Talent evaluation big problem for underachieving organizations

[sebestian]

I was having this discussion with a friend non commander, NFL fan and wanted to present to the community for debate. 
 

In the NFL you have to be able to identify talent and then develop it to be successful.  That goes without saying. We came to the conclusion that first rounders have to contribute significantly. Second rounders have to play. The rest we came up with a crap shoot. 
 

this club simply can’t get it right from a talent evaluation perspective. 
 

I will transition to what I wanted to ask the board and debate. Is RR  the final say on all football player picks?  Does he get advised by MM and MH?  Does The owner (I won’t dignify him by using his name) have a decent budget for scouts and are they at least decent in regards to nfl circles (ie reputation at least because the results have not been their). 
 

Ultimately my question is this is the main cause of the struggles that this organization and others like it have. The owner notwithstanding,  the advantage of having a bad year is that you have a perceived chance at the better players in the draft. However too be in this kind of dysfunction for this many years in my opinion it has to be talent evaluation and development. 
 

obviously I am not an expert just wondering what you gentlemen think. 
 

ps.  I look at the Steelers as the best organization in all of sports. Any league any sport. Maybe Rooney can own two teams😍

dreams. 
 

Thanks, sorry for the long post. 

[DWinzit]

It seems to me teams that experience consistent success like the Pats and Steelers have the owner, front office and coaching being on the same page. They also have consistency in the coaching staff and QB play. That allows them to draft and select FA's to fit their scheme year after year. No switching personnel like from 4-3 to 3-4 or pistol to smashmouth offense. This also allows them to draft more based on BPA (within their schemes) opposed to always drafting on needs. 

[KDawg]

A great QB makes the rest of your roster look better.

 

A bad QB makes the rest of the roster look worse.

 

I'm not sure if our talent evaluation is good or bad, but our roster construction and priority is wrong.

 

Get the QB, then figure it out.

[sebestian]

36 minutes ago, KDawg said:

A great QB makes the rest of your roster look better.

 

A bad QB makes the rest of the roster look worse.

 

I'm not sure if our talent evaluation is good or bad, but our roster construction and priority is wrong.

 

Get the QB, then figure it out.

Hey I dawg. I was wondering how I could get new logo as my avatar. Any help would be appreciated thanks in advance. 

[Burgold]

I'm never sure if it's the talent evaluation that's off or the teaching. After all, perennially good teams tend to stay on top and find great players despite picking in the twenties. So, I sometimes think that's it's not an issue of identifying talent, but maximizing it.

[KDawg]

1 hour ago, sebestian said:

Hey I dawg. I was wondering how I could get new logo as my avatar. Any help would be appreciated thanks in advance. 

Click your name at the top and then click the little photo icon over your avatar, then load whatever picture you want to use. I suggest googling pics and seeing how they work. 

[Conn]

I think the idea of the “super scout” and the idea that the greatest edge can be found in talent evaluation is a bit of a myth. I think the real edges are found in efficient resource management and player development within a steady organization with a healthy culture. 
 

In a macro sense, studies have shown that the vast majority of GM’s over a longer timeline can’t consistently draft that much better than the league average. Championship teams in the recent past have generally been built off of 2-3 great consecutive drafts, it’s true (although this may be changing as teams learn to maximize their competitiveness in the window of a rookie QB contract). But over a large sample size this is more random than not. People will point to successful drafting organizations like the Steelers and Ravens, but they develop players well, have incredible organizational stability and culture, and focus on having lots of draft picks. So there’s lots of noise and even Ozzy had some terrible drafts in between their peak Flacco era and this current Lamar Jackson era. No GM can consistently knock it out of the park with draft picks just by being a talent evaluator savant. You have to maximize your draft picks via trades and utilization of the compensatory pick system to give yourself the most ammo to take shots with—and you have to grow into a stable organization with a healthy culture that can develop players. That’s it really. 
 

And the unspoken truth that acts as an umbrella strategy over all of this? You get that organizational stability and the chance to nurture and grow player talent from all those draft picks by having an elite QB that keeps you competitive over a long period of time. That’s the easiest way for a down and out organization to eventually manufacture this “edge” and grow into a consistent, stable franchise that drafts well over a long period of time. 

[sebestian]

19 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Click your name at the top and then click the little photo icon over your avatar, then load whatever picture you want to use. I suggest googling pics and seeing how they work. 

Thank you.  Worked like. Charm. Sorry to take up time in your day

[Warhead36]

It starts at the top. The best organizations are all on the same page from ownership down to FO down to coaching. Look at Baltimore with Lamar Jackson as the perfect example.

 

Meanwhile we have an owner who comes in off his yacht to draft a QB that nobody else in the organization wants. Or a QB that the GM can't even say the name of properly. The list goes on and on.

[RansomthePasserby]

It’s not just player evaluation, it’s coaching evaluation as well. Some of the best young head coaches in the league now were assistant coaches here. You’d think we could have promoted one of them from within to give them a shot at head coach or at least kept them around longer as an assistants to build continuity. Instead we’re constantly pushing the reset button and no doubt pushing talent like theirs away with our toxic culture. 

[Zim489]

1 hour ago, Conn said:

You get that organizational stability

I think part of this issue here is you cant have stability if you dont draft and evaluate well because if you cant you cant expect to stay around

[Conn]

1 hour ago, Zim489 said:

I think part of this issue here is you cant have stability if you dont draft and evaluate well because if you cant you cant expect to stay around

Yes I kind of implied that it’s an ouroboros situation with no beginning and no end when you’re looking at it from the outside, but that acquiring an elite QB that can buy an organization time to build a culture and earn the right to that stability is basically the cheat code to hack the system. 
 

Many good teams were predominantly built by a regime that was fired, but the next regime lucked out and got the QB right so the previous regime’s picks had time to develop and show out and grow a stable winning culture along with the new regime’s guys. 

[petey hodge]

We’re good…. Can totally close this thread. 😂 

[skinny21]

Seems to me it’s a combo of qb (as @KDawgpointed out), organizational stability (hard to come by if you’re lacking a qb for long), and support structure for said qb (as stevemcqu…. Dang, what’s his new handle?) always talks about.

 

A good boss at the top to supply the vision and bring in people that will buy into that vision, time/support for that boss and FO as they work to find their qb (if there wasn’t one already in-house), and then the qb to act as the rising tide.  Any of those pieces fall and it can quickly become a house of cards.

 

For this team,I think it’s possible we’ve got the other two pieces in place (to some degree at least), but we’ve already seen the discontent as RR looks (potentially) like he’s going into his 3rd year without an answer at the qb position.  Personally, I think the clown show and immense difficulties he’s had to deal with (cancer, Covid, losing Fitzpatrick, etc) ought to buy him more time, but if we don’t have a proven, or at least promising qb by next offseason… the writing will be on the wall so to speak.

[Redwards]

13 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Seems to me it’s a combo of qb (as @KDawgpointed out), organizational stability (hard to come by if you’re lacking a qb for long), and support structure for said qb (as stevemcqu…. Dang, what’s his new handle?) always talks about.

 

A good boss at the top to supply the vision and bring in people that will buy into that vision, time/support for that boss and FO as they work to find their qb (if there wasn’t one already in-house), and then the qb to act as the rising tide.  Any of those pieces fall and it can quickly become a house of cards.

 

For this team,I think it’s possible we’ve got the other two pieces in place (to some degree at least), but we’ve already seen the discontent as RR looks (potentially) like he’s going into his 3rd year without an answer at the qb position.  Personally, I think the clown show and immense difficulties he’s had to deal with (cancer, Covid, losing Fitzpatrick, etc) ought to buy him more time, but if we don’t have a proven, or at least promising qb by next offseason… the writing will be on the wall so to speak.

Even though much of this QB problem is Ron's doing, it's undeniable that he inherited a QB quandary.  He did what he felt was best last year in not trading up for a QB in a QB rich prospect class (that was a huge mistake as many pointed out at the time, and it's killing us now), and I have to respect his decision.  He's paid to do what his gut tells him is right.  I certainly don't want him doing the opposite, even if I may disagree.

 

Personally, I don't believe in my bones that the RR era is going to produce much.  That's not doom and gloom, it's just honestly what my gut is telling me.  I think the mediocre FO that Ron has assembled, when he had the chance to assemble much stronger prospects, solidified my uneasy feeling.  Of course, I'm hoping to be dead wrong.  I take no joy in not feeling confident in this current regime.  But I don't see this FO as having much talent at all.  They've had their chances elsewhere and blown it.  Some twice. 

 

However, I do believe Ron should not be obliterated by the fanbase if he fails to get the guy this particular offseason.  You simply cannot manifest a QB prospect you have total belief in and are willing to do a complete build around just because you desperately need one.   Taking one out of desperation that you "kind of, sort of like" (ex.: Ridder, Strong) in the second round all but seals our doom.  We're 95% likely to be right back here in 3 years.  Take the swing next year if you absolutely must.  I can handle that.  However, next season would be the absolute last season I would tolerate not having the great prospect on the roster.  This time next year, if you can't get him via FA, Trade, Draft, then it's over for Ron.  Then you have the contract situation that many have pointed out, and you don't want a shiny new toy for a lame duck coach.  Maybe you just gotta extend Ron now for an extra year or two.  The other choices that we're likely to have following Ron don't look good.  (Putting it mildly).    

 

Man...just so tired of this merry-go-round.  I'm just throwing ideas out there.  I certainly don't have the answers.  I hope Ron and Co. do.  

Edited February 10, 2022 by Redwards

[Darth Tater]

NE got lucky as far as QB situation from 2001 to 2019. A sixth round QB turning out to be the GOAT?

Pittsburgh? A guy with talent was actually available to them.

Green Bay?  The best QB of the 2005 draft was still on the board at 24. You have up to 4 years to work out his flaws.

SFO? Holmgren and Walsh from the late 70s to mid 90s explain much success at QB. Brodie was the only franchise guy that was not heavily dependent on a bit of luck.

KC? Reid is why currently.  He took a guy who was looking like a bust and got multiple playoff runs from a team that had 4 10+ loss seasons over the previous 6.

 

Dallas is by far one of the most successful teams in my lifetime with only 2 periods of suck since their first 5 years and many seasons in the hunt. Only twice in their history have they not had a top-talent guy not fall off the tree for them.

 

Since Sammy Baugh, Washington has used 11 top picks to find a franchise passer. This is with multiple FOs that had different level of successes,

 

Haskins is still in the top 5 QBs available in 2019. Only Murray, Jones (only because he is still the starter) and Locke (only because he still is on the team that drafted him) have definitively been better. Murray looks to be the only franchise in the bunch.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Our talent evaluation could be better. Our talent development is the absolute worst.