AJ McCarron

[LogicIsForSquares]

23 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

Show your counterexample.

The other 31 teams who only use analytics as a part of their talent evaluations who also aren’t 1-23.

The Saints and Bucs were flaming dog crap for decades and got out of the hole pre-analytics. They went on to win championships. 

If Sashi and Co. are given another year and  it works, I will gladly eat crow. But if it fails on a historic level, everyone who fell in love with it will have to stand up and admit that they shouldn’t have been so smug about this horror show of a process.

[The Gipper]

17 hours ago, Canton Dawg said:

Let me rephrase that question.

If you paid 99 cents vs $1 dollar for an item, is that a significant difference?

 

If you get 5 of the lottery numbers instead of all 6...is that a significant difference?   (answer: Oh yea)

[Unsympathetic]

What, SPECIFICALLY, is "all analytics" about the Browns?  Not other teams. The Browns. 

For someone whose nickname is "logic" it sure seems like you're just trolling because you don't have an answer.

From the article: The analytics side liked Mitch Trubisky over Myles Garrett.  We drafted Garrett.  NOT an analytics decision, whether you like it or not.

So since it's not every decision.. just some:

 

Exactly what makes this organization "different" than any other?  Some decisions are analytics, and some aren't.  And this is new....... how?

[Tacosman]

1 hour ago, Unsympathetic said:

Talent evaluation is done via analytics ---- period.

 

 

yes....but who is to say our FO is doing this right?

Bill Bellichek is someone who relies on a very analytics approach to football.  My guess is that he would laugh at what the browns are currently doing....

 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Unsympathetic said:

Talent evaluation is done via analytics ---- period.

I don't think that is totally true.  Analytics is used extensively...but not exclusively.  I mean....talented evaluators still have to eyeball the talent that is out there...and they still have to judge their heart/character/determination.    Analytics said Tom Brady was at best a 6th round long shot prospect.  But other things do come into play.

 

Instead of asserting there's some "other" thing that Browns could magically do after which endless riches would result, perhaps it's time to consider that success in the NFL just might be tough.

Well...that is true..using analytics or not...or some combination.

 

[Unsympathetic]

2 minutes ago, Tacosman said:

yes....but who is to say our FO is doing this right?

Bill Bellichek is someone who relies on a very analytics approach to football.  My guess is that he would laugh at what the browns are currently doing....

 

Define "right" without referencing the Browns. 

 

What, precisely, is "right" ?

[Canton Dawg]

1 hour ago, Unsympathetic said:

Under 2 years later you want to stop -- because it's no less successful than anything else?

NO LESS SUCCESSFUL??

We're 1-23 and have NEVER been more unsuccessful.

[LogicIsForSquares]

13 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

What, SPECIFICALLY, is "all analytics" about the Browns?  Not other teams. The Browns. 

For someone whose nickname is "logic" it sure seems like you're just trolling because you don't have an answer.

From the article: The analytics side liked Mitch Trubisky over Myles Garrett.  We drafted Garrett.  NOT an analytics decision, whether you like it or not.

So since it's not every decision.. just some:

 

Exactly what makes this organization "different" than any other?  Some decisions are analytics, and some aren't.  And this is new....... how?

Name the talent evaluator in house who is having their say in decision making on draft picks. I hope they weren’t behind the WR heavy draft that ended with a handful of sand.

If the Browns aren’t doing anything new then why am I hearing a few voices talking about how they are doing something different than previous regimes and other franchises? That seems to be the complaint that traditional methods didn’t work for the Browns thus this new process. Can’t have it both ways.

I know your pants get tight over analytics and PFF. The rest of us are less enthused. The results are pretty clear.

[Unsympathetic]

59 minutes ago, LogicIsForSquares said:

Name the talent evaluator in house who is having their say in decision making on draft picks. I hope they weren’t behind the WR heavy draft that ended with a handful of sand.

If the Browns aren’t doing anything new then why am I hearing a few voices talking about how they are doing something different than previous regimes and other franchises? That seems to be the complaint that traditional methods didn’t work for the Browns thus this new process. Can’t have it both ways.

I know your pants get tight over analytics and PFF. The rest of us are less enthused. The results are pretty clear.

1) Talent evaluator - Everyone. They've said this repeatedly, you just haven't wanted to believe it.  Consensus decision making is.. everyone.

2) Reread the above link. Every 2017 NFL team uses analytics.  This is something new - FOR EVERY TEAM.

Your role is to show why Browns "new" way is substantially different than other teams' in 2017 ---- not different than the past, because that's a given for every team.

3) Seems to be the complaint?

You're the one who can't have it both ways ---- 4-12 is not working, yet you want to go back to the same method that brought us glorious seasons of 5-11.

4) I know you get your pants tight over repeating the same methods that brought us 5-11 teams. The rest of us are less enthused, because those results are clear.

[The Gipper]

1) Talent evaluator - Everyone. They've said this repeatedly, you just haven't wanted to believe it.  Consensus decision making is....everyone.

OK, fine, it is everyone......now name the one or two guys that are part of everyone that is actually worth a shite at doing their job. Not sure there is anyone.

[LogicIsForSquares]

1 hour ago, Unsympathetic said:

1) Talent evaluator - Everyone. They've said this repeatedly, you just haven't wanted to believe it.  Consensus decision making is.. everyone.

2) Reread the above link. Every 2017 NFL team uses analytics.  This is something new - FOR EVERY TEAM.

Your role is to show why Browns "new" way is substantially different than other teams' in 2017 ---- not different than the past, because that's a given for every team.

3) Seems to be the complaint?

You're the one who can't have it both ways ---- 4-12 is not working, yet you want to go back to the same method that brought us glorious seasons of 5-11.

4) I know you get your pants tight over repeating the same methods that brought us 5-11 teams. The rest of us are less enthused, because those results are clear.

No other team has completely scrapped any talent on their squad then tried to build from there. The other 31 use analytics as one tool in the toolbox. Not basing their entire approach on it, going so far as to bring in the guy who made it famous...in baseball.

Other teams have successfully brought themselves out of the dump without demolishing all of the in house talent. However, they also brought in the right people. The Browns seem cursed to bring in incompetent execs while the other franchises seem to have some hits with their misses. It appears the Browns are breaking new ground at being awful thanks in part to the front office a few people here adore. Empty offices could produce as many wins and progress as this front office has produced. No team will suck in NFL history as hard as the Browns have under Sashi and Co. 

Sorry that people aren’t pumped about historic failure.

[LogicIsForSquares]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

1) Talent evaluator - Everyone. They've said this repeatedly, you just haven't wanted to believe it.  Consensus decision making is....everyone.

OK, fine, it is everyone......now name the one or two guys that are part of everyone that is actually worth a shite at doing their job. Not sure there is anyone.

Well I guess that means everyone that is under the roof right now can't evaluate talent.

[The Gipper]

20 minutes ago, LogicIsForSquares said:

Well I guess that means everyone that is under the roof right now can't evaluate talent.

 Bingo 

[Tacosman]

4 hours ago, Unsympathetic said:

Define "right" without referencing the Browns.

 

What, precisely, is "right" ?

'right'- picking good players in the draft and developing them.

'right'- not wasting 2nd round picks on sure thing useless players

'right'- smart free agent signings on players who add value to a team

[Unsympathetic]

Define good.

Define developing.

Define wasting.

Define sure-thing-useless.

Define smart.

Define value.

 

I can't tell if you think you're being snarky.. or if you're actually trying to develop something.  Those sentences sound like the beginning of an idea, but it really needs more fleshing out to become something specific, something that can be used to assess performance.

 

When you consider a numerical way to define value.......... that sure sounds like your own theory of analytics.  Yet, wIthout precise [numerical, non-emotional, non-hand-waving] definitions of these terms, any situation can be twisted into whatever result you predetermined "should" be..  even if you actually are attempting to calmly think it through.   

[is a successful development a 7th rounder who improves to getting a few starts such as Ahtyba Rubin in one season a few years ago? Or a second-rounder like Bitonio being a plug-and-play near AllPro from day 1 for many seasons? But what precisely are the numerical metrics of round player selected, number of starts earned? Is starts the right metric? Should there be levels of development, say colors to denote each level? What then are the numerical boundaries of each color?]

 

And when you attempt to come up with numerical definitions of these.... you'll run into the same questions that many people have disagreed with Sashi on.. but perhaps you [and anyone else who actually goes through the exercise] might understand the difficulty [and imprecise science] of building a team.

[Canton Dawg]

38 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

Define good.

Define developing.

Define wasting.

Define sure-thing-useless.

Define smart.

Define value.

 

I can't tell if you think you're being snarky.. or if you're actually trying to develop something.  Those sentences sound like the beginning of an idea, but it really needs more fleshing out to become something specific, something that can be used to assess performance.

 

When you consider a numerical way to define value.......... that sure sounds like your own theory of analytics.  Yet, wIthout precise [numerical, non-emotional, non-hand-waving] definitions of these terms, any situation can be twisted into whatever result you predetermined "should" be..  even if you actually are attempting to calmly think it through.   

[is a successful development a 7th rounder who improves to getting a few starts such as Ahtyba Rubin in one season a few years ago? Or a second-rounder like Bitonio being a plug-and-play near AllPro from day 1 for many seasons? But what precisely are the numerical metrics of round player selected, number of starts earned? Is starts the right metric? Should there be levels of development, say colors to denote each level? What then are the numerical boundaries of each color?]

 

And when you attempt to come up with numerical definitions of these.... you'll run into the same questions that many people have disagreed with Sashi on.. but perhaps you [and anyone else who actually goes through the exercise] might understand the difficulty [and imprecise science] of building a team.

Define “define”.

[D Bone]

LMAO!

[TexasAg1969]

9 hours ago, Canton Dawg said:

Define “define”.

Define 1-23.

[TexasAg1969]

So what if McCarron wins his case for FA? Do we go after him and forget about drafting a QB?

 

[flyingfooldoug]

16 hours ago, The Gipper said:

 Bingo 

I thought that "everyone" is just a code word for Jimmah

[jiggins7919]

I don't think everyone truly understands just how terrible Kizer has been this year. Fans and analysts were both completely aware that starting a young rookie QB would be challenging, but there's a difference between challenging and "freaking butt-awful terrible go away you're a disgrace" bad. Here's some stats for you:

Kizer is last in several NFL categories including rating (51.1), completion percentage (52.1), touchdown passes (3) and interceptions (11). The Browns are also next to last in scoring at 14.9 points per game.

So, after you're finished vomiting, let's look a little deeper into these cataclysmic stats, shall we? For comparison's sake, a rookie Brandon Weeden completed 58% of passes, had 14 TDs in the air, and 17 INTs. Weeden was NOT good, we know this. But Weeden DID have like 3 or 4 passes he could execute frequently, and Weeden still managed to play well enough to win the OCCASIONAL game. Granted, Weeden was like 20 years older than Kizer as a rookie, but whatever. You can also say Weeden had better targets. But the point is that Kizer will finish the season with like 7 TD passes and 26 INTs at his current pace. The point is that we will never win a game with him because he's so terrible (unless we get the magical game with a special team TD, defensive td, and whatever else). 

Browns coaches and management know they needed something NOW. They realize they probably won't win a game with their current qb's. The Bengals asked for a ridiculous price because they knew we were basically bent over a barrel, while in prison, with two guys named Jamal and Jesus unbuttoning their fly and licking their chops. We realized too late that we wanted to trade and we didn't have enough time. 

I'm not going to rehash my examples of Kizer's futility. We'll get plenty more this weekend. In fact, I'd say there's a 50/50 chance Kessler comes in at some point. Especially if the game is close and Kizer continues to stall out. I'm not sure Kizer will throw as many interceptions, but I do believe he'll be too hesitant to throw where he needs to, and this will cause a barrage of punts, our defense to get tired, and the score to blossom out of control. We've seen it before. 

Regardless of how people feel about McCarron, I'd say it's a certainty he'd play better than Kizer, which obviously wouldn't require MUCH, but what's impossible to know is HOW much better he'd be. I'd say to just start Kessler, but his mobility is so awful and his upper body strength so miserable that he can't take ANY kind of hit without going down instantly. Without Joe Thomas, I worry about the pass protection and Kessler getting hunted down and basically killed. The complicating factor is that we haven't won a single game. If we just had one or two victories, it would be so different. The pressure would be considerably less, and we could start Kizer and see if he really does have anything (I say he doesn't). But without a win, our coaches know they have to do anything and everything possible to SOMEHOW get a W, and that makes a team desperate. 

There's a part of me that says Cody Kessler should start if we get Josh Gordon and Corey Coleman back on the field together. I think Cody has the accuracy required to make ENOUGH passes to possibly score enough points to win a game. However, I also feel that it would be unfair to bench Kizer just when we ACTUALLY get viable weapons to throw it to. But honestly, Kizer hasn't thrown it to our current scrubs when they're open, especially in the red zone, so why would it matter if more talented people are open? 

I'm officially on the "Kessler for week 11" bandwagon. That's the week Gordon is eligible for return and Corey hopefully will still be healthy. Josh Gordon, Corey Coleman, and Higgins in the slot. Toss in Njoku and Devalve with Duke and Crow out of the backfield...and you actually have something. I really believe Kessler can win a game or two with that lineup, and take some pressure off Hue Jackson. 

[jiggins7919]

26 minutes ago, TexasAg1969 said:

So what if McCarron wins his case for FA? Do we go after him and forget about drafting a QB?

 

Possibly Texas. The difficulty of this is actually figuring out how much to PAY a guy like McCarron. We all remember the Matt Flynns of the world who received giant contracts based on limited sample sizes, so working out a contract is not easy to do. While I believe McCarron is an obvious upgrade, that really doesn't say much when you're comparing him to the literal WORST QB in the league. 

My biggest concern with McCarron is his ceiling, ya know? Can he be a true franchise type guy, or is he simply a qualified backup? He's not fast. Not especially big. Doesn't have a plus arm, and really doesn't have much going on besides his knowledge of our offense, decent accuracy, and being a winner. 

I still think we draft a QB very high in the draft AND sign a veteran. I think we're going to be VERY aggressive this year addressing the QB position...like nothing we've seen before. I honestly don't think people truly understand the difference just an AVERAGE QB would make on this team. If you go back and just look at how many TD passes Kizer missed, how many turnovers he caused in the red zone, and if a QB could've converted just a THIRD of those....who knows what our record is. Yes our receivers dropped a ton. Yes Britt caused two by himself on decent passes that would have been 1st downs. Yes they haven't gotten open nearly enough. But Kizer isn't delivering the rock when they DO get open, and now Hue is dumbing down the offense so much that we have zero scoring threats. 

[TexasAg1969]

32 minutes ago, jiggins7919 said:

My biggest concern with McCarron is his ceiling, ya know? Can he be a true franchise type guy, or is he simply a qualified backup? He's not fast. Not especially big. Doesn't have a plus arm, and really doesn't have much going on besides his knowledge of our offense, decent accuracy, and being a winner.

So he's Joe Montana. I'd settle for that.

[Westside Steve]

I'm by no means a DeShone Kizer flak but for God's sake boys what kind of receiving cord does the kid have to work with? And what would makes you guys think that AJ McCarron is the second coming of Steve Young? Unless, and this is a shaky guess, Hue Jackson knows more about him than we do....

WSS

[Nero]

42 minutes ago, jiggins7919 said:

Possibly Texas. The difficulty of this is actually figuring out how much to PAY a guy like McCarron. We all remember the Matt Flynns of the world who received giant contracts based on limited sample sizes, so working out a contract is not easy to do. While I believe McCarron is an obvious upgrade, that really doesn't say much when you're comparing him to the literal WORST QB in the league. 

My biggest concern with McCarron is his ceiling, ya know? Can he be a true franchise type guy, or is he simply a qualified backup? He's not fast. Not especially big. Doesn't have a plus arm, and really doesn't have much going on besides his knowledge of our offense, decent accuracy, and being a winner. 

I still think we draft a QB very high in the draft AND sign a veteran. I think we're going to be VERY aggressive this year addressing the QB position...like nothing we've seen before. I honestly don't think people truly understand the difference just an AVERAGE QB would make on this team. If you go back and just look at how many TD passes Kizer missed, how many turnovers he caused in the red zone, and if a QB could've converted just a THIRD of those....who knows what our record is. Yes our receivers dropped a ton. Yes Britt caused two by himself on decent passes that would have been 1st downs. Yes they haven't gotten open nearly enough. But Kizer isn't delivering the rock when they DO get open, and now Hue is dumbing down the offense so much that we have zero scoring threats. 

I think that the problem with McCarron, as with any other backup, is that he can produce some highlights simply because of the surprise factor. There's many backups who come out and play well to then start failing miserably once they become starters.

Even though I want to stay more optimistic than you about Kizer - I think he turning around for better is one of the few things to hope for I have left for this season- I completely agree with you about addressing the QB position.

If it is so hard to get a franchise QB, let's take every possibility out of the situation. Get a veteran (before the draft) and draft a QB even if Kizer shows some promise in the end of the season. Make them compete so we finally get a decent player in that position. We got a huge salary cap and draft picks to make that kind of move.

[wargograw]

On 11/9/2017 at 3:09 AM, stillmotion said:

again i said Sashi needs to be demoted, not fired, yet you put words in my mouth and create false narratives in order to try and make your weak argument stronger.

"The Process" is far from perfect and Sashi needs to let someone who knows how to draft, draft instead of him and Mr. Baseball.

Again, same thing. And again, we are not getting some stud GM. You'll have to get over it.

On 11/9/2017 at 5:27 AM, LogicIsForSquares said:

Ah the method that every other dumpster team has used to get out of the dump. Yes, total failure for sure. Those other 31 franchises that use normal methods just don’t have the knowledge of Sashi. Get the Shmuck out. We already determined that you think of the NFL within the time frame of 10 years.

Do you think this fan base has only liked Joe Thomas? There are players in between the dog turds and a hall of famer. 

Yes, mocking a baby learning to walk = being critical of an adult millionaire being bad at their job.

Apparently it is an internet thing because you were trying to get people to modify how they post because they were saying meanie words about the FO of a 1-23 operation. Sashi the Great and Powerful should be able to hack it. Unless part of the process fails due to negativity on The Browns Board. We are in uncharted territory with record and FO so it may be a metric.

Beginning to think you and London might be Sashi and Paul.

They may have the knowledge of Sashi, they just don't have the incompetence of our organization before they got there. 

We already determined that you're 0-1 on examples that you think prove your point. Congrats.

So maybe cite some of them, instead of Joe Thomas? Then you wouldn't leave yourself exposed to looking so foolish.

Yeah, it was a pretty good analogy. Thanks.

The internet is the symptom. Culture is the issue. I already explained this. You dedicating a new paragraph to making the same point isn't going to cover up the fact that you have reading comprehension issues.

21 hours ago, Unsympathetic said:

For someone whose nickname is "logic" it sure seems like you're just trolling because you don't have an answer.

 

Pretty much nailed it. All the group has to say is "1-23" with insane asylum-worthy repetition. No actual solutions other than "hire a 'football guy'!" No actual discussion of where the team's going. These discussions are worthless.

[Unsympathetic]

14 minutes ago, wargograw said:

Pretty much nailed it. All the group has to say is "1-23" with insane asylum-worthy repetition. No actual solutions other than "hire a 'football guy'!" No actual discussion of where the team's going. These discussions are worthless.

And no answer or even thought given to the reality that the prior 2 decades of 4-12 prior to Sashi et al were 100% due to football decisions made by football guys.

[stillmotion]

56 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

And no answer or even thought given to the reality that the prior 2 decades of 4-12 prior to Sashi et al were 100% due to football decisions made by football guys.

Yet all of the other winning teams had football guys. Maybe we just had the wrong football guys in place. Sashi has succeeded in getting draft picks, not taking a QB, and having a worse record than any other "Football guy" we've hired.

[stillmotion]

1 hour ago, wargograw said:

Again, same thing. And again, we are not getting some stud GM. You'll have to get over it.

You don't know if Jimmy will add someone to make football decisions. It would be a very smart move. If you think Sashi is better at picking talent then any football guys then you're absolutely clueless and need to get his finger out of your mouth.

[jiggins7919]

1 hour ago, Nero said:

I think that the problem with McCarron, as with any other backup, is that he can produce some highlights simply because of the surprise factor. There's many backups who come out and play well to then start failing miserably once they become starters.

Even though I want to stay more optimistic than you about Kizer - I think he turning around for better is one of the few things to hope for I have left for this season- I completely agree with you about addressing the QB position.

If it is so hard to get a franchise QB, let's take every possibility out of the situation. Get a veteran (before the draft) and draft a QB even if Kizer shows some promise in the end of the season. Make them compete so we finally get a decent player in that position. We got a huge salary cap and draft picks to make that kind of move.

Well you're exactly right. I mean, I obviously don't KNOW Kizer will continue to flame out, but I also have zero reason to expect him to get better. I've gone into much (probably too much) detail about him, but the primary problems for him are a pervasive lack of accuracy and the inability to make throws BEFORE a receiver is open. That's the key factor for him. Seldom are people open in the NFL like college, and a QB has to release the ball knowing they WILL BE open to catch it. Kizer never had this skill, and has not shown the ability to learn. Now that he's been pulled multiple times and also thrown 11 picks, you can bet he'll be as hesitant as ever.

The inability to make these throws is bad enough, but when you couple it with his other flaw (accuracy), it's insurmountable. Basically, the rare times when Kizer DOES have someone open, he can't hit them consistently enough, especially in the red zone. It's a devastating combination, and one that can drive a giant rift between players and coaches. The players fight their butts off to get open during games, during practice, and they know their LIVELIHOODS are on the line. You telling me that our guys aren't ticked off? All this affects the coaches too, as their livelihoods are also on the line. It's toxic and difficult to overcome. 

We are now in full on desperation mode. Pulling qb's in the 2nd halves during 1 score games. Starting people like Kevin Hogan. Trying to trade with ten minutes before the deadline. We are desperate, and we're desperate because we (our coaches and front office) have zero belief that Kizer can develop into a serviceable QB. We knew this year would be rough, but we didn't think Kizer would be THIS bad. We didn't think we'd lose Corey Coleman right away, or that Britt would be so awful, or any of the other tragedies going on with us. 

We're staring down the barrel of an 0-16 season, and our coaches are now saying that we can only win if everything goes perfectly. When was the last time a game went perfectly? Ever? We are in deep trouble now. Journalists are saying there's a zero percent chance of our coaches and front office personnel coming back. You can almost feel the blow up coming, and fans can't really stomach it. We wanted to believe in the process. We were willing to give it time once more. We thought we'd see some progress, and we haven't. We simply don't score points. We watch other teams get better. We see nothing positive on our team. It hurts.