TexasAg1969 Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Chris-I was thinking the same thing about the age factor as I was reading Mud and Tour on this issue. Got to go with the lesser but younger player if they have at least a chance in the long run of getting better than the old. I understand the FO thinking on it, even if I don't agree with some of the draft choices they made and failed to make. All we have now is the hope they have learned MAJOR lessons from 2016 drafting/fa mistakes. If not then Goolie will have been proven correct on eventual firings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Chris-I was thinking the same thing about the age factor as I was reading Mud and Tour on this issue. Got to go with the lesser but younger player if they have at least a chance in the long run of getting better than the old. I understand the FO thinking on it, even if I don't agree with some of the draft choices they made and failed to make. All we have now is the hope they have learned MAJOR lessons from 2016 drafting/fa mistakes. If not then Goolie will have been proven correct on eventual firings. Exactly - I understand the reasoning behind it, and most of the execution. I'm sure if they had this offseason back they'd do some things differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 I don't see why Mud has such trouble understanding the strategy here. Are we really talking about Brian Hartline here?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Refer to the link below and tell me that the 2016 draft isn't arguably the best draft we've had since 1999. I am having a hard time seeing any draft before this with more than two key contributors to the team in the few years after they were drafted. 2010, 2011 and 2012 maybe, that's it. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/draft.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Please folks, refer to the link below and tell me that the 2016 draft isn't arguably the best draft we've had since 1999. I am having a hard time seeing any draft before this with more than two key contributors to the team in the few years after they were drafted. 2010, 2011 and 2012 maybe, that's it. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/draft.htm It's hard to look past that 2013 draft, with Barkevious Mingo headlining a list of perennial pro-bowlers in Leon McFadden, Jamoris Slaughter and Garrett Gilkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted October 31, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 It's hard to look past that 2013 draft... ... because the next thing waiting for you is 2012's First Round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 ... because the next thing waiting for you is 2012's First Round. Trent Richardson scored 12 touchdowns. That doesn't happen by accident. There was at least a mediocre, crowell-level player in there that got destroyed by trades, loss of confidence, fitness, the rest. It's a shame, but what can you do. At least we got a first round pick out of it that turned in to johnny manziel oh fuck it I'd rather have kept richardson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 If Richardson had the kind of long leash anywhere that Crowell's had he'd be a Pro Bowler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 But he did not, and he is not. A waste of mediocre talent isn't something I'm going to cry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted October 31, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Trent Richardson... was at least a mediocre, crowell-level player in there... .... who was taken #2 overall... after a trade up. I rest my case. And will forego your insulting Crow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 That does seem a little harsh on Crowell ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 Chris-I was thinking the same thing about the age factor as I was reading Not saying we should have kept all those guys....just showing how we didnt improve.... Exactly - I understand the reasoning behind it, and most of the execution. I'm sure if they had this offseason back they'd do some things differently. The execution is my ONLY issue.....again.....not saying Id rather have Hartline or Kruger again.....my point(all along) has been that I wanted BETTER players, when those old schmucks left.......and I wanted the NEW players to be better and actually beat those old schmucks out....instead of just get handed the jobs(w/o working to earn them).....and I wanted them to keep a few old schmucks, in the event that they had zero plan to replace them, until they found viable replacements.....but instead, I got 11 schmucks gone and only a hand ful back....not one person has shown me a convincing argument on WHY a team must get worse, in order to get better......so....my point....is that out of the 11 schmucks who sucked and got shafted outta here, they have only given me a few viable decent replacements and whole big pile of shitty football.... I don't see why Mud has such trouble understanding the strategy here. Are we really talking about Brian Hartline here?? I dont see why you never understand shit and always add your own meaning....read the words......I get the strategy, but just think it sucks and that the execution sucks too....can you get that? To clarify....I keep hearing about youth and let the young guys play and this drfat class, blah blah blah.....but here's some reality on what the FO gave us.... Replaced Whitner(1 yr removed from multiple pro-bowls) with his back up Replaced Gipson (1 yr removed from the pro bowl) with his back up Replaced Starks with his back up Replaced Mack with his terrible back up Replaced Schwartz with his udfa back up Replaced Dansby with a less accomplished Vet Replaced our entire OLB corps with 2 UDFA's, 1 4th rounder and DE project Replaced our All pro punter with a udfa THIS ^^^^^ is not rebuilding....it's tearing down and then plugging in crap.... And the rookies who are supposed to be benefitting from this purge and starting(or playing a lot)....arent Ogbah is the only rookie starter right now..... Nassib, Louis, Kessler, Drango, Schobert and Kindred are getting reps..... And the other 7 are either hurt or on the bench..... Keeping a few vets and signing a few quality players in FA...(OL anyone?)....coulda woulda been the difference in this team actually winning some games and starting to understand and build toward a "WINNING" culture..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 You obviously don't "get the strategy," since you question it ad nauseum, basically saying the same thing over and over. We get it, you don't like it. When you actually analyze, your posts are really good. When you get to ranting and repeating yourself, it's brutal. There are no old guys because old guys take snaps from young guys. Snaps=more important than some nebulous concept of having to beat out vets. You have been told this many times now, yet choose to hit the same talking points over and over anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 I do get it and it sucks.....guess I didnt say that clearly last post.... I have lots of talking points, but you seem to only see this stuff....actually been away for weeks, cause Im ill from what I see.... And....as Ive told you MANY times, no need for you to worry about my posts....Ive asked you to please ignore them, but thats a concept you never got either..... There's an ignore button....use it.... please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread? We get it. You disagree with it. I'll look at what I want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread? I'll look at what I want to. And Ill post what I want...when I want....deal with it.... Not your job to patrol the boards and tell people what they can and cant post...just because we have differing opinions, does not make mine(or anybody elses) opinion less valid..... Every other thread?.....hell, I barely post every other week anymore......stop being an arrogant puss and talk some football instead of playing forum opinion police.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillmotion Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 I agree with Mud's post. We replaced most of the aging veterans with shit. I don't see how parkey is so much better than coons. I'm optimistic about all of the young guys we're bringing in, and in many ways i like the trade we've made with new england, but I want to win games now. I'm sick of ESPN or commentators making fun of the browns. The talent on defense is lacking so much it's ridiculous. Coleman looks like he can be a stud and Ogbah and Nassib look good too. I found myself a bit puzzled we drafted so many WR's to find a "diamond in the rough", but I like the effort. Hue looks like he can be a great coach with more talent.... The players seem to love him and Kessler has looked very good in my opinion. i'm not (ALL-IN) in the analytics game yet, and I think it would be extremely naive if anyone says that they are. We've yet to see what this strategy can do, but looking for diamond in the roughs and saving Jimmy money shouldn't be the main focus next year, or years to come. I guess if we go 0-16 this year, then we're really setting the bar low for improvement, because if we win one game next year we'll already be progressing. However, If we continue to trade down and stockpile picks (lets say we have #1 and trade down to #22 next year), I'll be furious and might start doubting jimmy's strategy. We need playmakers.... people who make an instant difference. Ezekiel Elliot or Carson Wentz didn't need a year to sit and learn.... I don't give a shit if Shon Coleman is a nice guy..... If he sucks and undrafted free agents beat him out why the heck is he on the team? What type of message does that send? If we can trade or cut Kruger or Gilbert, why don't we do the same with Cam Erving.... Can't we all agree that they all suck? People who aren't even playing in the NFL are better than Cam, and I think if anyone thinks he'll be a pro bowl center they're out of their mind. The positives - offense looks legit. Pryor, Coleman, Crow, Barnidge (hasn't played upto the bar this year). Next year, lets get some beasts on defense and get a D like the seahawks, panthers or vikings. last comment: I have no idea how Ray Farmer get jobs talking about football on T.V. after the draft with manziel, gilbert, and vincent mayle..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 I agree with Mud's post. We replaced most of the aging veterans with shit. I don't see how parkey is so much better than coons. I'm optimistic about all of the young guys we're bringing in, and in many ways i like the trade we've made with new england, but I want to win games now. Coleman looks like he can be a stud and Ogbah and Nassib look good too. I found myself a bit puzzled we drafted so many WR's to find a "diamond in the rough", but I like the effort. i'm not (ALL-IN) in the analytics game yet, and I think it would be extremely naive if anyone says that they are. We've yet to see what this strategy can do, but looking for diamond in the roughs and saving Jimmy money shouldn't be the main focus next year, or years to come. I guess if we go 0-16 this year, then we're really setting the bar low for improvement, because if we win one game next year we'll already be progressing. One - Coons was solid from under 50 but lost his way outside that distance. Patrick Murray was the guy who beat him out don't forget, btw, not Parkey. Parkey, though, was a pro-bowl kicker in 2014, was injured all of 2015, then signed with us like a day before the Miami game, where he missed three of six kicks. Since then he's been batting 1.000 so to speak. So that's on that. On the analytics driven front office - we brought in Coleman, Ogbah, Nassib and Kessler because they were guys who had played for a long time at a high level in college, shown very good production there. Ogbah and Nassib were #1 and #2 in sacks in college in 2015. Coleman was #1 in TDs. Kessler is a different story but it looks like Hue's 'trust me' is worth more than it appeared at the time. All of that, picking players based on tangible production, that's driven by analytics. Picking guys based on physical attributes in the hopes that you can make them in to a solid football player, that isn't. That's a low percentage play, especially in cleveland where in recent times it's brought us Erving, Gilbert and Mingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 And Ill post what I want...when I want....deal with it.... Not your job to patrol the boards and tell people what they can and cant post...just because we have differing opinions, does not make mine(or anybody elses) opinion less valid..... Every other thread?.....hell, I barely post every other week anymore......stop being an arrogant puss and talk some football instead of playing forum opinion police.... I will deal with it. By pointing out what a raging and repetitive crybaby you are. You calling me a puss is rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 Let he who has never jumped on the soapbox and overstayed his welcome upon it cast the first stone. It won't be me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firebiker911 Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 I think the reason we had so many draft picks is that management feels that there are no guarantees when it comes to any draft picks. 50% of them will be busts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 Let he who has never jumped on the soapbox and overstayed his welcome upon it cast the first stone. It won't be me... I only cast them from the Bully Pulpit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 OK-two plays from what could have been-indulge me on the soap box. https://youtu.be/TKQj8Jj8DYQ?t=40s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 Well since trading out of the stars gave us a lot of draft picks that put us in good position for those stars, the real question will be did they learn anything from the 2016 draft that might make them go for star players? I couldn't find Mud's post to quote from, but regarding the draft I hope they have learned their lesson. One thing being really bad is going to get us is the first overall pick. Do Sashi and DePo see a once in a generation talent out there for us in 2017? This could be "Suck for Luck" revisited. Ha Da Bears won, only need the 49ers to follow suit to lock that pick up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 This could be "Suck for Luck" revisited. When we went for 2 still trailing the Titans by 9... the word "tank" did cross my mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillmotion Posted November 1, 2016 Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 it would make sense, but would hue actually do that? if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1". I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2016 it would make sense, but would hue actually do that? if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1". I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck. True, but the Colts decision to tank was completely on the FO. They simply refused to activate Manning after he was medically cleared. That sealed the deal. As for Hue... I really don't believe it is in him to lose intentionally... but the word did cross my mind. Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted November 2, 2016 Report Share Posted November 2, 2016 Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well. You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick? Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2016 You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick? Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes. C'mon... we're amateurs and we could see what the sum of the parts were... even before injuries further diminished our "shell". As for our recent "addition"... I think your choice of "seemingly" is appropriate for now. But even if he is everything we'd hope and then some, does this D look to be one player away from competitive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted November 2, 2016 Report Share Posted November 2, 2016 You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick? Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes. Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime. I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.