"What's important to us is getting this team to sustainable long-term success. If we were just concerned about winning now, I think this team could vie for the playoffs next year. But that might not be what's best long term."
Translation:

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup
by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:58 pm

by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:07 pm

by Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:11 pm

by andrew6586 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:12 pm
by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:24 pm
by motherscratcher » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:24 pm
Hikohadon wrote:To paraphrase:
"What's important to us is getting this team to sustainable long-term success. If we were just concerned about winning now, I think this team could vie for the playoffs next year. But that might not be what's best long term."
Translation:
by motherscratcher » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:27 pm
Hikohadon wrote:Sounded like they'll hire the Coach first, and the amount of power they give him will be dependent on who he is. Basically, pray they don't get a coach that sucks with personnel (cough cough McDaniels).
by Govbarney » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:27 pm
by motherscratcher » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:29 pm
by mattvan1 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:35 pm
Hikohadon wrote:To paraphrase:
"What's important to us is getting this team to sustainable long-term success. If we were just concerned about winning now, I think this team could vie for the playoffs next year. But that might not be what's best long term."
Translation:
by Govbarney » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:36 pm
motherscratcher wrote:What, exactly, has been half assed about the last couple rebuilds?
Mangini nuked it. Holmes renuked it.
I'm fuckin' done with nukings.
by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:37 pm
fuck it , a good old fashion Nuking is better then pussy-footing around a half-ass rebuild, which is all the Browns have been doing since '99.
by Larvell Blanks » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:42 pm
motherscratcher wrote:Hikohadon wrote:Sounded like they'll hire the Coach first, and the amount of power they give him will be dependent on who he is. Basically, pray they don't get a coach that sucks with personnel (cough cough McDaniels).
I have a feeling (based on absolutely nothing) that it will be Gruden.
So...yeah...
SSS will be over the moon, I guess.*
*If I'm right, which I'm not often.

by pup » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:45 pm
by pod2dawg » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:46 pm
by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:00 pm
pup wrote:Must have watched a different presser than you guys.
Loved every word of it. Biggest difference between these two and the past is quite simple. They have made the level of decisions that are required to be made previously. They have hired succesful people in the past and plan to again.
About McDaniels...what I heard was if they hire a HC they believe is a strong player personnel guy, they will look for a GM to augment those skill sets. If the HC does not show a strength for player personnel, they will look for a stronger GM. What is wrong with that? Sounds like the perfect plan to me.
Coach will not automatically have player personnel decisions, but will have control over the 53 and the 46 that dress. Again, correct, IMO.
Said there is a lot to build on. The question that leads to the "blow up" concern was "Can this team be in the playoffs next year?". Banner said if they wanted to build a team that could 100% make the playoffs next year and the future be damned he would be disappointed if they could not. But that is not what they will do. They will build on what they have and the result will be a better, more sustainable football organization.
by googleeph2 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:12 pm
Hikohadon wrote:Heard it before.
I'll give them proper accolades when/if it happens.
Until then, they're just another brick in the wall.
by Madre Hill, Superstar » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:25 pm

by YahooFanChicago » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:05 pm
Hikohadon wrote:To paraphrase:
"What's important to us is getting this team to sustainable long-term success. If we were just concerned about winning now, I think this team could vie for the playoffs next year. But that might not be what's best long term."
Translation:
by bookelly » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:16 pm

by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:17 pm
YahooFanChicago wrote:...or, don't hold me accountable for the next year or two since we don't have the right pieces...
I already hate that guy and his fucking pinchy face.
by swerb » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:40 pm
by motherscratcher » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:25 pm
by Triple-S » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:29 pm
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:45 pm
swerb wrote:I think the only difference between what the new guys said today and what the old guys were saying is that the new group is smart enough and unbiased enough to know that we have a MFP (Major Fucking Problem) at the most important position on the field: quarterback.
by mattvan1 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:46 pm
motherscratcher wrote:Agree Swerb.
There is a Mangini/Kokinis joke in there somewhere, though, but I'll be damned if I can do it justice.
by Hikohadon » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:48 pm
Triple-S wrote:I don't put the sins of the RG3 trade on Heckert.
I place them on a bullshit fake bidding war the Rams pulled, thus fucking us over regardless.
Honestly, that did hurt though. I mean, the skins have a good head coach with a possibly promising good OC, a decent ground game, and a franchise QB. And are in the playoffs.
The browns got stuck with Pat fucking Shurmer and an offense so fucking old it looks like it should have been written in hieroglyphs.
You can't continue to jam a round peg in a square stupid ass hole, which is exactly what they did tried to do with Weeds and the bullshit west coast offense. Trust me, that more than anything in the world cost us games. Fucking Peyton Manning would look like absolute dogshit if handcuffed to this piece of shit offense.
Now honestly? I don't care where they go with the position now. I don't care what happens with Brandon Weeden, whether they stick with him or not. If Saban/Gruden/Cowher/McDaniels/Arians/Kelly decide they don't want him and want to bring in their own guy? Then whatever. Just make it work, and win us some ballgames.
That needs to be goal number 1. Put a winner on the field, no more rebuilding, no more 5 year plans, no more "battling". A winner. A playoff team. NO EXCUSES. You have some talent on this roster, spend money, get the right people involved and do whatever it takes.
by jerryroche » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:58 pm
Hikohadon wrote:The ship has sailed and those who are to blame/not to blame are gone.
by Triple-S » Mon Dec 31, 2012 7:06 pm
Hikohadon wrote:This probably has merit, but, really, at this point, it's meaningless.
Holmgren is gone. Heckert is gone. Shurmur is gone. RG3 is in Washington.
The ship has sailed and those who are to blame/not to blame are gone.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

by OldDawg » Mon Dec 31, 2012 8:29 pm

by leadpipe » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:40 pm
swerb wrote:I think the only difference between what the new guys said today and what the old guys were saying is that the new group is smart enough and unbiased enough to know that we have a MFP (Major Fucking Problem) at the most important position on the field: quarterback.
Heckert's comments this morning were hysterical: "Only difference between Indy and us is they won the close games." No, they won 11 cause they have Andrew Luck. We won five because we have Brandolt McWeeden (credit to Peeker on Twitter for the moniker).
I think what they were saying without saying it today is that they will not be afraid to be aggressive once again at the QB position, even if it means using yet another high pick on one. Which would make it tougher theoretically to get over the hump and to get to 9-11 wins, but would also be in the better long term interest of the organization.
Ya gotta be well coached and ya gotta have a good QB. I think these guys know this, know we currently have neither, and what they said isn't too far off what I would have said if it was me up there taking over as CEO.
They're correctly prioritizing the coach over the GM. Gotta have the right coach. Find that dude ... and then figure what GM works best with him. Team has always done it backwards. Good coaches and quarterbacks make the Scott Piolis and the Jordy Nelsons of the world look like stars. Pioli was Mike Lombardi in KC. Jordy Nelson would be Darren Chiavirini on this Browns team.
I do like the fact thet appear to be retaining much of the player personnel staff that was assembeled by Heckert, who do 99% of the work and recs that lead to draft picks and FA signings. And they also have correctly punished Heckert with his job for so badly screwing up the RG3/Weeden DISASTER.
So far so good to me.
by Hikohadon » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:01 pm
jerryroche wrote:Hikohadon wrote:The ship has sailed and those who are to blame/not to blame are gone.
Clean slate. So why all the pessimism? Seems like people are visiting the sins of the past upon the new regime without waiting to see what develops. We've not had a complete housecleaning of this order since 1999, so there really is no precedent. All the team's recent history is, once and for all, deemed immaterial. Could be good, could be bad—but we don't really know, do we?
I, for one, am looking forward to seeing how it all plays out. Hell, this off-season could be more entertaining than any of the past 14 regular seasons.
by Hikohadon » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:07 pm
leadpipe wrote:I think the presser today differed in some previous ones in the following ways;
1. As Swerb alludes to about the coach/GM deal. This is the first time in quite awhile the coach/GM combo does not involve a patsy on one side or the other. Mentioned this several times, but a GM who is afraid of the coach, or a coach who is afraid of the GM is bad business in the NFL. You have no checks and balances. These guys understand this. You want them to work together, but not be afraid to MF each other behind closed doors. It's how good shit gets done.
by Triple-S » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:30 pm
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

by jerryroche » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:41 pm
Triple-S wrote:About the only way you're going to lure elite candidate to this trainwreck of a team is giving them a lot of say within the organization.
by Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:44 pm
by leadpipe » Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:07 pm
Hikohadon wrote:leadpipe wrote:I think the presser today differed in some previous ones in the following ways;
1. As Swerb alludes to about the coach/GM deal. This is the first time in quite awhile the coach/GM combo does not involve a patsy on one side or the other. Mentioned this several times, but a GM who is afraid of the coach, or a coach who is afraid of the GM is bad business in the NFL. You have no checks and balances. These guys understand this. You want them to work together, but not be afraid to MF each other behind closed doors. It's how good shit gets done.
That's not what I took away at all. When it seems they are willing to give a coach a ton of power to entice him to come here, that would by definition make the GM that coach's bitch.
If Nick Saban comes here then Nick Saban has no checks and balances. Nick Saban will do what Nick Saban wants to do.
Again, I've heard nothing yet that convinces me that this regime will be any different than some of the past. Nothing new at all, except maybe the fact that Haslam is way more invested than Lerner. Maybe that will be enough. But if he's handing the keys over to a President to run things (this time Banner instead of Holmgren), not sure how that's different either.
by jerryroche » Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:12 pm
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Feh
Roster control = lipstick on a pig in Cleveland
Better to buy out O'Brien than to succumb to Saban
by Hikohadon » Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:31 pm
leadpipe wrote:Hikohadon wrote:leadpipe wrote:I think the presser today differed in some previous ones in the following ways;
1. As Swerb alludes to about the coach/GM deal. This is the first time in quite awhile the coach/GM combo does not involve a patsy on one side or the other. Mentioned this several times, but a GM who is afraid of the coach, or a coach who is afraid of the GM is bad business in the NFL. You have no checks and balances. These guys understand this. You want them to work together, but not be afraid to MF each other behind closed doors. It's how good shit gets done.
That's not what I took away at all. When it seems they are willing to give a coach a ton of power to entice him to come here, that would by definition make the GM that coach's bitch.
If Nick Saban comes here then Nick Saban has no checks and balances. Nick Saban will do what Nick Saban wants to do.
Again, I've heard nothing yet that convinces me that this regime will be any different than some of the past. Nothing new at all, except maybe the fact that Haslam is way more invested than Lerner. Maybe that will be enough. But if he's handing the keys over to a President to run things (this time Banner instead of Holmgren), not sure how that's different either.
C'mon Hiko, if he didn't hand the keys over you'd be yelling Jerry Jones.
HUGE difference between throwing the keys to someone you barely know and running to the Hamptons, and handing them over to someone you've dealt with in the past, and overseeing things as a whole.
And if they hire a coach and give him total control that's a big problem. Don't see that happening, but again, that'll all play out.
You're sick of the bullshit, I get it. But Christ on a pony, Randy Lerner was about as poor an owner as there was in sports. No interest, no knowledge...got his status on the shoulders of Dad....I mean Christ, whether Haslam works out or he doesn't, on the ownership issue alone there will be improvement.
by mattvan1 » Tue Jan 01, 2013 5:50 pm
Triple-S wrote:About the only way you're going to lure elite candidate to this trainwreck of a team is giving them a lot of say within the organization.
I hate Merrill Hoge and find him a tool, but he made a good point last night, this is not an attractive job. You're going to have to try to dress this up as much as possible as being something more than absolute dumpster fire.
by Hikohadon » Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:48 pm
mattvan1 wrote:Triple-S wrote:About the only way you're going to lure elite candidate to this trainwreck of a team is giving them a lot of say within the organization.
I hate Merrill Hoge and find him a tool, but he made a good point last night, this is not an attractive job. You're going to have to try to dress this up as much as possible as being something more than absolute dumpster fire.
Hoge had waaaay to many concussions back in the day. He's just playing the role his producers tell him to play - the doosh.
Anyway, why is this not an attractive job? As cynical as I am, I actually think HC Cleveland Browns is one of The best openings. The "no QB" is an obvious detrement, but exactly how is the Browns' job worse than Buffalo or KC or 'Zona. Do you want to go to Philly and follow Andy Reid and sort out the Vick/Foles mess? I can see San Diego and maybe the Bears as better spots, but only maybe due to the QBs, although both are talented both are rather diva-ish.
by swerb » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:06 pm
by justmebd » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:09 pm
by gameface » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:10 pm
Hikohadon wrote:
When it seems they are willing to give a coach a ton of power to entice him to come here, that would by definition make the GM that coach's bitch.
by e0y2e3 » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:18 pm

by gameface » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:58 pm
by Triple-S » Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:19 pm
gameface wrote:Ha ha. John Lennon and Miami Dolphin beat reporter as enemies of the state.
Slight case of paranoia.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

by mattvan1 » Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:06 pm
pod2dawg wrote:.......Doug Marrone?
by Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:41 am

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], leadpipe and 3 guests
