Nasdaq wrote:

Nasdaq wrote:

Gameface64 wrote: Pretty disheartening that our chief talent evaluator missed so badly on 3 QBs in one draft. Three years from now the picture might have changed, but day-um, Gibbert and Mallet over Kapernick? And what he writes seems self serving, trying to bolster his initial take on Mallet was correct based on a couple pre-season series. It'd be nice if he could admit being wrong, and that would indicate an ability to learn from mistakes.

And do I remember correctly that Mallet was 3rd string in NE?

I've posted many times that imo the key to successful franchise building is scouting and talent evaluation. If Lombardi doesn't have the gift, here's hoping he'll get out of the way and trust his best scouts.

Reduced to hope.

Hope is not a plan.

I may just pull a T-Dog and divest until after this re-boot fails.

It's been 4 minutes and not one post begging me to stay.

let's get on the ball there, people.

SoulDawg74 wrote:

Nasdaq wrote:

Nasdaq wrote:

Gameface64 wrote: Pretty disheartening that our chief talent evaluator missed so badly on 3 QBs in one draft. Three years from now the picture might have changed, but day-um, Gibbert and Mallet over Kapernick? And what he writes seems self serving, trying to bolster his initial take on Mallet was correct based on a couple pre-season series. It'd be nice if he could admit being wrong, and that would indicate an ability to learn from mistakes.

And do I remember correctly that Mallet was 3rd string in NE?

I've posted many times that imo the key to successful franchise building is scouting and talent evaluation. If Lombardi doesn't have the gift, here's hoping he'll get out of the way and trust his best scouts.

Reduced to hope.

Hope is not a plan.

I may just pull a T-Dog and divest until after this re-boot fails.

It's been 4 minutes and not one post begging me to stay.

let's get on the ball there, people.

SD:

what are you carping about Dabessst been had room in his study since he cleaned out his Browns gear half a decade ago .

You can find sympathy there , if you don't want to leaf thru Websters and find it between shyte and Syphillus .

Sympathy is my middle name  call me anytime.



SoulDawg

BK Dog wrote: As someone once said, they never dedicated a monument to a committee.

HeadHole wrote: 2 things:

-For years WW2 vets didn't have an official DC memorial chosen by a committee or anyone else. To an extent, what was the point? People either got what they did or they didn't get what they did. Their service and sacrifice was in some ways their memorial. Now they have one- for what it's worth.

- What's more important: The individual that made up the committee of the army, or the committee of the army that was made up of individuals? Is it a memorial of the Army committee that was ordered to fight WW2 or a memorial of the individual people who were WW2 vets and actually had boots on the ground?

The story I keep hearing is that guys fought for themselves and the few guys around them- not for the Army. Tough call.

In football it's different. The committee called the Browns is more important than individual players.

But the original BK post is correct that sometimes an individual gives up personal opinion to the comfort of committee consensus. That way blame gets spread around and responsibility is dodged even if a shared opinion is less than straight-forward. And if things go well, one can always jump on the bandwagon.