So what about the 2018 NFL Draft Quarterback Class?

Once again the Browns season is over after Game 8, and us fans look ahead to the NFL draft as the next opportunity for something positive to happen to our pathetic team. 

For some time, I believe that the Browns have looked ahead to the 2018 draft as a likely place to draft a first round quarterback. They didn't buy into Carson Wentz or Mitchell Trubisky as true Franchise Quarterbacks (whatever that means), but the 2018 class has been viewed differently. At the end of 2016, Sam Darnold and Josh Rosen, Lamar Jackson and Mason Rudolph in particular looked like brilliant prospects.  Sportswriters were saying this was going to be the best draft since the famous 1983 quarterback class with John Elway, Dan Marino and Jim Kelly.     

However--as the 2017 season has unfolded, some of the luster has come off as the top quarterbacks have been very good, but not as brilliant as expected.  All of them have turned in a few bad games, and some of their flaws have been exposed. 

Analytics shows that, over time, quarterbacks in the first round are usually (not always, but usually) overvalued.  Teams have done better by taking flyers on guys like Derek Carr, Jimmy Garoppolo, Russell Wilson and Dak Prescott in later rounds, because if you blow it, it's not as painful as blowing a first round pick.

But I suspect that 2018 was perceived to be an exception to the rule, as scouts reportedly were drooling over not just one, but maybe as many as five guys that are regarded as exceptional.   I still think that there are going to be several quarterbacks taken in the first round. Here are my current favorites, but without a great deal of conviction.  Things will change as the season plays out and after the Combines.  

1. Mason Rudolph, Oklahoma State.  If Rudolph had come out in 2017, I thought he might have been just as good as Mitchell Trubisky, but bigger, stronger (and a little slower).  But he stayed in school, has four legit years of college preparation.  HE is close to NFL ready, unlike Manziel or Kiser with only two years of preparation.   I've seen him make some questionable throws this year for whatever reason, whereas last year he threw very few picks.  

Mason Rudolph is big, strong, smart and has four years of major college ball to prepare for the NFL.  Despite playing for Brandon Weeden University, I believe he may be the first overall pick. 

2. Sam Darnold, USC.  Sam was sensational last year, has size and tons of arm.  However, he hasn't really gotten better as a sophomore, and the scouts are complaining that his release is a little slower than they like to see.   Do you want to take a chance on a kid with only two years of college preparation?  I hope he stays in school, but in my eyes he has more raw talent than Mitchell Trubisky from 2017.  Emphasis on "raw."

Nobody throws the football like Sam Darnold.  However, if he enters the draft this year, he will skip two years of valuable training at USC.  The Browns front office seems to believe that makes no difference, as they drafted both Johnny Manziel and DeShone Kizer after their sophomore year.  

3. Josh Rosen, UCLA.  Rosen along with Darnold has a great arm, and he might be the number one overall pick.  Like Darnold, he has not had the team success that his fans would have liked to see.  He will have had three years of prepping at UCLA versus only two for Darnold at USC.  

Josh Rosen has amazing athletic gifts, but has also had some so-so outings this year, and his team is not in contention for a National Championship. Plus he has a knack for generating controversy in the press.  But I think he will still be drafted very early.  

4. Lamar Jackson.  Jackson is a brilliant runner and has all the tools, but people are worried about his accuracy.  My take is that in his offense he is the number one threat on the ground and in the air, so the defense targets him and he is almost always throwing on the run, partly because he has to because he has no pass protection. Like any quarterback, he's not as accurate while running at full speed. If he had a better O-Line, he would be much more accurate.  I have a first round grade on Mr. Jackson hands down, but may not Top 10.   

Lamar Jackson is a premier talent on an otherwise weak team.  I think he should be forgiven for throwing on the run and losing accuracy, because he has no choice.  

5. Josh Allen, Wyoming. Allen has some support from the scouts based on his throwing ability, size and ability, but he doesn't have superior numbers and has thrown more than his share of INTs.  

​6. Ryan Finley, N.C. State.  Like Mitchell Trubisky last year, he is flying under the radar so far, but some of the sportswriters say he has comparable talent to go with it.  If he does well at the combine he could move up the draft board. Why not?  

7. Baker Mayfield, Oklahoma.  Baker has a lot of the brilliant on-field traits of Johnny Manziel, but at the end of the day his arm is probably not as good, and he is smaller than desired.  He can make it in the NFL, but he is not a sure thing.   

8. Luke Falk, Washington State.   Falk also has gaudy stats but gets some negative attention for throwing five picks at Cal.  They also knock him for lack of arm strength.  That doesn't sound like a first round pick, but he has his supporters as a first round guy.  

Where Moneyball Goes Wrong for the Cleveland Browns

Weakening the team on purpose makes sense to some degree, but the joke has worn thin on Mr. Haslam, not to mention the fan base.  Is it worth destroying the franchise for draft picks? 

Have the Cleveland Browns forgotten that the objective of football is to win?  They act as though the object of football is getting draft choices rather than winning games.

I'm all about moneyball and trying to build a team by outsmarting the system.  Hence I've been a fan of Sashi Brown and John DePodesta as they have been accumulating draft picks. However, I think they have gone too far, to the point where they are deliberately playing at a miserably low level in order to wind up with the number one overall pick in the draft again.  

I think that indeed you can hire Harvard graduates to trade draft picks, and they can be traded with the same skill that they use to trade stocks, bonds and currencies. Brown and Podesta correctly realized that they can not compete for players on a level playing field with Dallas and New England. Players will sign with those teams even if Cleveland offers literally twice as much money. Management has determined that by tanking the team for about three years and accumulating as much draft capital and salary cap room as possible, in year four and five they will create the highest payroll in the NFL with the most first round draft picks in the NFL, and that team should win.  That's the plan. 

Hence, in 2016 the Browns cut  players like Paul Kruger, Karlos Dansby, Donte Whitner and Craig Robertson that do not have a three or four year horizon with the team.  They also cut Taylor Gabriel out of sheer stupidity, but that's not part of the plan. They would up with the lowest active payroll in the NFL, while paying a huge amount of "dead money" to players no longer with the team.    They didn't try that hard to sign players like Mitchell Schwartz, Travis Benjamin.  Then the trend continued in 2017 as the Browns cut Joe Haden, Josh McCown, Gary Barnidge, John Greco, Stephen Paea, Desmond Bryant, Tramon Williams and Jordan Poyer. The analytics says that it's better to lose games and get better draft picks than to win with short term players.  Draft position is very important, because analytics say players drafted in the first position are worth more than three times the players drafted from the fifteenth overall position.  This of course assumes that your team is reasonably astute at judging talent, which of course is not the case for the Browns. 

Where we've gone off the rails, however, is in not trying to have  a team that can win, and in fact sabotaging the team by leaving holes.  For example, the Browns saved $4 million by cutting Joe Haden (they are paying him $7 million in guaranteed money as opposed to $11 M in total composition).  Maybe you can get another cornerback that plays even better for $4 million (I doubt it), but we didn't even replace Joe.  We just cut him. 

I don't think a football team can turn their instinct to win on and off so easily.  At some point the team is supposed to rally and try to win games, but now the precedent has been set to hope for losses to get good draft position.  I don't think that the human element can break the losing habit so easily.  

If the GM thinks that it makes sense to cut an overpaid veteran, how about proving it by signing a better player for less money.  Is there a four million dollar guy who actually plays better than Joe Haden?  And is he willing to sign with the Browns?  This is where we go too far, by deliberately weakening the team by cutting a veteran and doing nothing to replace him.  

Analytics should be able to observe that it is very hard to get players from the outside to come to Cleveland.  For example, the Browns had to grossly overpay Jamie Collins, Kevin Zeitler and Kenny Britt to choose Cleveland.  In fact, we had to make Zeitler the highest paid guard in the NFL to come to Cleveland, even though he has never been to a Pro Bowl.   Therefore it makes sense to pay extra to keep more players who are already here like Schwartz, Travis Benjamin, Buster Skrine, etc. 

For example, it is fine to recognize that Terrelle Pryor would have been overpaid at $8 M per year, but did we actually get a better player by investing $17 M guaranteed for Kenny Britt?  We sent Mitchell Schwartz packing rather than offering 6 million, and replaced him with a guard in Kevin Zeitler who we had to make the highest paid guard in the NFL in order to get him to come here.  Is that Moneyball?  

What Free Agent is ever going to come to Cleveland now, if he isn't sure that the Browns are serious about winning?   What Coach will coach here?  These are serious, serious problems that the Browns have gotten into themselves by failing to properly account for the fallout from their drastic overall. The Browns are buying themselves a huge disadvantage compared to other teams the opposite of what Moneyball is supposed to do.

The front office needs to be able to look the Coaches and players in the eye and tell them that the team is going to make a bona fide attempt to win games.  It's okay to stockpile draft picks, not okay to deliberately weaken the team to get better draft position

Top 10 Reasons the Cleveland Browns Are Not Moving to London

The 1945 Cleveland Rams were World Champions, then moved to Los Angeles.  The Browns replaced the Rams in Cleveland. 

The 1995 Browns had a staunchly loyal fan base...and moved to Baltimore because they got a better deal there.  

Cleveland is no stranger to having franchises stolen by greedy ownership.  The NFL has moved franchises on two separate occasions.  The 1945 Cleveland Rams won the World Championship, and then moved to Los Angeles, thus providing an opportunity for the upstart Cleveland Browns to become the flagship of a new league, the All American Conference.

The Browns have been strongly supported by a ravenous group of Dawgs over the years, but they moved away in 1995 because Art Modell got a better deal from the City of Baltimore.  They were replaced in 1999 by the new Cleveland Browns.  I thought it was a great deal.  We got rid of Art Modell, and we only had to pay $400 Million dollars for a new stadium.  But truth to tell I miss the old stadium.   

The Browns are playing in London, England this week.  The League and the team want to pretend that it is a kind of special bowl game for us.  But make no mistake about it, what's going on here is that the NFL is preparing a London-based NFL fan base, with the intention of allowing one or more NFL teams to move to London in the next few years.  Could it be the Cleveland Browns?  Here are 10 reasons why they might not move, ranging from the most idiotic to the most realistic. 

10.  The team has an unbreakable lease!  I don't know how many times I've heard that, but I've never heard that from any attorney.  Just what is an unbreakable lease?  Ownership has access to some of the best legal minds in the country. They have to, as it was very difficult to keep Mr. Haslam out of jail over the Pilot Oil rebate scandal. Surely, the same clever lawyers will find some way to prove the City is in Breach of Contract and defend themselves from a countersuit by the City.  Put it this way, some of my very close friends are sports nuts, and attorneys, and they all say that the team would owe some money to the City, but bottom line, the team can be moved. 

9.  The NFL are done with moving franchises, and will oppose future franchise moves. Moving franchises is good for business because it allows teams to threaten to move unless they get sweetheart deals from their current host cities.  The NFL loves it when franchises move, and love it even more when they can extort money.  So heck no, they are not done. 

8.  The NFL would never permit the Browns to move.  What nonsense.  Because of the Pilot Oil diesel rebate scandal, Jimmy Haslam is radioactive.  The NFL would gladly get rid of Haslam in favor of even richer owners in London.  Jolly right. 

7.  The Browns are too strong of a franchise to move.  Really?  Forbes Magazine ranks the Browns as the 29th best franchise out of 32 (  Forbes on Cleveland Browns ).  .  Based on their dismal, awful terrible performance in 2017, the value of the franchise is decreasing significantly.  

6.  Mr. Haslam is so wealthy, that increasing the value of the Browns by a billion dollars would not tempt him. Hahahahaha!  I can't even respond to that.  

5. Mr. Haslam would be banned from the State of Ohio if he were to move the Browns. So what?  He is not a local owner.  He lives in Tennessee.  When he bought the Browns he promised to move to Cleveland to be a full-time owner.  Somehow, he forgot that promise and continues to live in Tennessee.  Quite a guy.  

4.  Los Angeles may be a disaster. Los Angeles went from zero teams to two, but on the other hand, they have never been strong supporters of the NFL.  The city failed to support the Chargers in the AFL, and also previously chased the Rams out of town to St. Louis, and the Raiders went back to Oakland after a gig in Los Angels.  Will the city ever embrace either the Rams or the Chargers?  Currently they struggle to get 25,000 fans to show up.  If the hostile reception continues after getting a new stadium in 2020, there may need to be a drastic solution.  In that case, I could see one of those teams moving.  

3.  Other teams have more to gain.  The Cincinnati Bengals, Detroit Lions and Buffalo Bills seem to be in worse long-term shape than the Browns, locked into smaller markets. There are other small market teams that are comparable, such as Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Tennesee and New Orleans. For a long time Jacksonville was considered the odds-on favorite to move, but recently they have become more stable under owner Shahid Khan.  Oakland wants to move, but they have Las Vegas on the radar.  

2. The Browns would probably have to be sold in order to move, and Mr. Haslam doesn't want to sell.   Because he's considered a pariah by the other NFL owners, they would probably try to force him to sell to new ownership in order to approve a move.  That's one good thing about the Pilot Oil scandal--it limits the power of Mr. Haslam to get his way.  

1. Ohio's Congressional Representatives would fight the NFL bitterly and try to take away the Antitrust exemption.  Losing their monopoly power is one thing that the NFL fears. It's worth billions of dollars to legally prevent anyone from competing against them.  Ohio would react angrily to being ripped off yet again by the NFL,  and it's politicians would fight hard and fight dirty. Would they have the same clout as in 1995?  It's hard to say, given the terrible product that now exists.  If they ever try to move the Browns again, Browns fans will go nuclear.  We will be lobbying politicians nationwide to remove the antitrust exemption--i.e., legalized extortion--and we will organizing boycotts against NFL advertisers.  Our rank and file will get the trucking companies to boycott Pilot Flying J, and support their competitors.  Hit them hard where it hurts--right in the pocketbook.

NFL, You Had Best Not Mess with the Dawg Pound!

  

What Are The Browns Doing at Quarterback?

Who's at the top of the Depth Chart for the Cleveland Browns?  Since training camp it has been Cody Kessler, then Brock Osweiler, followed by DeShone Kizer.  Then Coach Jackson pulled the plug on Kizer, replacing him with Kevin Hogan.  Hogan earned the staring position, at least for a game, but the results were so bad that he went back to Kizer.   Kizer again struggled, and was replaced this time with Cody Kessler.  But now Kessler is back holding a clipboard, and Kizer is again firmly entrenched as the starter....at least for one half.  

That's seven quarterback changes.  Eight if you want to count RG3 being cut in the pre-season, along with backup Josh McCown.

This is nuts.  Putting a kid quarterback in too early (remember, he skipped his junior year at Notre Dame to play for the Browns) is a classic prescription for disaster.  Rule Number One is to not pull the starter when things go bad, in order to let the team know that the Coach has faith in them in tough times.  Is Hue really that clueless?

The Browns plan is to concentrate on the draft.  They have gotten rid of veterans in order to lose a few extra games and obtain better draft position.  I could imagine that Sashi Brown would be eager to start a rookie at quarterback in order to establish his draft priorities in 2018.  He wouldn't mind losing about 14 games and winding up in the top 5 again for the draft.   So, my question is, did Sashi order Hue to start Kizer?  

There is no evidence that the GM is meddling on that level, but otherwise I can't explain why it ever made sense to start a "project" quarterback in Game 1.   Kizer had good, not great seasons at Notre Dame, but left school two years early.  A normal progression would have him start to assert himself in 2020, not 2017.  Kizer did not have a good combine (raw talent, with an emphasis on raw).  He did not have a good preseason, either putting up a very low completion percentage.

You get the idea that would rather have someone else as the starter, but he keeps on coming back to Kizer as the starter even though it's clear that it's not working.  Is someone forcing him to do that?  It's madness.  Is it simply that we have decide to tank the season--again, and are hoping to lose more than the rest of the NFL?  

Otherwise, its bafflling that Hue would stake his reputation on a kid being ready three years earlier than normal. If he really thought that Kizer was the best choice to win to start the season, it's completely crazy.  Clearly, if his reputation is on the line, and I believe it is, he has whiffed badly.  

  

Pro Football Focus Backtracking...Joe Haden Not so Bad After All?

Two weeks ago I bashed Pro Football Focus, which is a great website for Pro Football Fanatics (I subscribe to it, by the way) because they were bashing Joe Haden, which I thought was ridculous.  Two weeks ago, Joe was rated as the number 72 cornerback in the NFL, which means he was a mid-level number 3 cb; i.e., good enough to be a backup but not good enough to start in the NFL  I had pointed out in my blog that this made no sense, based on the fact that no one was making any catches against him.  

For example, yesterday he held A. J. Green, who you will have to admit is a productive NFL receiver, to 41 yards on 3 catches out of six attempts. Joe also had an interception.  Of course Joe wasn't on Green all the time, but the point is that no wide receiver is catching the ball against the Steelers this year, so if he is really a F level player, why can't NFL offenses exploit him?  The Steelers are only giving up 147 yards per game through the air, and Joe is involved in 98% of the defensive snaps.  No one has caught very many balls off him the whole season.  61 receiving yards is the season single-game high for an opposing wide receiver versus the Steelers.  It's obvious that the Steelers secondary is doing a great job.  Last year they were atrocious. 

So today,  PFF no longer ranks Joe as an F.  He is now the 36th best corner in the NFL.  Apparently he improved really, really fast?  

     No, the problem is that the guys who work for Pro Football Focus probably don't watch the Browns' games, and truth to tell I don't blame them.  But because they ignore Cleveland, they didn't realize that Joe had two successful surgeries to repair torn groin muscles,  and he is way better now than he was last year.  I don't know that he's an All-Pro again, but he's pretty good.  Good luck to you Joe, you were a great Brown.  

To Tank or Not to Tank?

   Based on what we see on the field, the Cleveland Browns Front Office isn't even trying to win.   They have deliberately tanked the team, deliberately made it worse in order to maximize their draft position unloaded veterans who could contribute in the short run but maybe not in the long haul.  n for 2018.  In 2018, they probably have their eye on a quarterback that they believe is so special that it is worth losing games in order to get, unless something miraculous happens between now and the draft, which I doubt. 

     The temptation to tank for draft picks is not a new idea.  I remember in 1968 the Philadelphia Eagles fans were winless with two weeks left in the season.  That was the year they famously booed Santa Claus.   But the fans were excited because they were going to be able to draft O. J. Simpson, the superstar halfback of the University of Southern California.   You young 'uns might not believe it, but O. J. was a football star before he became a reality TV phenomenon.

    So most of the fans wanted the Eagles to contrive to lose their last two games.  The Eagles players, however, were not interested in losing and Eagles somehow managed to win their last two games in a row to finish 2-12, just ahead of the Buffalo Bills who went 1-12-1 and landed the coveted prospect.  So the Bills got O. J. and the Eagles wound up with a fellow named Leroy Keyes a running back who didn't fare well in the Pros.  

     But even as kid, I respected the Eagles for fighting to the end and trying their hardest to win.  But by now, the Cleveland Browns have apparently figured out that it is better to lose games to get good draft position for a few years, with the idea that they will start trying to win in 2018 and beyond.  

    Are the fans okay with that?  
    It's inescapably obvious that the Browns have a plan to land a major player, comparable to Myles Garrett, but probably a quarterback.  

The fictional antihero of the movie "Draft Day" was a sensational quarterback named Bo Callahan.  They say there are a few  five star quarterbacks in the 2018 draft class. 

    That is the reason why the Browns are so far under the salary cap.  The Browns are spending only about $115 million on active player salaries in 2017, or in other words about $35 million below the rest of the NFL.

      Their biggest investment this year was Brock Osweiler at $16 Million, the highest paid man on the team, who isn't even playing. They made this investment in order to obtain a second round draft pick for 2018.  They could have signed two starters for that amount of money.  

    The Browns cut, traded or made little effort to sign several players who were veterans and still capable of playing NFL caliber football if not at a star level.  In particular, they cut Joe Haden, who they are paying $7 million dollars to play for the Pittsburgh Steelers.  This was done over the objections of Coaches Hue Jackson and Gregg Williams, per Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.  ( 6 Reasons Not to Cut Joe Haden ).  The Browns Coaching staff did not want to lose DeMario Davis, according to Ms Cabot.  We made these moves to make sure we can lose  games and perhaps even beat out the  the San Francisco 49ers,  for the top slot in the draft.  Th 49ers, like the Browns, are jettisoning veteran players and gutting salaries.

    I think they made the decision to start DeShone Kizer to find out if we have a franchise quarterback, and if not, we'll draft one in 2018.  Not sure that one year is enough to make a decision on Kizer but any case I don't think they can turn down a start quarterback in the next draft. 
      This thought process probably looks good in computer simulations. But I question whether a football team is going to win if they realize that the Front Office is okay with a losing performance.  I can't stand it whenever I hear talk that we need to start the rookie NOW to "set our priorities" fore NEXT year.  Ugh.  That's not football.  Football is the toughest game in the world and it's played by guys who value winning above all else.  I don't think you can just suddenly switch gears and start to win on command.  

     So, what do you think, Browns Nation?  Is it ok to play kids to set your draft priorities rather than trying to win every game you can?   Or, what happens if we suck it up, put the veterans back in the lineup and actually win some games?  If we are 10th in the draft, probably all the "franchise' types will be gone.   

      Are we okay with potentially missing out on a top qb in the draft to win meaningless games?  Or do you play to win, no matter what?  

Isaiah Crowell is Not Tanking

     Is Isaiah Crowell taking it easy in order to get a rich free agent contract next season?  That thought has been voiced in our friendly "Browns Bloggers and Friends" group (look me up on Facebook if you want to get added).  Certainly Isaiah's numbers are down after a very impressive 2016 campaign in which he gained almost 1000 yards despite playing behind an underperforming offensive line.

      Currently, he is ranked #47 by Pro Football Focus.  Remembering there are 32 teams in the NFL, that means he is about average for a second string running back.  

      Okay, you see where I'm going with this.  There will not be a big payday waiting for a guy who performs at the second string level.   Maybe a million dollars, or twice the NFL minimum.  But nothing big, nothing unaffordable should the Browns decide to keep him.  They may not need him as they have Duke Johnson (ranked 14th in the NFL, which is rather good) plus a flock of 2018 draft picks.  Rookie running backs are usually pretty good, unlike rookie quarterbacks.   So if Crowell wants a big free agent contract he's lost most of his value as of Game 5 in the 2017 season. 
         Browns management may be tanking, but Isaiah Crowell is not. 

       My take is that the Browns have a dysfunctional offense. With a rotating door at quarterback and no wide receivers of any consequence right now, opposing defenses are free to key on the running game.  The passing game can not harm them.   That's one reason why they are able to limit Crowell.
    

Updating the Carson Wentz Deal 1 Year Later

   A year later, many Browns fans wish that the team had drafted Carson Wentz.  Wentz has certainly done well for a good Philadelphia team. No question that they got good value by selecting him.
    On the other hand, does that mean he would have been a star for the Browns?  That is a much more difficult question.   It's not clear to me that he would be a star on the Browns with a much lower talent level, and in particular the Browns offensive line caused their quarterbacks to suffer broken bones, concussions and other injuries.  RG3 out once with a shoulder injury, McCown out with a Broken collarbone, Kessler out twice with concussions. Even Clipboard Jesus Charlie Whitehurst was knocked out with a knee injury.   Is that the proper environment to put a very valuable young quarterback in?   Maybe, but I have my doubts. 
      There's usually two or three guys from each class that ultimately have Hall of Fame careers, so if you're going to draft that high, you should get someone that you think is going to be really a top player.  We know Wentz will be a very good starter for years to come, but that is not quite the same as saying he can not be traded at any price.   
     The Browns did get an amazing talent haul for Wentz, and we're not done yet--one more third round pick remains to be identified in 2018.  However, two additional parts of the puzzle were chosen in Jabrill Peppers and DeShone Kizer, in addition to Kessler, Corey Coleman, Shon Coleman, Ricardo Louis and Derrick  Kindred, for a total of six starters plus backup Spencer Drango.  The complete list is posted below.  It's easy to see how this could add up to a guy as good as Wentz, though that is not the case so far. NONE of the 8 players received for Wentz has become an impact player so far, but that could conceivably change in the next few years.    Put it this way, if the Patriots had drafted from the same position,  they would draft a few guys to get sent to the Pro Bowl, but the Browns may not have the ability to accurately evaluate football talent.   

       The final answer is going to take a few years to decide, but at the moment I would give the Browns an A for trading draft picks, but a D for choosing good players.   

     I still think DeShone Kizer has great talent, but his career would have been better served by staying in school.  2017 should have been his JUNIOR year at Notre Dame, and his rookie NFL year would have been 2019.  Normally his career progression would see him start to establish himself in 2020.  The nonsense of accelerating his development from three years to a few months is simply a delusional fantasy by Coach Jackson.   As far as we know, no one wanted that to happen but the Coach. There is no evidence that you can make a kid grow up faster by throwing him on the field without adequate preparation.  In addition, Cody Kessler never did anything wrong, especially by rookie standards.  He completed 65% of his passes with a good TD/INT ratio despite playing on a lousy team with no pass protection, and was mysteriously dropped. 

         So the jury is still out, but for now it would be fair to say that the clear edge goes to the Eagles.  They got their guy, whereas we have not been able to identify a single star player so far.  

PLAYER/PICK	ROUND	OVERALL PICK	POSITION	COLLEGE
Corey Coleman	1	15	WR	Baylor
Shon Coleman	3	76	OT	Auburn
Cody Kessler	3	93	QB	USC
Ricardo Louis	4	114	WR	Auburn
Derrick Kindred	3	129	SS	TCU
Spencer Drango	4	168	OL	Baylor
Jabrill Peppers	1	25	DB	Michigan
DeShone Kizer	2	52	QB	Notre Dame
2018 NFL Draft Pick (from PHILLY)	3	TBD	TBD	TBD

Update on Steelers' Star Joe Haden

Is Joe Haden too old at age 28?  Too slow?  Past his prime?  Are the Browns geniuses for getting rid of him.  Maybe, but so far nobody in the NFL is catching passes against him this year.  For example, in the Steelers' loss to the Bears, the Bears completed one pass to a wide receiver the entire game.  One. 

UPDATE:  OCT 11 2017.  Last September 1, the Village Elliot complained bitterly about the Browns cutting Joe Haden from the roster so that that the Pittsburgh Steelers could pick him up.  I said he was back after off-season surgeries to repair two torn groin muscles. 
Village Elliot Scorches Browns over Cutting Joe Haden

I still can't believe he even played, and yet many of my friends were very critical of Joe.  They say he is washed up, overrated etc. Pro Football Focus agrees, ranking Joe as the 72nd best CB in the NFL.  That means he is number 3 cornerback.  Rather pathetic for a guy making $11 million dollars a year.   It's just wishful thinking by the Village Elliot that Joe might be back after two off-season surgeries.  Pittsburgh is going to be sorry they signed him! Right? 

Well, they are not sorry yet.  The Steelers rank FIRST in the NFL in pass defense.  Through 5 games, they are giving up a microscopic 139.6 yards per game.  That's a ridiculously small number.  To put it in perspective, the Browns are ranked 19th at 228 yards per game, or 88 yards per game more.   Last season, by the way, the Steelers were 18th.   Old broken down Joe is playing in 98% of the team's snaps on defense.  If he is a weak spot on the team, the rest of the NFL hasn't found him out yet.  

Hue, This is Bad. The Too-Rapid Rise and Fall of DeShone Kizer

Coach, we gotta talk. 

    Oh Coach Jackson, this is a fine mess you've gotten yourself into.   You didn't have to risk your reputation on DeShone Kizer, but that's what you did.  So many people told you not to rush a young quarterback like Kizer into action. No doubt,  he is highly talented, the best combination of size, speed, intelligence and arm strength that the Browns have ever had.  But he's very raw and not very accurate.  He did not put up great numbers at Notre Dame, left school not one but TWO years early.  He did not do well at the combine, having trouble with fundamentals, and he did not do well in preseason (25 for 49, or 52% completion percentage, qbr of 72.7 which is about the level of the league's worst starting quarterback.   It doesn't get better in the regular season when teams start using more complex defensive schemes).  So why start Kizer?  The only reason is that Hue, as a quarterback guru, pronounced him ready to overtake the other candidates, namely Cody Kessler, Brock Osweiler, and Kevin Hogan.

That was a very surprising decision, and I'm not second guessing him.  Check out my blog. Preseason Predictions Village Elliot, where I predicted exactly what would happen.  Not that I'm a great prognosticator, and many others had the same opinion, which is precisely the point.  This was a freakishly weird decision to start Kizer.  

There are two basic methodologies for developing a quarterback, as shown in the accompanying table.  The method on the left is used by the rest of the NFL.  The method on the right is being pioneered by the Cleveland Browns. 

TWO METHODS FOR DEVELOPING QUARTERBACKS.

The Browns had some decent results with Cody Kessler,  who put up some numbers in his 2016 rookie year:  65% completion average, 6 Tds versus only 2 INTs, and qb rating of 92.5, which is one of the highest in team history.  But he doesn't have the superstar potential every team looks for.  He's slow, takes too many sacks and he's not that big.  Still, there is every expectation that he would be allowed to continue his development, with Kizer taking the year to learn the offense as the third string quarterback. 

Nobody would have complained if Hue had elected to start Kessler, at least as long as the team has a shot for the playoffs.  Give the rookie time to learn the playbook, while the veteran tries to get the team in the playoffs. Even Kessler has less than a full year of experience, and would be considered a young developmental quarterback in all other organizations, but for the Browns 8 starts signifies late middle age for a quarterback.  If the Browns were to fall out of contention by midseason, that would be the time to start an inexperienced rookie.    But Hue didn't do that, proclaiming that there was no need for additional studying, Kizer was ready to be the Game One starter.  

Now, with the Browns at 0-4 and effectively out of the playoff hunt, it actually makes sense to start a rookie, even if he is the worst quarterback in the league.   Maybe it will accelerate his development so that he is actually effective in 2018.  But instead, Hue is shaken up and has lost confidence in the rookie, realizing that he has blown any chance of even pretending to contend in the AFC North. 


Honestly, I suspected that the plan was to find out if Kizer can be a so-called "Franchise Quarterback," that mythological beast that makes the Pro Bowl every year and takes the team to the Playoffs.  If we go 1-15 again, then Sashi will get the number one draft pick again, take the consensus number one quarterback in the 2018 draft, which is supposedly loaded with top prospects (my favorite is Mason Rudolph,  Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen, Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen and Baker Mayfield to name a few). 

But now Hue is 1-24 and is leery about going down in history as the losingest Head Coach in NFL history.  Maybe he's not okay to finish last in the NFL again to get better draft picks.  Maybe he and Sashi are feeling the heat from the Haslams, who have to be losing millions of dollars while his athletes lose games Maybe he now wants to sit down the immature Kizer, as he should have from the get-go.  

As I see it Hue staked his reputation on Kizer. Unless Sashi ordered him to do it to get draft picks, Hue didn't need to promote Kizer, but that's what he did.  If he comes up empty, it means that he is not the quarterback guru we thought he was.  In fact, he looks rather silly, especially in light of flamboyant play calls that bombed versus the Jets. 

Hue might be gone before you know it. 

POST SCRIPT

While i'm on the subject of people being gone, I wonder if Sashi Brown can avoid the temptation to trade Joe Thomas or Isaiah Crowell or others to get more drat picks?  At the beginning of the year I figured four games under .500 would be the threshold to get rid of additional veteran players.  For what it's worth.  

Josh Gordon is not Eligible for Reinstatement until June 2018.

*********************************************************************************
UPDATE:  Josh Gordon has been reinstated, despite having not complied with the NFL drug policy as recently as June 2017.   I can't explain the legal rational, as it seems cut and dried to me that he should have been kept out until next year.  Maybe the Commissioner wants to cut the Browns a break by not enforcing the policy.  I don't see where in the current drug policy and collective bargaining agreement he is allowed to do that, but as a society we are moving away from banning marijuana, and in some states it is legal.  So it's probably the right thing to have a less draconian drug policy, although that is not the way that the current NFL drug policy is written.  No matter, here's hoping that Josh Gordon complies with the requirements to stay clean and sober, and gets his life back on course. 

*********************************************************************************
  Many of my fellow Browns fans believe that Josh Gordon will be soon reinstated to the Cleveland Browns.  For the record, I believe that the NFL marijuana policy needs to be liberalized.   However, that has not happened yet.  

     The current policy is available on the net, and shows that players in Stage 3 (that would be Gordon) are suspended for a year in the event that they fail to get tested.  I've appended the pertinent section so that you can read it for yourself.
       Josh missed a drug test in June 2017.  That's an automatic one year suspension.  No time off for good behavior, no time off if we believe that he didn't actually take drugs, so special exemption for marijuana.    The suspension can not be lifted until June 2018 at the earliest.  There's no decision to be made.  There's not going to be any review, no interview, nothing. 
    But didn't the Commissioner say last winter that Josh could re-apply for reinstatement in September?  Yes, but that assumed he would comply with the drug policy.   Josh did not comply, so that is off the table.  The rule is, you fail to take a drug test, that's another one year suspension.  

    But feel free to disbelieve it.  All I ask is that you not blame me for Josh's situation, because I had nothing to do with writing the policy, I'm just reading it to you.  

   Without further ado, here it is, from the 2016 NFLPA NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE POLICY AND PROGRAM ON SUBSTANCES OF ABUSE,  as agreed by the National Football League Players Association and the National Football League Management Council Section 1.5.3 paragraph B: 

A Player who: fails to cooperate with testing, treatment, evaluation or other requirements imposed on him by this  (2016) Policy or fails to comply with his Treatment Plan, both as determined by the Medical Director; or who has a Positive Test Result, will be banished from the NFL for a minimum period of one (1) calendar year.