Add Mel Tucker to the List of Browns' Candidates

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 31, 2008 7:29 PM EST in General News

That's right -- according to the Plain Dealer, Randy Lerner will interview current defensive coordinator Mel Tucker for our head coaching position. Tucker was promoted from our defensive backs coach to our defensive coordinator after Todd Grantham was let go last season. With the Browns finishing 26th in the league defensively, surely Tucker has as good of a chance as anyone to become our next head coach, right?

Hardly.

Without the intention of coming off as disrespectful, Tucker is likely filling Lerner's requirement of having to interview at least one minority candidate, per league rules. Sorry Tucker -- odds are that's the only reason you're receiving an interview.

In other head coaching rumors today, the OBR reported earlier today that the Browns asked for and received permission to interview New England Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels, as expected. The Plain Dealer reported that Tennessee Titans defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz will be brought in for an interview as well. Last, but not least, the Plain Dealer also speculated via sources that Mike Shanahan will most certainly be given consideration for the head coaching role. However, bringing in Shanahan -- a guy who would probably want control over his roster -- would conflict with Scott Pioli, if we do indeed hire him as our general manager.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

FO’s DVOA statistic has the Browns at 17th for Team Defense. They were hardly the problem.

Mel Tucker is a really good coach. He will get a job somewhere and do well. He obviously isn’t going to be the Browns head man, but he is a really talented individual. I would like to have seen his defense with some better athletes at linebacker.

by gahnki on Dec 31, 2008 7:50 PM EST reply actions

Didn’t we lead the league in takeaways.

by vegasbrown on Jan 1, 2009 11:22 AM EST reply actions

Just looked… we were 2nd in the AFC with 31 takeaways behind Baltimore with 34 and 3rd in the NFL Chicago had 32. Can you believe that! If our offense wasn’t so inept.

by vegasbrown on Jan 1, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions

the less time your offense is on the field, the more chances your defense has had creating turnovers.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Jan 1, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions

Come on! Just hop on my bandwagon – why ya got to be pointing out the obvious. :)

by vegasbrown on Jan 1, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions

I didn’t mean to give the impression that I personally thought Tucker should be canned; I was just implying that compared to Spagnuolo and Schwartz, hiring Tucker after just one year as a coordinator would come out of left field.

Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.

by Chris Pokorny on Jan 1, 2009 12:35 PM EST reply actions

But it’s just a matter of time until he is canned.

by vegasbrown on Jan 1, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions

Oui

Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.

by Chris Pokorny on Jan 1, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions

Rose Bowl comment

Nowhere else to put this, but Rey Mauluga is a joke. He hasn’t done ANYTHING for USC’s defense the entire game. The Browns better not even consider drafting him with their pick.

by gahnki on Jan 1, 2009 6:55 PM EST reply actions

Agree

Between him and Cushing, I like Cushing better.

Oh The People You Meet When Your Out of Ammo.........

by Juannieboy on Jan 1, 2009 7:36 PM EST up reply actions

Not even close. Someone will draft him because he is big and hits hard though. Second coming of the Boz.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 1, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions

This is one more abuse of league rules. If I put on blackface and claimed to be Art Shell, and I’m only 5-8, I’d have as much chance of getting this job as Mel Tucker. How much more trouble would it be for our Browns to interview a truly qualified African -American candidate?

by elsandito on Jan 1, 2009 10:01 PM EST reply actions

The Rooney Rule is no longer needed in the NFL. College maybe, but for the NFL it has become outdated.

With the likes of Herman Edwards, Tony Dungy, Lovie Smith, Mike Singletary, Mike Tomlin and Marvin Lewis, it has been proven that teams are not just looking to hire people based on skin color. 6 out of 32 isn’t a horrible ratio. I actually think the the Rooney Rule is now actually hurting black head coaching possibilities. I’m sure a lot of people hear that a black coach has an interview usually think, “Okay, there is that teams Rooney requirement” instead of saying “I bet he would make a good head coach”. That is a shame.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 1, 2009 11:40 PM EST up reply actions

I disagree. If absolutely nothing else, it gives minority candidates a chance to interview and gain experience from it for another job in the future.

by Fundamentals on Jan 2, 2009 7:44 AM EST up reply actions

Also

When the same minority candidates are being interviewed at different places, they become popular as the top minority candidates and then sooner or later they get hired. At the very least, the Rooney Rule helps spotlight those top minority candidates.

Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history

by maryrose on Jan 2, 2009 4:14 PM EST up reply actions

But isn’t it kind of insulting that the only reason a guy is getting an interview is because he is black? Isn’t that the same thing it is supposed to be stopping?

by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 2, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions

Black coaches don't feel that way

According to Floyd Keith, Director of the Black Coaches Association, Black coaches need exposure and interviewing experience, which is exactly what the Rooney Rule accomplishes.

Were it not for the Rooney Rule, it is fair to question whether Mike Tomlin would be a head coach right now. The Rooney Rule got him in the door. From there he knocked everybody over and won the job.

I do agree, though, that time will eventually render the rule unnecessary. I just don’t think we are there yet.

Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history

by maryrose on Jan 2, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions

~~Black~~ coaches need exposure and interviewing experience

Fixed that for you.

Were it not for the Rooney Rule, it is fair to question whether Mike Tomlin would be a head coach right now. The Rooney Rule got him in the door.

While that may be true (and I’m not saying it is), I would personally find it demeaning to have that said about me. Everyone wants their work to speak for itself.

Personally, I can’t speak for the hiring processes of NFL owners; it’s impossible for us to know whether or not the Rooney Rule is necessary anymore.

What we can know, however, is that it would probably be foolish for the Black Coaches Association to voluntarily relinquish any advantage they have in getting interviews.

by danvail on Jan 5, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions

You made some impressive points. However, they are all beside the point. We don’t only follow the rules that we believe to be timely. Until this rule is removed, we are better served following the spirit of the rule, rather than treating it poorly.

by elsandito on Jan 2, 2009 11:38 AM EST up reply actions

I’m not saying that the Rooney rule should not be followed, I just think it is no longer needed.

I think the last team that didn’t follow it got hammered by the NFL. Matt Millen, go figure.

Detroit Lions general manager Matt Millen is the only person punished for a Rooney Rule violation. He was fined $250,000 by then-Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, stemming from the process that led to the 2003 hiring of Steve Mariucci, who was fired in 2005.

by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 2, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions

How does everyone feel about making a FanPost on the draft that we “rec” up to the top?

That way, everyone can post their thoughts and opinions, and we can keep some form of continuity going for a little while. Right now, we have opinions on the draft spread throughout five or so different threads.

by gahnki on Jan 3, 2009 1:08 AM EST reply actions