Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
See....you can't have that and expect to build an identity, or even skeleten of an identity when you clean house like that willy nilly. Hit the reset button too many times and you take it all the way back to expansion level. Sure, there's some holdover talent in Cleveland, but the owner has already tried to defend his franchise as not dysfunctional. What other franchise owners have to go out to the press and basically say "we're not clowns!". Haslem already alluded to the fact coaches and players don't view Cleveland as an attractive spot to land. There's been too much damage done over a short time to say the damage is a mere flesh wound.
This argument of "we suck less than you" is pretty silly. You win the boobie prize!.... Happy?
He is talking in terms of the actual talent on the team. I dont care how good your owner and coaches are, if you have no talent you can't win. And this team definitely has more talent than the Raiders did, and do.
The last part is especially true. No doubt there's more core talent on the Browns than the Raiders. I am not attempting to compare them on that level. But what's really important is organizational stablity. In that regard, I consider the Raiders in better shape going forward than the Browns. And I would not trade your 6 probowlers for your dysnfunctionality at the top of your organization. Talent without leadership goes nowhere.
king clearly needs to come here and be educated:
Well, some of our leadership just improved with addition by subtraction.
wasn't my point, my point was the narrative you drew between the two organizations is wrong.
It's hard to fault Jimmy for not doing this when the Chud decision was made IMO. Piecing together things we've heard/seen, it's Banner and Lombardi saying again we're gonna go out and strike gold...instead they kept striking out, like the year before, and turning more people off in the process. Regardless of who ultimately put the hammer down on Chud, it's a blessing it happened because Banner and Lombardi needed to go. It didn't go down conventionally, but as many keep saying we're better today than we were on Monday...and it's a helluva lot better than having to do this after the draft or during/after next season. I wouldn't necessarily be saying that if somebody other than Farmer was taking the reigns from a personnel standpoint.
no my point is valid. you are in year one of a five year plan. if you can't see that, you are in denial.MAC_32 said:
B-Deep said:
Did you read the single paragraph of the article that was devoted to Schiano? If so, I'll just say I don't agree with your assessment of it. If not, I'll put it here:
Commonly held view?B-Deep said:
ok
yes
it sounds like banner was a tool, i don't dispute that. But i'd have a hard time sitting through a schiano interview and pretending i wanted to restart my franchise with him. Did you see tampa this season? Good lord talk about a recipe for disaster. What if it was schiano sitting there right now instead of Pettine? dear me
who was on the raiders three years ago and is still on the team? Who was a part of the long term plan? What was your cap and draft pick situation like?Now answer those same questions with the browns now.
yep
I hear you, but schiano was among the biggest cluster####s of a coach i can recall in recent years. No matter what Bellicheck said I am not sure he deserved a fair hearing given what transpired in Tampa.
Um, we fired Mike Lombardi and Joe Banner.
Pump the breaks in saying Ray Farmer is better than Mike Lombardi?
Time will tell what Farmer is, IMO. Could be better, worse or the same, we'll see.
he's not any more on the hot seat than he was prior to these moves. he was Jimmy's hire.
