Dawgs By Nature: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Defend That, Digger! The Overrated/underrated edition

Cleaning House - Savage Ditched, Crennel Next

Romeoout_medium Romeo Crennel couldn't beat the Pittsburgh Steelers once in eight attempts. He had losing seasons in three of four years. More than that though, Crennel never showed qualities desirable in a head coach.

Phil Savage had a different story. Heading into the season, I didn't think there was any chance his head would be called for at the end of the season. Then, things went terribly wrong -- including the email situation following the Bills game, the confrontation with Kellen Winslow, and the blatant "jabs" taken at his head coach during the regular season.

There's one thing to say to these two men...

Getout_medium

The candidates to replace both men will be speculated over the next several weeks.

Pro Football Talk, Mike Trivisonno, and Tony Rizzo have reported that Savage is gone -- something that may have happened around 5:00 PM Sunday, just following our pleasant 31-0 season finale loss to the backups of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Rumors have been swirling that New England Patriots Executive Vice President Scott Pioli will be offered the GM job.

Savage won't be remembered for everything being "bad". He may not have been the "great" talent evaluator we had hoped for, but it was under his watch that we were able to acquire the likes of Joe Thomas, Brady Quinn, Eric Wright, and Shaun Rogers. All four of those men have the potential to be the heart of our team in an All-Pro manner.

UPDATE: 6:42 PM - ESPN is reporting that the Browns, Jets, Raiders, and Lions have shown an interest in Bill Parcells being their general manager. Other rumors are indicating that Crennel will step down or be let go some time Monday.

0 recs  |  Comment 83 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Rumors have been swirling that New England Patriots Executive Vice President Scott Pioli will take the GM job.

Where are these?

The only thing I’ve seen is that he will be offered the job, not that he would necessarily take it.

by gahnki on Dec 28, 2008 6:28 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Thanks, I corrected it. I had something a little longer typed up originally and I’m pretty sure I had the correct verbiage in my first post. When it didn’t save, I goofed in trying to quickly whip something back up.

Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 28, 2008 6:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Completely understandable.

by gahnki on Dec 28, 2008 6:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pioli would be AWESOME.

Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out Phil. In fact, hold it open for Romeo to follow you.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

by BringBackKosar on Dec 28, 2008 6:30 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Since you referenced him, I feel compelled to point out that Mike Trivisanno is, and always will be, an idiot to me. You may now continue debating the merits of these changes.

by Fundamentals on Dec 28, 2008 6:34 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Heh, I never listen to him. If you’re looking for further verification, Tony Rizzo is reporting that a team official indicated that Savage was gone.

Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 28, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Triv is about 85% of the reason that I got satellite radio. He’s horrible to listen to and thinks he knows entirely more than he actually does. When WTAM had Triv and Drennan on back-to-back, it made me want to take an ice pick to my ears. Now, WKNR has gotten slightly better, but I’m still glad to have my satellite radio just to avoid the blow-hards on WTAM, notably Triv.

by Fundamentals on Dec 28, 2008 7:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Grossi just posted his story on Cleveland.com According to him, Savage was fired. I’m happier if it’s called a firing. I don’t want Phil to have the luxury of walking away and blaming it all on Romeo.

Does anyone give any credence to the idea that Lerner wouldn’t have pulled the trigger on this firing so soon without already having a candidate lined up?

by NickFantana on Dec 28, 2008 6:51 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Does anyone give any credence to the idea that Lerner wouldn’t have pulled the trigger on this firing so soon without already having a candidate lined up?

This is the Browns organization we are talking about, right?

by gahnki on Dec 28, 2008 6:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, but somewhere today I read about the good work Lerner has done with his soccer team in the UK. He turned that team around. Call me crazy but I still believe in Lerner.

By the by, expecting that the next round of rumor and intrigue will be during Football Night in America, starting at 7.

by NickFantana on Dec 28, 2008 6:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yep, make sure your eyes are glued to the screen when Peter King comes on.

Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 28, 2008 6:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, King seems pretty sure we won’t land Cowher.

by exposition on Dec 28, 2008 7:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to believe Lerner understands the mistake he made in the past, sure the talent on this team improved, however it is not where it should be to be a consistent winner and playoff contender.

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Dec 28, 2008 6:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

May just be he wants to give himself as much time as humanly possible to decide on who to hire.

by mgtbfb on Dec 28, 2008 7:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Plain Dealer is reporting the same, Savage out. Parcells would be an interesting piece, however it would take some sort of compensation to get him here.

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Dec 28, 2008 6:52 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I will repeat here: Criticism of Randy Lerner is unwarranted. His role is to spend the money and stay out of the way. By firing two guys that he will have to pay for a few more years, he is showing that he is committed to putting a winning product on the field no matter what

by Roger Dorn on Dec 28, 2008 7:10 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree.

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Dec 28, 2008 7:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure in all honesty. I like his handling of things, by largely staying out of the way. However, the team hasn’t had success under him, he hasn’t made good hires, or good business decisions. Were we going to lose Crennel or Savage, who were under contract, without new extensions last year? I know he’s willing to spend money, but if he doesn’t spend it in the right spots, does it really matter? I’m not blaming Lerner, exactly. I’m just saying that he doesn’t deserve to get a pass in all of this. I think we’ve all loved the idea of Randy Lerner, even if the local media has idealized him in some sense, owning the Browns and getting a title for Al Lerner (even with the story of Lerner and move to Baltimore). I’m just not sure that he’s done anything to deserve the praise that he gets from so many on different Browns boards that I’ve read.

by Fundamentals on Dec 28, 2008 7:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

This is just absurd. It’s all Randy Lerner’s fault! He is the guy in charge. He is the guy that interviews the GM and coach. He is the guy that writes the checks. Everyone is pissed off about this year, but in the 10 years under Lerner’s ownership we have been a joke. Savage didn’t hire Policy and Clark. Savage didn’t hire Davis. Savage didn’t even hire Crennel.

IMO, only one guy in the Browns organization has actually done his job relatively well, and that’s Savage. But since he is a jerk, he was fired. I look forward to watching him build a winner elsewhere while the Browns continue to be a bad organization and team.

by dvd1204 on Dec 30, 2008 10:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

randy has made great business decisions, as the value of this franchise has almost doubled since his dad brought the browns back. so that’s false.

as well, randy didn’t hire policy or clark…or davis—al did. and savage did hire crennel! give a thought to a little verification of your rants before you go on them. you sound like triv.

randy is a model owner, which makes this situation attractive to guys like pioli…or parcells. he puts football people in place and gives them the rope they need to do their thing. savage and romeo hung themselves…that would have been hard for randy to foresee. now he needs to be very careful about giving the rope to the right guy.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

King echoes what Chris wrote about Pioli

by Roger Dorn on Dec 28, 2008 7:13 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

The Breaking News ticker on ESPNEWS has the Browns firing Crennel and Savage both. Not sure if this is premature, but it’s certainly not surprising.

Is the common wisdom now that Scott Pioli is the favorite? Something like Lerner meets with Cowher, gets turned down, hires Pioli and then Pioli finds the head coach?

by NickFantana on Dec 28, 2008 7:35 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

PD says Savage fired for draft errors and overspending on free agents.

by palcal on Dec 28, 2008 9:38 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Bingo!!

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Dec 28, 2008 10:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pretty inaccurate.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 1:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

are you saying that the PD’s message was different from what palcal said? or that savage did not err in the draft or overpay on FA’s?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 1:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The latter

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 1:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

For the moment, at least, Jay Glazer seems to think Cowher’s not interested.

BROWNS — Both head coach Romeo Crennel and GM Phil Savage are expected to be gone regardless of whether or not the Browns can lure Bill Cowher or Patriots VP Scott Pioli. As for Cowher, he has insisted to many that he will not take the Cleveland job regardless of the dollar amount thrown his way.

by exposition on Dec 28, 2008 10:12 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Remember Parcels eying Romeo for the head coaching position in Miami. Dont be surprised if we get Parcels and Romeo sticks around in some capacity.

by vegasbrown on Dec 29, 2008 12:41 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

As a side, I really do find all this hard to utterly rediculous, granted it has been a shit season but wasnt the writing on the wall. The schedule was nasty, the expectations were absurd, a number of key players were hurt prior to the first game, and we lost …. how many QBs? Cleaning house just seems rediculious and reactionary… just going down the same path of blowing it up and starting over again. How many times have the Stealers blown up their organization lately?

by vegasbrown on Dec 29, 2008 12:50 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

The Browns are a victim of their own ridiculous expectations right now. They can’t build anything if they keep restarting every four years. I mean, maybe they should just start planning the next coach after we run this new one out of town.

by gahnki on Dec 29, 2008 3:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i think it’s pretty fair to expect a talented and competitive team after 4 years of a gm/coach regime. i’ll leave the talent point aside since that’s been a topic of much consternation around here, but i think we’re fooling ourselves if we think that this organization is headed in the right direction football-wise. we’ve got a shot at a true fix in an established guy like pioli, why wouldn’t we take it?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 11:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Winning organizations don’t restart every four years. I don’t know whether this is the right move, as it very well may be, but they need to find someone they will stick with for many years. Even if there is some struggle.

by gahnki on Dec 29, 2008 5:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

but we’re not a winning organization. until we are, until we’ve built some sort of framework for success, we’re going to have to restart at various intervals. under your theory of not restarting, we should be entering year 11 of the chris palmer regime and hoping that this is the year that we finally become a winning organization. it doesn’t work that way.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Actually, if we had given Palmer more than two years, we may very well be a winning organization now.

by gahnki on Dec 30, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Winning organizations hire their own Pioli’s from lower level positions and let them grow into the role. They don’t poach established Pioli’s from other organizations.

We already had our own Pioli/Colbert/Newsome in Savage, and now we have apparently thrown him to the curb b/c of an idiot coach and a few non-football related gaffes.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 5:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

this is a total farce. winning organizations are net exporters of talent, man, not importers. off the top of my head: patriots – weis, romeo, mangini, dimitroff, pioli, mcdaniels; giants – john fox, sean payton, spagnuolo; eagles – childress, john harbaugh; chargers – cam cameron, w. phillips… the list goes on. the steelers hired mike tomlin from elsewhere, and shipped out whisenhunt and grimm, both super bowl ring holders from a steelers championship.

pioli and belichick were hired from somewhere else. parcells was hired from somewhere else 4 or 5 times. the ravens asked to interview chud, but that’s it in our second life. not a single browns executive or scout has been hired away to a position of more influence at a different club. how many coaches have been hired away (grantham and davidson were both fired)? or even interviewed? that’s some football operation as orchestrated by old phil (romeo’s at fault, too).

winning doesn’t come from hiring and crossing fingers. you have to be proactive about getting the right people in the right places.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I meant lower levels of other successful organizations, obviously. Which is exactly what we did with Savage.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 3:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m with you. Randy Lerner is a joke. The truth is this team was realtively competative for the first half of the season and has some talent.

by dvd1204 on Dec 30, 2008 10:38 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i’m not sure how this is a reflection on lerner?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ESPN is reporting that the Jets will fire Mangini today. They have a press conference scheduled for 10 am. If Pioli comes to Cleveland, would Mangini be a candidate to join him here? Maybe he’ll be the next Belichick, who learns from the mistakes of his first job to be great in his second job.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 29, 2008 9:32 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

i was thinking the exact same thing…although, i’ve started to convinced myself that Pioli is going to hire Josh McDaniels to be the HC, in which case i think Mangini would be a great defensive coordinator.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 11:31 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have no doubt that Savage will win a Super Bowl as the head football man somewhere.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 1:29 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

great point. i love the analysis and specifics. good luck with that.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 1:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The talent is undeniably higher than ever before. He hit jackpot on numerous decisions that were immensely important:

- Edwards pick (look at the other top 7 pics from that draft, BE is by far the most successful)

- The Wimbley pick is, like most problems with this team, Crennel’s fault, not Phil’s. Savage had Wimbley and Ngata pretty much even, and Crennel made the call based on the positional aspect. And he was even wrong in that assessment (NT being more important in a 3-4 than stud OL). Also, going from 11 sacks to 5 to this year has to be placed at the defensive coaching staff’s feet, which is all Romeo.

- Thomas pick

- Trade for Quinn (we ended up losing a 20-something pick, for a top 10 talent)

- Trade for Rogers, highway robbery.

Not to mention the unbelievably tragic losses to players in their prime (Bentley, Baxter).

The critique of his 2nd day pics/undrafted FAs is ridiculous, both b/c of the veritable success he’s had there (Cribbs, Harrison, McDonald) and b/c he’s only had three chances (He said himself 05 was too little time to implement his system, and that had a lot to do with the bust of the 2nd day draft that year. They concentrated on getting the high picks right, which they mostly did w/ Edwards and Pool.)

Finally, he’s not a big spender in FA at all. When the cupboard is bare and you’re 40 million under the cap b/c you literally have no players good enough to command a high salary, of course you have to sign some guys. Plus, our cap situation is still better than the Steelers or the Ravens. They’ve drafted better than us for a decade so their $ is spent on their own players. We didn’t have any good players, so what’s he supposed to do with that extra 40 million, sit on it? At the time of their signing, Bentley and Baxter were both coups (from Philly and Balt respectively), amazing moves if their careers had continued throughout the normal prime years of a player. And those two players are pretty much the only big ticket FAs he’s ever signed. Stalworth’s contract is nothing, basically a one year deal, and he’s not overpaid for a starting receiver at all. And Williams and Rogers were both under control by their former teams and acquired via trade, with Rogers being an absolute robbery. Those two moves in conjunction are a deniable positive (2nd, 3rd and Bodden for Williams and Rogers) and show just how creative Savage is to improve a roster.

The only real football criticism you can apply to him, expecially when it comes to “big” decisions, is not cashing in on DA’s value when he had the chance. That’s it, that’s the only one.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 1:59 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

“an undeniable positive”

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

so, you primarily cite 4 personnel decisions as “jackpots” as your evidence for phil’s impending greatness as a personnel guy. i can’t buy off on that. for this paragraph, i’ll even grant you that he’s a good evaluator of talent, but the guy is not a gm/face of the franchise (winslow situation, f you to fan, throwing crennel under the bus). that’s all he ever could have been in cleveland, and he has and would continue to fail. for that reason alone he needs to be moved out.

now, i’ll take back the “good” label for his talent skills, and pose you a question: as a matter of opinion, how many players on the browns would start for more than 50% of the teams in the NFL? rogers, winslow, edwards, thomas, steinbach. those are the only players that i can come up with that would start on the majority of NFL teams. that’s not talent accumulation (esp considering winslow is a butch holdover). even if you disagree with that list, consider this: in the 4 years that savage has been in cleveland, the browns have drafted 32 players (including Anderson and Cribbs), 21 of those players are still in the NFL (66), 20 are still with the Browns (63). 7 players have started more than 50% of the games that they could have played (22). the Browns have won 24 games in that span (38 win pct.). compare that to the Ravens, from whom the Browns got savage, who have won 37 games in 4 years (58% win pct): 34 draftees (including Anderson), 27 in NFL (79), 26 w/ Ravens (76), 8 players (24) have started more than 50 of the games they could have played. the Browns have been substantially worse than the Ravens, and yet have selected fewer impact players than the Ravens have. i realize that’s just one data point, but i looked at this for several teams, and Phil’s record is uninspiring, at best.

moreover, bentley and baxter (and steinbach) weren’t “coups” as you say…they were common sense. the browns had 10s of millions under the cap, and those guys were top-3 overall free agents. now, i’m not going to penalize savage for that, but i will not give him extra credit for using lerner’s checkbook to pay for guys at the top of the FA list.

maybe he’ll get better, but he has not been good here. maybe someday he’ll get to control just personnel, and have a coach to deal w/ media, fans, etc., and maybe then he’ll be good. but he has been a failure here, as evidenced by his team’s 24-40 record. romeo may not have been a good coach, but i refuse to lay the blame solely at his feet. winning has to be a combo of talent and coaching…our record would indicate little of both…and i’ll disagree with you on DA, too. he had no choice but to keep DA. i won’t penalize him for that.

good riddance. especially if they get pioli…a proven winner.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the numbers in parentheses in the second paragraph are s. so, “21 of those players are still in the NFL (66)” should read "…NFL (66)"

d’oh

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 2:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

my percentage button seems to be having issues…it should be 66 percent

%

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 29, 2008 2:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I’ll assume your numbers are correct (even though the Ravens’ 79% is unbelievably high… to the point of not being, ahem, believable).

Nonetheless, I still don’t see a big difference when comparing this record to one of the best personel people’s in all of football (Newsome). The entire league could not maintain a 66% draft success rate, b/c the turnover in players would be too high.

The first paragraph is a misguided and completely irrelevant critique. If a fan base cares whether or not a GM uses four letter words in emails, they don’t deserve a winner. The Winslow thing was widely known to be because some low level idiot PR person texted K2 unbenounced to Phil, and the suspension was rescinded. You don’t give up on one of the most talented and youngest personel guys in the world b/c of two things that have nothing to do with what goes on between the lines.

“Face of the Franchise” is meaningless management speak. Parcells, Belicheck, Reid, Holmgren, Knoll, Cowher, etc weren’t “faces” of anything. They won. Afterwards, the press and fan bases won. Besides, that job goes to the head coach anyway, it is not in the job description of a GM. And we had a bumbling idiot in that position.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 3:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the press and fan bases “complimented them”

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 3:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

a bumbling idiot that kicks that field goal in a 10-3 game against Pittsburgh

a bumbling idiot that can’t find carries for a second back, when other teams (Giants) find carries for 3 of them

a bumbling idiot that has syndrick steptoe on the field for a single play in an NFL game, let alone over 50% of them

a bumbling idiot that can’t run or setup a proper 2 minute drill

a bumbling idiot who flips a coin to decide starters

a bumbling idiot who plays a QB w/ a sub-.500 completion percentage

and on and on and on… Phil’s right to blame that fat moron. He hired the “experienced name” in 05 and paid for it ever since for the sake of “continuity.”

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

what about the bumbling idiot who went into this season w/ a top-4 LB corps of Wimbley, Jackson, A. Davis, McGinest? in a 3-4?

or the bumbling idiot who entered the year w/ a below-average pass rush, and a corner depth chart of wright, holley, mcdonald?

he hired the experienced name in 05…and then extended that name in 07. but in your world he’s clearly blameless for the extension. what would you have had the browns do? fire romeo after year 2? or after year 3 and 10 wins?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would have kept Savage and hired a competent coach.

(The corners were fine all year, save 2 bad games by McDonald that were partly caused by no pass rush. We have two of the top 35 pics of the 06 draft invested in the LB corp, with lots of “depth” planned to fill out the other two spots: Peek, McGinest, Davis, Williams, Bell, etc. It’s the Coach’s job to get them up to speed, not direct the regression of an 11 sack rookie.)

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 3:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, and Savage doesn’t have to worry about being “penalized” for Bentley, Baxter and Steinbach, he is only to be lauded. You’re not going to give a guy credit for signing premier, young free agents to a program that has been a laughing stock for 7 years? Those were intelligent player management moves that should be added to the 5 I specifically mentioned (Philly and Balt were fuming over Bentley and Baxter, respectively). So that’s 8 impact/pro bowl type moves he’s made in 4 years, which is 8 more than any other Browns head has in the last 20 years.

And this doesn’t even account for the average/slightly above average acquisitions he’s made: Pool, Wright, Jackson, Vickers, Jamal (07), Jurevicious, R. Smith, S. Smith.

by kwoog on Dec 29, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i just want to get this straight…savage has control over 52 people on the roster, and romeo has control over kam wimbley? and i suppose kam’s 11 sacks in his rookie year were all luck, while his decline is all romeo? it couldn’t possibly be savage’s failure to get someone under the age of 100 to rush from the other side?

you’re very quick to give savage a pass on bad situations (and lay the blame at romeo’s feet), and yet allot savage 100% of the credit for other more positive results. can’t have it both ways, bro. whether romeo pushed for kam or not, savage has control of the 53…and you yourself said ngata and kam were a tie on savage’s board. so savage deserves some blame. likewise, how do you know that romeo didn’t weigh in on rogers and bodden?

the equation can’t be good = savage, bad = romeo. it’s just not that simple, much as you’d like for it to be. 24-40. no one is blameless

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 1:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Savage is undoubtedly good at picking players. What is Crennel good at?

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 3:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Crennel is good at winning 5 Super Bowl rings.

I’d like to reiterate a question I asked previously that you didn’t answer: how many players on the Browns’ 53-man roster do you think would start on 50%+ of NFL teams? Clearly, this is an opinion question, but I think if you are honest about it it would have an effect on your assertion that Savage is undoubtedly good at picking players.

I’d also like to say that I was in favor of firing both, so I’m not trying to shill for Romeo here. I just think Savage is at least as culpable as Romeo.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 4:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thomas, Steinbach, Tucker, Shaffer, Winslow, Edwards, Vickers, Quinn, Williams, Rogers, Wimbley, Jackson, Wright, Jones and Pool

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 5:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Shaffer, Williams and Pool I’m on the fence about… Maybe Wimbley too. Even without them that’s 11… If you think Jackson doesn’t belong, then that’s 10.

that’s almost 50% of the starters. and of those ten, 3 are in the top 3 in football at their postion (Thomas, Rogers), and 4 are in the top 10 at their position (them, Edwards and Winslow)

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 5:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

wow. that’s 15 players. if you think that’s true…or even that 10 is true as you say below…then we’re going to have to agree to disagree, b/c to me that is preposterous. what’s greater than preposterous, actually? and as a matter of opinion, i’m unlikely to convince you that i’m right, and you’re unlikely to convince me that you’re right. i’ll give you the 5 i mentioned earlier (thomas, steinbach, edwards, rogers, winslow), and i’ll grant you vickers…to the extent that FB is even a starting position anymore.

quinn didn’t even start half the games here…he starts for more than half the teams in the NFL? not a chance.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 5:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Tucker, Wright and Jones are obvious. FB is a starting position in this offense and lots of others.

Quinn had a pro bowler in front of him.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

and yet you don’t list that pro bowler? quinn may yet turn into that guy, and wright may yet as well, but to say that either of those guys is there today is blindly homeristic. period.

tucker and jones may be obivous to you, but that would make you the only one.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

not to mention tucker and jones are both butch holdovers.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 6:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What part of Head Coaching is Crennel good at?

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 5:20 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

meant as a reply to not-joey

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 5:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

listen, i’m with you that Crennel is not a good head coach. you will get no argument out of me on that. but he’s a good defensive mind, as should be evidenced by his likely opportunities to take a DC job next season, and the defense has been consistently bad. he didn’t just forget how to coach defense…he didn’t have talent on that side of the ball.

as far as Savage, let’s try another route…how many of these open GM positions do you think he’s likely to interview for? i’ll set the over/under at 0. that’ll be a good indicator of how impressive his ability to amass talent on the roster has been to the rest of the NFL.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 5:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That’s quite literally the worst indicator one could come up with. Literally the worst. The man was just fired from a job. It’s like saying, “how many head coaching jobs can Belichick get” in 1995, or “how many head coaching jobs can tom coughlin get” in 2002.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i will wager whatever you’d like to wager that mike shanahan will have every opportunity to be a head coach in the NFL in 2009. the reason: b/c he’s good at what he does. savage will not, b/c he is not.

if you’re capable, you get scooped up quickly.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 6:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Shanahan is a veteran that’s had a lot of time to build up a resume of success.

Your over under should be future GM positions, and if the over/under on that is 0, I’ll bet my savings on the over.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

mangini, who was just fired after 3 years (a skinnier record than savage’s), is being interviewed for head coaching jobs. your argument falls apart. he’s good, he’s interviewed. savage is not.

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 7:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ridiculous extrapolation. one example, that isn’t even for the same position. an embarrassing display of fallacious argumentation. you’ve lost all credibility that you never deserved in the first place.

by kwoog on Dec 31, 2008 6:06 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

you’re ability to backpedal, mudsling, qualify or spuriously explain away situations and evidence that disprove your particular theories is very impressive. well done. i can’t blame you for getting upset, though, as you’re clearly wrong.

let’s move on, though, shall we?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 31, 2008 7:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

my ability to mix up “you’re” and “your” is equally impressive…

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 31, 2008 7:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

you’re ability to backpedal, mudsling, qualify or spuriously explain away situations and evidence that disprove your particular theories is very impressive.

It was a very impressive sentence overall. “Spuriously explain away,” was a really nice description. Alas, the You are contraction ruined it!

by gahnki on Dec 31, 2008 7:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

man i was hammered when i wrote this not-joey (see the time)…

anyway, i still think taking one outlier example and considering it the rule is bad debating.

by kwoog on Jan 2, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Also, the defense this year wasn’t bad. It was exactly average (tied with the Bears, incidentally), ranked 16th.

However, as a Head Coach Crennel is a bumbling idiot for all the reasons (and 100s more) that I mentioned above.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

well, you say yourself up above that there are only 3 sure-fire guys on the defense who would start for more than half the teams in the NFL (wright, jones, rogers…which i disagree, w/ obviously, but we’ll go w/ that for now). so if a mere 3/11 players are above average, and the defense finished tied for 16th (you don’t mention what measure you use for this ranking), “exactly average”, wouldn’t it stand to reason that the coaching staff (romeo is a defensive guy) outperformed the talent they were provided?

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 6:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i mentioned williams, wimbley, jackson and pool as well

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

and subsequently backpedaled from those 4, which is why i said “3 sure-fire guys”

by DontCallMeJoey on Dec 30, 2008 6:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i didn’t backpedal, i said “even” if. despite the arbitrariness and ridiculousness of the question, i believe in my original list. my point was to show that even with taking out the “close calls” you’re talking at least 40% of the starters. but my actual opinion of the talent is much higher.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Impossible to tell unless you are part of the organization. I think you are being entirely too unfair to Crennel.

by gahnki on Dec 30, 2008 6:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

His game management alone is unforgivable.

by kwoog on Dec 30, 2008 6:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.

Community Guidelines
Send us a Scoop

Start posting about the Browns »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Brown-ratterman_small
Brown: The Real Color of the Super Bowl

Recent FanPosts

Awesome_small
7 ROUND Browns Mock Draft
42867-mcgahee_1_small
Bill Parcells' Guide to Rebuilding the Browns
Otto_small
Ravens Owner disses Cleveland
019_small
New Salary Structure
Hahahame_small
Keep an Eye on the Vernon Gholston Situation.
Hahahame_small
A gameplan for the Browns' draft.
Otto_small
A case for trading Josh Cribbs
Logo_ksu1_small
2010 Pro Bowl
Small
The Dreaded Bottlegate

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

Browns Links


Executive Editor

Dbn_small Chris Pokorny

Moderators

Pryor_small Buckeye Brad