Dawgs By Nature: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: The Record of Wrongs: Vanderbilt Commodores

George Kokinis Named Browns' General Manager

After weeks of waiting, the Cleveland Browns finally named George Kokinis as their new general manager on Sunday, just one week before the Super Bowl. Kokinis has spent the past 13 years with the Baltimore Ravens' organization, including the past six as the team's director of pro personnel.

"The Browns are excited to bring George back to Cleveland where he began his NFL career," said Browns owner Randy Lerner. "He is a tireless worker that has spent his entire career evaluating talent and knows the type of player it takes to be successful in this league and in our division."

"I would like to thank Randy Lerner for the extraordinary opportunity," said Kokinis. "Cleveland is a football town and I look forward to working alongside Eric Mangini and the rest of the organization."

In the end, Mangini/Kokinis is a far stretch from what we imagined towards the end of the season. Hopefully the pair works out for the best, because we missed out on a lot of the league's promising young head coaches this offseason.

0 recs  |  Comment 58 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Finally! Now the Browns can go about preparing for a very important draft this year. We can’t afford to miss with any of our top picks.

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

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 25, 2009 8:02 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

amen to that. it would be nice to get another first year difference maker like Thomas. this #5 pick is very important to team success, but also to kokinis’s success. if this first pick busts out, the second guessing may start early.

by Dawg Nuts on Jan 26, 2009 11:01 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Just keep on hiring our FO members

And you’ll eventually strike gold. Maybe you can convince Ozzie to switch over?

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jan 25, 2009 8:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don’t think it’s Kokonis anyone is concerned with.

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Jan 25, 2009 11:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

How is this not green?

by gahnki on Jan 26, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Give us back the horseshoe

And we’ll give you back… oh wait, you got to keep your colors.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jan 26, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Browns don’t play in Columbus!

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Actually, the Buckeyes played in the Horseshoe before the Baltimore Colts even existed. So you stole that too.

by gahnki on Jan 27, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

We got to keep the colors because the move was in violation of the Municipal stadium lease.

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Jan 28, 2009 10:31 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My goodness, let us all hope and pray that his face-making abilities is well suited for the role.

by kwoog on Jan 25, 2009 11:43 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

At this point, I would have been more worried if Kokonis had not become the GM. With Mangini wanting him so bad, Kokonis visiting our facilities for so long, and Lerner pretty much stating that cooperation of coach and GM was his top priority, we would have looked horrible if he didn’t take the job.

Mangini’s staff looks good. Real good. Hopefully we’ll have a functional system in place and some legitimate coaching and talent ASAP.

by rufio on Jan 26, 2009 12:41 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

it has begun.

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

by BringBackKosar on Jan 26, 2009 3:51 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Anybody see this?

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/ny-spmang6012151jan25,0,7833347.column?track=rss

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

by BringBackKosar on Jan 26, 2009 10:48 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

he didn’t quote a source, are we sure its true?

by Dawg Nuts on Jan 26, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don’t see the point of that at all. What the heck does that do?

by gahnki on Jan 26, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps it’s a metaphor for the idea that the current players have accomplished nothing. Whatever it is, it’s disrespectful and a bad PR move. Get used to that.

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Jan 28, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

This has to work.

I think we are, the city is, and more importantly the Cleveland Browns are tired of being pushed around in this league.
 These two gentlemen deserve a shot and lets hope they worked there ass off and bring the city a winner on a consistent basis.
 I can’t worry about who we did not hire at this point, this is our management team, and I hope to hell it works.

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

by Grockcubs on Jan 26, 2009 5:40 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I just watched the whole press conference. He was a pretty bad standup comedian, but I was impressed w/ his constant podium tapping. Seriously, anyone who thinks this guy is “more mature” or a better “face of the franchise” than Savage is nuts. Best case scenario is he isn’t too much of a drop off from Phil in talent acquisition (Thomas, Quinn, Rogers, Cribbs, Steinbach, Anderson, Edwards, Wright, Pool, McDonald, Jackson, Harrison, Williams, etc), and Mangini is a half way competent coach, something the Phil never had.

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 12:12 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Come on, using podium presence as a gauge for his talent as a gm? Seems a little premature. Give him a few minutes.

by joeee on Jan 27, 2009 2:49 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It was part sarcasm. “Podium presence” is seemingly the only reason fans wanted Savage fired, and it’s seemingly the reason Lerner fired him. This is a ridiculous notion which I’ve been railing against for a month. The one and only quality that is important in a GM is to set up an organization where good players are acquired. We got one of the youngest and best in the business at this, for “podium presence.”

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

“We got RID of one of the…”

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i don’t really want to get into this with you again, but your insistence that the only reason that either fans or Lerner wanted Phil out was b/c of his “podium presence” is absurd. under phil’s leadership, the organization was 24-40; that has much more to do with his ouster than any other single factor.

divining kokinis’ maturity or face-of-the-francise-ness from a single press conference is similarly absurd.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 27, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think it’s pretty clear that when Randy Lerner fired Savage for differences in “management philosophy” he was referring to emailing fans and throwing the coach under the bus. Nothing about getting in front of a crowd and speaking which I thought Savage was pretty good at

by Roger Dorn on Jan 27, 2009 12:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed. and most stories seem to indicate Mangini will be more the podium man anyway, and Kokinis will spend his time behind the curtain.

by APV on Jan 27, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So……Kokinis is like the Wizard of Oz?

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

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 27, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

well then this should be easy. all we have to do is click our heels and say “there’s no place like the Super Bowl.”

by Dawg Nuts on Jan 27, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, but this plan doesn’t work if Mangini takes the “the media is the devil” Bill B. approach.

Honestly, I don’t give a damn about news conferences, they can never talk to the media as far as I am concerned. Just put up the Ws.

I agree with Kwoog’s sentiment that the reason for Savage’s firing was neither his “podium presence” nor his talent evaluation. So much of the reasons that are given to the media are BS because people don’t want to throw other people under the bus. If I had to guess, I would say Savage was canned because of the email, the lack of faith on Lerner’s part that Savage could develop a chemistry or a good working relationship with any coach, Savage’s attitude, and/or Lerner’s desire for a clean slate.

Are any of those good reasons for firing a GM? I think it was too early to tell. But Savage got paid millions of dollars, so as long as Kokinis and Mangini get this team some talent and put up some wins I will forget about Phil really quick.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I forgot to mention that Savage also alienated to an extent Kellen Winslow. Combating with some of your best players is not a great idea either

by Roger Dorn on Jan 27, 2009 3:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

People who are good at acquiring NFL players don’t grow on trees. That’s basically my entire point. I hope these guys work out as much as anyone, but we’ll have really had lightening strike twice in a row if it happens. I’m not betting on it.

(And one last time for fun: The email to a fan is nothing. It means nothing, isn’t efficacious in any way, doesn’t signify anything, doesn’t illuminate anything. It’s literally as relevant to his job as GM as what he has for lunch.)

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 5:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

as i’ve said before, i think it’s still up for debate as to whether or not savage is good at acquiring NFL players.

leaving that aside, though, NFL success is not as simple as acquiring good players; rather, success is dependent upon acquiring NFL players who work in your system and can co-exist harmoniously (enough). see: Cowboys, Dallas; or conversely Patriots, New England. even if i stipulate that savage is good at acquiring players, it’s hard to argue that those players worked well toward the goal of winning games (24-40).

lastly, gratuitous usage of “SAT” words like efficacious doesn’t make your (minority) argument more robust…especially when using them incorrectly.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 27, 2009 6:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would add that there was also the issue of trading draft picks. Phil bet the farm on the moves he made in the last off season creating a team that was at least competitive. It’s a high-stakes move, and he lost.

One could argue that his plan was derailed by injuries, but if one did someone else would surely argue that other teams get through injuries because they have depth, and then it would just go back and forth – so let’s just skip that argument.

Phil gambled. Phil lost. I think that was the real problem. Personality issues just added to the problem.

by JustBob on Jan 27, 2009 9:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

We can’t know at this point if Phil lost his gamble. He traded a pick for Brady Quinn. I contend that Quinn looked good in limited action (part of which he was playing with that finger injury). The hope of the future of the franchise rests on Quinn’s shoulders if you ask most of the fan base. Savage also traded picks for Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams. The coaches used Williams in a way that didn’t suit his skills (this also could have been blamed on Savage because he didn’t get the type of player that Romeo wanted), and Rogers looked like one of the best linemen in the league. I would trade a 2nd and 3rd (and more) for Rogers right now. He also traded picks for a bunch of rookies who saw little-to-no action last year because the coaches refused to play them.

Other teams get through injuries because they have depth because they have been acquiring talented players for 5+ years. Phil got just enough talent to possibly compete if everything went just right.

Because we are the proof of Murphy’s Law that is the Cleveland Browns, whatever talent we did have got stepped on and had their heel cut open, blew out their knee, achilles, quad, both knees etc. Given another year or two, who knows what Savage would have been able to put together.

Regardless, you can’t be too hard on Savage’s draft decisions. One can criticize his free agency decisions a little more.

You can’t make an argument and then say “well I just won’t bring that up, lets not talk about what I just talked about”.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 10:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don’t begrudge him for trading a 3rd rounder for someone who he thought was a starter caliber football player. He also assumed, correctly, that some of the picks he traded away would be recouped and then some by dealing one of our two QBs, b/c there’s no way they could co-exist for a third year.

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 11:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would contend that the Pats use the players they get in a way that suits their skills best, not simply that they bring in guys who fit their system. They do that too, but whoever they get they use well. Also, I would contend that Moss not only didn’t fit NE’s existing offensive system, but also changed his attitude because of Belichick and Brady, not because of anything the “GM” did. You can’t say we should have picked him up. The reason he turned his career around was to be a part of a great team, not to turn a team into a great team.

It wouldn’t have hurt Romeo to line Rucker up in the slot instead of Dinkins, to let Corey Williams shoot a gap (and to keep him at a nice 315 lbs instead of whatever he played at), to move Wimbley and Alex Hall around and get them to the QB unblocked once in a while, to have Jerome Harrison catch the ball and run out of the shotgun more, to not try to run Jamal Lewis outside the tackles, to better utilize the left side of our offensive line’s athleticism, to let Cribbs have a run/pass option in a meaningful game, to throw to Winslow more, to have DA throw down the field where the reward could possibly balance out his occasional yet ever-present mistakes, to not put DA in an offense constructed for Quinn, to run a few more play-action deep passes on first down, to throw a screen or two when you are playing Jim Johnson and it’s 3rd and over 5 and you know he is sending some ridiculous blitz and your Qb isn’t going to even get a 3-step drop to get rid of the ball because everyone in the world knows that the blitz is coming and that an unblocked rusher is coming at the QB…

Just because it is a “minority” position doesn’t make it wrong.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 10:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the minority position to which i was referring is the one that you refute quite well just a few posts south of here. i was saying that he’s in the minority regarding the total irrelevance of the email to the fan. think about your various lines of work…if you told a client to “f off”, wouldn’t there be consequences? and serious ones, at that?

as to the pats, i think we’re sort of saying the same thing. isn’t using someone well the same as effectively deploying them in your system? point being, the pats don’t switch to a 4-3 for certain players.

and the offensive criticism you level above is certainly warranted…but the guy working the offensive puppet strings was chud, savage’s hand-picked offensive guru.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 28, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If a client says idiotic things and, for example, will only offer you 1/2 what your goods and services are worth, you most certainly tell them to “f off.”

You understand the EFFICACIOUS qualities of an NFL GM as well as your avatar understood them for Marxism.

by kwoog on Jan 29, 2009 11:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

all i can say is i’m glad that you don’t have anything to do with any of my clients, b/c that answer is just patently ridiculous. beyond sanity ridiculous, in fact. it goes to further discredit your blind shining of savage…without admitting so much as the smallest of faults.

does your last name begin with “s”? and end with “avage”, perhaps?

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 30, 2009 12:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Calling this particular fan a “client” is just misleading to me. It’s not like this was done publically, or he has to always be selling Brand Browns to us, if ever. Win freaking games and I don’t care if you’re the Wizard of Oz or Bobby Knight or Lenny Bruce behind closed doors. And of course in less public settings business deals get heated.

We’re talking about the most violent game on earth, and talking privately within minutes of a close game ending where our the season was on the line. Do I see the point that it shouldn’t have happened? Of course. Does it mean anything that it did? Of course not. I had unanimous responses from all my friends (non-Browns fans, i live in Chicago) that they all loved that Savage said that (I’m 28, so I appreciate the possible demographic differences).

In the end, I don’t want to beat a dead horse and I truly want Kokinis and Mangini to succeed. I just think this was done prematurely, and the lack of appreciation for stability is very disconcerting to me. If the allegations in the other thread by the O&B Report are proven by a few reasonable sources, I’ll agree with the firing immediately. But I have multiple reasons to see through those charges, as I described in the double post in both threads.

by kwoog on Jan 30, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Once I use them incorrectly, I’ll let you know.

by kwoog on Jan 27, 2009 11:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

see, now that doesn’t make any sense. if you use them incorrectly, i’d imagine you’re not doing it on purpose, which would imply you don’t know you’re incorrect and couldn’t let me know. i’ll keep my eyes peeled for you…

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 28, 2009 11:26 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It makes sense b/c I wouldn’t use a word if I didn’t know what it meant.

by kwoog on Jan 29, 2009 11:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Savage’s email at least meant something from a public-relations standpoint. The fact that we are even talking about it means it meant something. I’m not saying it illuminated anything (and I certainly don’t care about it anymore), but it definitely didn’t look good for the franchise. I guarantee Lerner didn’t look upon the email (and subsequent media reports of it) in a positive light.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 11:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly. Why neither you nor I, nor most people here, probably care, evidently some people do. Namely, the man who hired Savage and controls the team probably didn’t think it looked good for his team.

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

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 28, 2009 5:39 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Did spygate look good for the Patriots? No, but Bill’s still there. Obviously Savage doesn’t have the resume of Belichick, but his crime wasn’t in the same universe as far as egregiousness either.

by kwoog on Jan 29, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Savage isn’t just a horse-trader, nor should a GM be a talent scout exclusively. He is the decision-maker of the entire organization. It’s his responsibility to build a functional, methodical franchise that has a unifying philosophy and cogent chain of command. Sound familiar to other succesful organizations? Maybe Kokinis and Mangini can establish some order among the children who have been running the brownies for the past 9 years.

by joeee on Jan 28, 2009 5:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It takes a cohesive organization with a unifying philosophy to identify your main target in free agency and swoop in and steal them from another team that wanted them badly and offered just as much if not more money (Baxter and Bentley).

It takes a cohesive organization with a unifying philosophy to make three picks and two draft trades within 2 hours of each other on draft day to get the top two players on your board, as well as a starting CB.

It takes a cohesive organization with a unifying philosophy to trade, within the first hours of the free agency period, a 2nd rounder, a starting CB and a 3rd rounder for one of the 3 best DT in the game and another highly talented DL who was so coveted by his team that he was franchised.

The organization he created received unanimously positive buzz in getting a franchise LT and QB in the same draft. The organization he created shocked everyone and went 10-6 in 2007. The organization he created rewarded the guys that got us there afterward. The organization he created made moves to get Rogers and Williams that were widely lauded by almost every kind of source, whether media or fellow NFL personnel (Tomlin, Dungy, Millen giving us props). And then the organization he created started 2-3, losing to both eventual AFC Championship Game teams and having just beaten the unbeaten Super Bowl Champs.

At no point during these 20 months did anyone even consider questioning the “cohesion” and “unity” of the Browns. Perhaps they questioned the moves (keeping DA, thin in the secondary, giving up the 08 draft), but no one questioned the unity. What happens next? Bad DA shows up for good, inexperienced coordinators go through their first taste of adversity while being led by a complete moron, 6 weeks later we’re putting a QBs coach under center.

Savage’s org didn’t become disjointed in 6 weeks. But fairweather, scapgoat seeking fans do.

by kwoog on Jan 29, 2009 11:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Fairweather fans?!?!?! Who here is a fairweather fan??

(And I don’t think there is such a thing as a fairweather Browns fan — at least not since the late 80’s).

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

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 30, 2009 6:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Fairweather when it pertains to Savage.

by kwoog on Jan 30, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I always liked Phil from a talent acquiring perspective, but I also wasn’t heaping the praises on him that a lot of people did. Being the champions of March and April does not guarantee anything. It felt like every year we were the big winners on day 1 in free agency, but it really doesn’t matter until you get it done on the field. Pittsburgh has long understood this, they got the right talent through the draft and retained the players worth keeping.

This doesn’t mean that I am not for the trade for Shaun Rogers, but we need to be focused on acquiring hard-nosed football players through the draft

If the team made the playoffs and played solid football, then I would have been totally behind Phil

by Roger Dorn on Jan 30, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Those were Phil Savage’s draft picks and free agent signings, not the sign of a healthy organization. The Browns had the whiff of headless chickens. Poor internal communication, non-existent chain of command, a series of moronic PR moves. The Browns were a bombshell with some good draft picks and two-four good free-agent pickups, and that’s the reality. And if you’re accusing anyone who here disagrees with you on Savage’s mismagement of the organization of being a fairweather fan, I’d take a look at the Brownies record over the past 10 years, as Brad alluded too. Remember: the Browns aren’t good, and haven’t been since the late 80s. Nor have they shown sustainable signs of life – yet. Let’s not get too married to our FO until they give us an intelligent, quality product.

by joeee on Jan 30, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My entire point was that Savage gave us that. It’s debatable but pointless argument.

Go Browns and Mangini/Kokinis.

by kwoog on Jan 30, 2009 8:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Browns had the whiff of headless chickens.

Care to elaborate on that?

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:32 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

GM/Coach on different philosophical planes, GM/med staff on different…staph planes, excessive gambling with draft picks which is a pretty questionable long-term strategy.

by joeee on Jan 31, 2009 3:07 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Podium presence probably had a little less to do with it than telling a fan to F off. But I could be wrong.

by gahnki on Jan 27, 2009 4:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Savage decision came because of the expectations we had this year not coming through. Lerner needed scapegoats because of the tremendous dissapointment the fanbase felt this year.

Whether it was the right decision or not, we’ll see, but podium presence had nothing to do with it. It came down to this disaster of a season.

"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.

by rose_11 on Jan 27, 2009 6:07 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

Acme Packing Company
Replay: Tracy Porter's Super Bowl INT Return
Mocking The Draft
Morgan Burnett NFL Draft scouting report
The Phinsider
A quick look at free agent tight ends

Browns Links


Executive Editor

Dbn_small Chris Pokorny

Moderators

Pryor_small Buckeye Brad