Sports: NFL

[japes]

Originally Posted by Tornado

Since the Browns left and returned they have not won a playoff game.

The Lions stayed put that entire time and did not win a playoff game either and they had an extra few chances while the Browns were inactive.

50+ years and the Lions have one playoff win, ever.

I think they just picked up a really experienced head coach, so that is cool.

My son learned that Detroit was the only NFC team to have never been to a Super Bowl so he's started secretly pulling for them...Cleveland on the other hand he was rooting for them to complete the "perfect" season...his thoughts were that if you were going to be bad you might as well be the best at being bad.

I honestly think that if Cleveland went through the next 3 or so years and just traded away every first round pick they get and stock up on 2nd and 3rd rounds picks they would end up better down the road. Less pressure of picking the "savior" and you'd completely turn over your roster in a couple of years with about 15-20 second and third round players.

besides drafting 3 more QB's over the next 3 years isn't going to get them anywhere. They need more than a QB and I don't see anyone in the current class changing things in Cleveland...

[Yodaking]

Originally Posted by japes

My son learned that Detroit was the only NFC team to have never been to a Super Bowl so he's started secretly pulling for them...Cleveland on the other hand he was rooting for them to complete the "perfect" season...his thoughts were that if you were going to be bad you might as well be the best at being bad.

I honestly think that if Cleveland went through the next 3 or so years and just traded away every first round pick they get and stock up on 2nd and 3rd rounds picks they would end up better down the road. Less pressure of picking the "savior" and you'd completely turn over your roster in a couple of years with about 15-20 second and third round players.

besides drafting 3 more QB's over the next 3 years isn't going to get them anywhere. They need more than a QB and I don't see anyone in the current class changing things in Cleveland...

I've been pitching basically the same thing for years for how I would run the draft for a team if I were the GM taking over a loser. If you are a play off team, adding 1 huge talent to the roster can be the missing piece that gets you over the edge. But if your team is currently in terrible shape, one star isn't going to fix your problems. You are better off trading out of the first round, picking up as many picks you can in the process, and employing the shotgun method for hitting your target. Draft 12+ guys in the 2nd to 5th rounds, not everyone is going to be a hit but it would be pretty hard to miss on all of them. When their rookie contracts run out, keep the best of them and let the rest walk. There are countless pro-bowl players that were not drafted in the first round and many, many glue guys for your roster. Do that for 3 drafts in a row, then you should have the foundation for a decent roster from which you can start adding first round talent to.

As for the browns QB situation, I would just stop heavily on that position for the next few years. Focus instead on building an O-line to protect your QB and some skill players that can make exceptional plays and take the pressure off your QB to feel like he has to win the game all by himself. Build a team that wins with Defense and by running the ball. You can still draft a couple of later round QB's and see what you can develop in house. Tom Brady was a 6th rounder, Tony Romo went undrafted, Russel Wilson was a 3rd, Dak Prescot was a 4th, and on and on. If is doesn't work out, at least it didn't cost you much.

[japes]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

I've been pitching basically the same thing for years for how I would run the draft for a team if I were the GM taking over a loser. If you are a play off team, adding 1 huge talent to the roster can be the missing piece that gets you over the edge. But if your team is currently in terrible shape, one star isn't going to fix your problems. You are better off trading out of the first round, picking up as many picks you can in the process, and employing the shotgun method for hitting your target. Draft 12+ guys in the 2nd to 5th rounds, not everyone is going to be a hit but it would be pretty hard to miss on all of them. When their rookie contracts run out, keep the best of them and let the rest walk. There are countless pro-bowl players that were not drafted in the first round and many, many glue guys for your roster. Do that for 3 drafts in a row, then you should have the foundation for a decent roster from which you can start adding first round talent to.

As for the browns QB situation, I would just stop heavily on that position for the next few years. Focus instead on building an O-line to protect your QB and some skill players that can make exceptional plays and take the pressure off your QB to feel like he has to win the game all by himself. Build a team that wins with Defense and by running the ball. You can still draft a couple of later round QB's and see what you can develop in house. Tom Brady was a 6th rounder, Tony Romo went undrafted, Russel Wilson was a 3rd, Dak Prescot was a 4th, and on and on. If is doesn't work out, at least it didn't cost you much.

Draft the crap out of OL and DL and go from there...The thing that most of the QB's you mentioned above have in common is that they had good talent already and at minimum a serviceable line. Nothing wrecks a young QB more than getting pounded their first couple years by grown men...in college they may get sacked hard 3-4 times in a career...in the NFL you get hit hard on an incomplete pass...

Heck we are talking about the Browns here...they couldn't do worse...

[Dad_Scaper]

Yup. Drafting Johnny Manziel was a costly mistake. Missing on any first-round draft pick sets an organization back, and missing on a first-round QB sets an organization back *years*. Don't take the ones with red flags.

[japes]

Originally Posted by Dad_Scaper

Yup. Drafting Johnny Manziel was a costly mistake. Missing on any first-round draft pick sets an organization back, and missing on a first-round QB sets an organization back *years*. Don't take the ones with red flags.

This year I wouldn't take any of them in the 1st round unless you can protect them and you have playmakers surrounding them...Sam Darnold gave you a glimpse of what he will look like if he has to look out for the rush...and that is what would happen in any of the top drafting teams right now...

[Dad_Scaper]

As a fan of a team picking in the middle of the first round, I look forward to several teams at the top showing poor judgment.

[Spidey'tilIDie]

@IAmBatman and @Tornado , I know Cleveland is bad, but that 0-16 Detroit team was epic-ly bad. I think the Browns have wrested the long term futility title away from you, but that Safety where Orlovsky ran out of the back of the endzone that ended up being the margin of victory, will forever live in my memory. That, plus the fact that Detroit went 0-16 with a viable Hall of Fame talent at a skill position, makes them the worst single season team of all time to me. Sorry fellas!

@Dad_Scaper , @japes , and @Yodaking As a fan who gets to watch Cleveland at least twice a year (they play my Stillers), I think the biggest mistake that current ownership has made is never once giving anyone a real window of opportunity to succeed. Let me expand. I am a former student at Texas A&M University. In 2002, the school decided to fire the winning-est coach in school history after his second non-winning season of his career (they went 6-6 both times, yes he never produced a losing season as head coach). Since then they have hired a bunch of numbnuts to coach (current coach excepted), but in each instance they gave each coach at least 4 seasons. Why? Because they felt it takes at least 4 years to see if someone is turning a program around, and I agree. The Browns, on the other hand, have done the following:
Chris Palmer (1999-2000)
Butch Davis (2001-2004; he actually made the playoffs)
Terry Robiskie (2004)
Romeo Crennel (2005-2008; 10-6 in year 3 bought him one extra year)
Eric Mangini (2009-2010)
Pat Shurmur (2011-12)
Rob Chudzinski (2013)
Mike Pettine (2014-15)
Hue Jackson (2016-?)

For all his failures, Hue Jackson is the third longest tenured coach in the franchises short history (yes, they have the same name, but the Cleveland Browns I grew up hating now reside in Baltimore). I applaud the fact that they hung with Hue for another year. I think he should get at least one more than that. You can turn over an entire roster in four years. If he doesn't win in year 5? Fine, fire him. But the only two coaches to have winning seasons in Cleveland only got 4 years each. That franchise needs to re-evaluate their hiring and firing philosophy.

[Spidey'tilIDie]

Oops! Double-posted.

[Yodaking]

I am fully aware of Cleveland's lack of stability in the area of coaching, and I too applaud them for finally not being quick to pull the trigger on Hue. Unfortunately his record over two seasons now has produced just 1 win. Hopefully that starts to turn around here at some point. In college, due to the 3-5 year window of it's players, you can indeed turn over the entire roster in the span of 4 years. College coaches should be given a chance to recruit the kinds of players they feel can excel in their system. Not every coach is looking for the same body types and skill sets for the same positions. While the NFL roster does not usually turn over as completely due to the much longer playing careers and contracts, you can still do a fairly big overhaul in 3-4 years between the draft and free agency. NFL coaching staffs should also get a chance to put together their own teams, however that doesn't always play out as GM's often can have more control over player acquisition. As Parcels once said, if you want me to cook then dinner I should get to pick some of the ingredients.

[japes]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

I am fully aware of Cleveland's lack of stability in the area of coaching, and I too applaud them for finally not being quick to pull the trigger on Hue. Unfortunately his record over two seasons now has produced just 1 win. Hopefully that starts to turn around here at some point. In college, due to the 3-5 year window of it's players, you can indeed turn over the entire roster in the span of 4 years. College coaches should be given a chance to recruit the kinds of players they feel can excel in their system. Not every coach is looking for the same body types and skill sets for the same positions. While the NFL roster does not usually turn over as completely due to the much longer playing careers and contracts, you can still do a fairly big overhaul in 3-4 years between the draft and free agency. NFL coaching staffs should also get a chance to put together their own teams, however that doesn't always play out as GM's often can have more control over player acquisition. As Parcels once said, if you want me to cook then dinner I should get to pick some of the ingredients.

The Jets attempted to turn over their roster this year...

Hue did try to get a QB but apparently that got sabotaged as well...can't blame him for trying. As far as keeping him another year...that may not be a decision they chose to make for the right reason...they didn't want to be paying 3 coaches next year...They've probably had more money tied up in coaches they've fired than players on the current roster.

[Spidey'tilIDie]

@Yodaking I figured you knew, just wanted to include you on the convo. The pros is only minorly different from College, the average NFL career is only 3.3 years. With guys like (well any decently successful QB) and really good WRs and Defensive players skewing that, a Coach/ GM should be able to turn over a roster in 4 years. The problem is that they don't just need to change the roster, they also need to teach the new guys their system, and have them get comfortable with it. I was not surprised to see that the only moderately successful Browns coaches were the ones who got more opportunities. I think Hue should be given until year 5 to be judged, if he isn't winning by Bye week in Year 5, let him go. 72 games should be enough to know if its working or not. But that's easy for me to say, Steelers have 3 head coaches in last nearly 50 years.
By the way, I love that quote from Parcells. I remember them playing that on Sportscenter when he retired.

[IAmBatman]

To me keeping a guy who only wins ONE game in two seasons is basically saying you don't believe coaching matters at all. I don't think the Browns have the least talented roster in the NFL by a significant margin. They might not even have the least talented roster in the NFL at all.