Yup. There was huge blowback. Reese and McAdoo are the fall guys, but latter on record that ownership was on board with the move.So one of the owners comes out and says that he was on board with Eli's benching, they then fire the coach who did it, and Eli is back under center? How can you run your organization based on fan reaction? Is this the University of Tennessee?
Everyone’s favorite Manning (Cooper) I think has a 14 year old son who is supposedly a big QB prospect.Are there any male grandchildren? No way Archie cares about Peyton or Eli anymore.
I think this is a poor move. The Browns have no internal consistency. They’ll have had 18(!) head coaches and GMs since coming back.Browns are firing Sashi Brown. So they are seemingly overhauling their personnel department again. The Moneyball approach was a disaster.
Scheffer also adds that Hue Jackson is staying(for now).
Well, the new guy is going to have a very good opportunity to make an impact so I'm fine with this move if you don't have faith in Brown's ability to draft. Browns currently have the following picks in the 2018 draft:I think this is a poor move. The Browns have no internal consistency. They’ll have had 18(!) head coaches and GMs since coming back.
Their roster wouldn’t have been able to take advantage of any of the QBs that they passed on over the last few years.
Wentz/Watson went to teams that had solid defenses and enough pieces on offense to ignite a quick turnaround. If either were on the Browns right now, I don’t think they’d have had anywhere near the success as they’ve had.
Possible. Browns with Jimmy at QB, Gordon/Coleman at WR, Njoku at TE would have been on the right track. And they would have been able to use their 2 top 10 picks on their defense or OL.Maybe Haslam was watching Garoppolo last weekend and decided Brown let him down by not acquiring him.
No way - those 2 top 10 picks would've been how they got JG in the first place!Possible. Browns with Jimmy at QB, Gordon/Coleman at WR, Njoku at TE would have been on the right track. And they would have been able to use their 2 top 10 picks on their defense or OL.
Even if they turn it around, it's only a matter of time before Haslam screws it up again.Well, the new guy is going to have a very good opportunity to make an impact so I'm fine with this move if you don't have faith in Brown's ability to draft. Browns currently have the following picks in the 2018 draft:
#1
#7 (from Houston)
#33
#40 (from Houston)
#62 (from Philly)
#65
#97
And that's before trading down, which would give them even more picks. If this crap franchise ever turns it around, it's going to start in this draft.
I certainly won’t argue with you there.Even if they turn it around, it's only a matter of time before Haslam screws it up again.
I mean, sure. Cleveland's coach is black and he has won a single game with the team, with 27 losses. Yet he kept his job. But the team was definitely looking for the most racist option.After a long and exhaustive search that of course involved minority candidates, I'm sure.
Ok, so is your point that the Browns are dysfunctional or the Browns are racist? Or is it the Rooney Rule that is racist? I'm trying to understand what your post meant.Just noting the ongoing farce that is the Rooney Rule. The real criticism of Cleveland here would be obvious, panicked haste in making a crucially important decision.
I mean, the Boston Celtics set out to hire their current coach and focused on him like a laser beam. The recruitment process took well over a month. In that span of time they did interview other people. They had a hypothesis that Stevens was the choice, they did their due diligence, they validated that hypothesis, and they indeed hired him. But there was nothing hasty about it.
Meanwhile, the Browns' move resembles more of a papering-over, "nothing to see here!" sign on the wall, symbolizing nothing so much as their dysfunction.
Or, this is all a massive overreaction and assumption with a somewhat illogical cross-sport, no-context comparison thrown in.Just noting the ongoing farce that is the Rooney Rule. The real criticism of Cleveland here would be obvious, panicked haste in making a crucially important decision.
I mean, the Boston Celtics set out to hire their current coach and focused on him like a laser beam. The recruitment process took well over a month. In that span of time they did interview other people. They had a hypothesis that Stevens was the choice, they did their due diligence, they validated that hypothesis, and they indeed hired him. But there was nothing hasty about it.
Meanwhile, the Browns' move resembles more of a papering-over, "nothing to see here!" sign on the wall, symbolizing nothing so much as their dysfunction.
I thought he meant the Rooney rule isn't followed very reliably and the league lets it slide.Ok, so is your point that the Browns are dysfunctional or the Browns are racist? Or is it the Rooney Rule that is racist? I'm trying to understand what your post meant.
And now you're saying the Browns are disfunctional and not run as well as the Celtics. Damn, that's a tremendous take. I'm sure you would have trouble bringing people together to agree with you about that.
I was going to honestly answer your question, but then you decided to be a dick for no reason, so why bother.Ok, so is your point that the Browns are dysfunctional or the Browns are racist? Or is it the Rooney Rule that is racist? I'm trying to understand what your post meant.
And now you're saying the Browns are disfunctional and not run as well as the Celtics. Damn, that's a tremendous take. I'm sure you would have trouble bringing people together to agree with you about that.
The process of a GM hunt is not that different between sports. I was picking a very familiar example of a situation where the team president had someone in mind from the beginning - so, like Cleveland here - but nevertheless did a thorough, proper job of considering alternatives and questioning their choices. In other words, if you're going to start with something other than a blank slate, there's a way to do it right, and Cleveland's haste makes it obvious that they didn't do it right.Or, this is all a massive overreaction and assumption with a somewhat illogical cross-sport, no-context comparison thrown in.
They probably had their eye on Dorsey for a while. Evaluations and process don't always come front-and-center. I'm sure they didn't just shrug their shoulders and go "welp, this guy's available, might as well hand the keys to him", but...it is the Browns, so who the hell knows.
Sure, I appreciate the talk.I was going to honestly answer your question, but then you decided to be a dick for no reason, so why bother.
Was going to say something similar. It also entirely overlooks quality (IE: drafting Kizer, Kessler, Manziel, etc.)I don't know enough about the actual talent on the Browns, but using a barometer like "multi-year NFL contributors" seems flawed. If there is shit for talent on the team, and they have no hopes of winning this year (or last year, or the year before, etc) then their draft picks are going to play. That doesn't mean they were good picks.
That's a blatant assumption, and one you don't exactly have any evidence behind. The timeline was quick, yeah...but there's absolutely nothing to substantiate your claim. We know nothing of the due process.The process of a GM hunt is not that different between sports. I was picking a very familiar example of a situation where the team president had someone in mind from the beginning - so, like Cleveland here - but nevertheless did a thorough, proper job of considering alternatives and questioning their choices. In other words, if you're going to start with something other than a blank slate, there's a way to do it right, and Cleveland's haste makes it obvious that they didn't do it right.
Exactly right. Rich Eisen broached this topic this morning on his radio show -- but handled it, as usual, with class and simply said that the presence of the Rooney Rule leaves some questions unanswered about how Cleveland approached it.That's a blatant assumption, and one you don't exactly have any evidence behind. The timeline was quick, yeah...but there's absolutely nothing to substantiate your claim. We know nothing of the due process.
Well wouldja look at that... maybe they were hasty. Quelle surprise.He didn't, however, jump on the Hot Take Express and said they went about it the way they did because of incompetence or bigotry. And that's the difference between how Eisen approached it and what spurred this discussion here
Of course, a lot of the reason the Browns’ picks are playing is that their roster is terrible, so anyone wearing the correct uniform gets a spot on the team. Obviously a QB is key to any team’s success, and they lack one, but going 1-31 or 2-30 doesn’t scream “absurd success” in the last two drafts. Take a look at Kizer, for example. Is he a “successful” draft pick?Eric Galko with a different opinion on Sashi Brown’s drafting:
“Here's Sashi Brown's last two NFL Drafts. Our of his 24 picks, 20 might be multi-year NFL contributors. That's an ABSURD success rate.
Plus, they have 2018 Draft 1st and two 2nds coming.
If not for ownership, this would be the most coveted GM job in recent memory. #Browns”
In fairness, your initial post made more sense if one reads the “imaginary interlocutor” part which you left out.Well wouldja look at that... maybe they were hasty. Quelle surprise.
Yeah, except it was for the reasoning I pointed out (they had done their homework on a guy they liked,) not yours (racism, or something.)Well wouldja look at that... maybe they were hasty. Quelle surprise.
Panthers announced they've hired outside counsel (quinnemanuel.com) to investigate workplace misconduct allegations against owner Jerry Richardson. @JimTrotter_NFL had it 1st.
Not that it’s likely to happen, but if there was any situation that would serve to rehab Goodell’s image, throwing an prominent owner out of the league for being a creep would be it.Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy:
CHOOO CHOOOOOO
Seems about right for a NFL investigation.Isn't having the minority owner overseeing the investigation of the majority owner a conflict of interest?