 3-4 or a back up OLB in a 3-4.

I dont think I can hold Nassib and Schobert against Sashi as proof that he doesnt understand the nuances of football. 

 

[Mind Character]

5 minutes ago, Bonanza23 said:

Hate to toot my own horn, but I said you’d be back @Mind Character 

You just had to say it...didn't you.

I'm as disgusted at myself as the fans are disgusted at Hue.

I also realize that everyone is as disgusted by my return as the fans are disgusted at Hue.

RBS, Grossi, every cleveland.com writer, 92.3....they just put me over the edge. It was just one echo chamber of the same loud yell.

The media really makes the experience insufferable.

The only writers that are actually readable are Nate Ulrich ohio.com, Dan Labbe cleveland.com, and sometimes Scott Petrak the chronicle.

They do good reporting and logical criticisms.

Literally, everyone else drives me nuts and just serve as loudspeakers for popular sentiment.

[Mind Character]

1 hour ago, bruceb said:

Now we are up to 190%.

I think 0-16, 1-31 most likely explains everything.

See that's the most interesting thing to think about...I mean it's truly fascinating

Where I get lost and confused is .... if every single exec, football insider, football expert believes that the 2016 Browns were going to go winless in 2016 b/c they had no real talents, let all the good players go, clearly were tanking for picks, and were in trouble w/ starting RG3.

Then, when rookie 3rd rounder Cody Kessler starts....were we shocked we went 1-15?

No, we weren't. Most of us expected it.

There's reasons why  people predicted we'd be hot garbage then...that's why for most the narrative was "we went 1-15, it wasn't really on Hue, we need better players, there's always next year."

Mostly, everyone generally  agreed with that sentiment, especially football people.

Now, here's the kicker and most fascinating thing to me.

That same team that went 1-15, everyone thought was one of the worst rosters every, and screwed the fans and coaches over... you take that very same team and you add Kenny Britt, Jason Mccourty, 7 rookie starters including a QB (8 if you include Shon Coleman as true 1st year starter), a new defensive scheme, subtract Terrelle Pryor, and subtract Joe Haden AND POOF *Presto Chango* now the team that everyone thought was toilet water before and no coach could do much with it is now a team that if it sucks it is all a problem of coaching exclusively and to say the team is talent deficient is a lie that should never be spoken.

As always I don't really count the OL additions of Zeitler and Tretter b/c we've had an OL before and been garbage so we have to look beyond that position.

This is where my confusion always lies and I think most of it is b/c we judge GMs on how their future is looking but coaches on the immediate. With the plan always being forward looking, the coaches were always going to be garbage in the immediate.

So, was 1-15 on the coaches in 2016? Sure it was in part all of it does fall on the coaches to some degree. I think we'd all agree with that. But again, most of us would've said, the coaches got a pass b/c the team was toilet water.

Now, a year later 7 rookie starters, a Mccourty, and Britt starter later when the team is toilet water again...and it's all the coaches fault, the coaches need to own all the losses from the first year (the one's we didn't really blame them for then) as well as this years so 1-31...simple enough 1-31 explains it all and our GM was a genius ahead of his time that we should build a statue to.

It's an odd logic set to me.

The plan is working how it was always intended to. It was intended to look like garbage after 2 years. It was intended for the coaches to look like garbage after 2 years.

In reality, Sashi did his job b/c it was a longterm plan. Hue and the coaches don't get judged on that time scale but on present wins/losses therefore they have failed us all historically. It doesn't matter who the coaches were to me they'd be on their way out this year as well...maybe they'd have 1 or 2 wins but no one was taking those 7 rookie starters with mccourty and britt on a 1-15 team without Joe Thomas and Myles Garrett for major portions of the season and leading that team to success...or to a place where us fans would be happy for that matter.

The plan is working. Dave Toub and John Dorsey will take us over the finish line to victory hopefully.

 

 

[Mind Character]

38 minutes ago, ohiogenius said:

I always felt Nassib wasnt a good fit for either the 4-3 or 3-4 unless you are running a scheme where he doesnt need to have any bend to get to the QB or he took 2 years to fill into his frame and become a 3-4 DE.

I think Joe S was projected to be a middling 3-4 OLB. I think hes a solid 4-3 LB but unless im remembering correctly he was projected to be a WILL in a 3-4 or a back up OLB in a 3-4.

I dont think I can hold Nassib and Schobert against Sashi as proof that he doesnt understand the nuances of football. 

 

Schobert played in a very unique position as a roaming but mostly 34 OLB at Wisconsin. Every team he spoke with had him projected as a 43 LB according to him this year. The only questions from teams were whether he'd play Middle or outside in the 43.

Nassib was seen exclusively as a wide 9, 43 DE who couldn't bend but could burst up the field and get the edge if coming off the sharp angle of the wide-9...that's the furthest thing from a 34 5 tech.

What then of Ogbah...No one thought he was 34 DE or a 34 OLB.

They were good selections in the long run w/ Ogbah and Schobert being more so than Nassib, but the point was how could we strategically  draft those player when they weren't scheme fits.

Ultimately, i was a proponent of Sashi seeing the plan through but that always stuck out to me as showing a knowledge deficiency in roster building especially when we watched Ray Horton give press conferences about how he had to do things out his comfort zone as play caller and spend most of our time in the 43 to "fit our personnel challenges"

Of course, I could be wrong that it wasn't that big of deal, but it is something that no one really talks about nowadays b/c it may have worked to our benefit.