Randy Lerner Wasn't Kidding; Reportedly Fires GM George Kokinis, but Daboll Staying
by Chris Pokorny on Nov 2, 2009 8:47 PM EST
in General News
Email
PrintI don't think anybody saw this one coming.
According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Pro Football Talk, and other various sources, the Cleveland Browns have shown general manager George Kokinis the door after having the position for around nine months. Kokinis was reportedly escorted by security from the team's practice facility in Berea. The firing comes during the team's bye week, and more changes could be on the horizon. According to team owner Randy Lerner yesterday, firing head coach Eric Mangini will not be included in those changes.
The Plain Dealer had the following tidbit:
One league source said "Kokinis is a great guy who does not deserve this. He is taking the fall for the team's problems and it's not right.''
With Kokinis gone though, does this indicate that Mangini's chances of lasting past this season are somewhat slim? If you recall, Kokinis was hand-picked by Mangini to be the Browns' general manager. Mangini and Kokinis came as a package deal of sorts, and if one goes, the other might not be too far behind.
When Romeo Crennel was fired at the end of last season, many coaching candidates were available for the Browns. Not many people thought Mangini would be our head coach, and it was his "name" that first introduced the possibility of Kokinis as general manager. Here is a post from Dawgs By Nature back in January, when Randy Lerner was suddenly "so impressed" with Mangini's interview:
(January 6, 2009) - Link
Eric Mangini's interview with team owner Randy Lerner went over so well last week that the following has seemed to occur:
- Scott Pioli, who seemed like a definite hire after the firing of Phil Savage, isn't even on the Browns' radar anymore, and is close to accepting an offer from the Kansas City Chiefs.
- No other head coaches are being scheduled for interviews, and it doesn't sound as if serious inquiries have been made to Mike Shanahan or Marty Schottenheimer (two veteran coaches).
- Despite only having three years of experience with the New York Jets as a head coach, Mangini will get the say on who our next general manager is -- Baltimore Ravens director of pro personnel George Kokinis.
- Mangini would receive similar authority and/or respect that Bill Belichick has with the Patriots.
I'd love to hear just what in the world Mangini's sales pitch to Lerner was, especially since there were rumors after he was fired that many executives in the league considered him a "rat" due to Spy Gate.
How quickly things have changed.
Regarding Brian Daboll
According to the Plain Dealer, Eric Mangini indicated today that he will not relieve offensive coordinator Brian Daboll of his duties and believes he can still grow into his role. Instead, he'll allow quarterbacks coach Carl Smith to have more input on offense. Bummer. That doesn't mean Lerner won't overrule Mangini though, right?
We'll have more updates as they come along.
625 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We didnt have enough time to make enough Kotnkus(sp) jokes. Oh well. Kokhinis, so long, we hardly knew ya.
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 2, 2009 8:51 PM EST reply actions
again, i don’t really see why this makes it that much more likely that mangini is gone. maybe this is what it took for him to stay. ultimatum of sorts?
he always seems to show up when there’s something negative going on. typical ratbird, rubbing things in.
MaLoR
has been on hiatus for three weeks. So your point is all has been positive for the browns these past three weeks?
by steelerstyle on Nov 3, 2009 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
I don't know...
It sounds like “Boy’s hole” Is that gum in your mouth? Spit it out.
"The ball always seems to find Ed Reed...The man is a menace"
by UMBC Oriole fan on Nov 3, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
This was easily Kotnkus’s(sp) easiest paycheck.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 8:57 PM EST up reply actions
WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
I’m trying to read as much as possible into the Carl Smith bit. Maybe this is a shot across Daboll’s bow, and if he doesn’t miraculous improve with help from Smith, he’s out?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 9:39 PM EST up reply actions
At least we’ve come to the conclusion there is a problem.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:40 PM EST up reply actions
Unreal. The Browns desperately need someone with NFL experience to come in and be president. I’ll suggest Bill Cowher and Mike Shanahan.
This is asinine. What makes the AFC North so different that a coach could be successful elsewhere but not here?
We are a large defensive division. With 2 1/2 strong teams (Bengals are 1/2 I don’t know what to make of them) you have to be strong, forceful and a defensive minded coach. Granted they also have good O’s but it’s D first.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:27 PM EST up reply actions
So Shanahan, who has won two SBs and has a pretty good overall record can’t compete here because there are good defenses in the AFC North?
Exactly. But I also didn’t explain it well enough and don’t know how to do it any better. Sorry.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:31 PM EST up reply actions
However, the frontrunners of the AFC North Bal and Pitt both run the ball very effectively. Mike Shanahan may be the best coach out there for running the ball. How many different nameless backs did he turn into 1000 yd. rushers?
However, you’re right, his defensive stats were not great, and it would be very difficult to be competitive against the other AFC north teams without being a hard-nosed and defensive centered team.
Historically yes. But last season and this current one we are far from an effective running team. IMO
by steelerstyle on Nov 3, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
I couldn’t be any more wrong on this. Selective memory, I guess (likely a result of Shanahan’s Broncos twice getting knocked out of the playoffs by AFC North teams).
Here’s Shanahan’s record against the AFC North since Cleveland returned in 1999:
2008 cle w 34 30
2007 pit w 31 28
2006 bal w 13 03
cle w 17 07
pit w 31 20
cin w 24 23
2005 bal w 12 10
pit*l 17 34
2004 cin l 10 23
2003 cin w 30 10
pit w 17 14
bal l 06 26
cle w 23 20
2002 bal l 23 34
2001 bal l 13 20
2000 cle w 44 10
cin l 21 31
bal*l 03 21
An 11 and 7 record vs. the AFC North. More often than not, his defense gave up a lot of points, but the offense put up even more. Who knows? I’m not a big fan of Shanahan’s style of football, but he’s a consistent winner, and winning on a consistent basis is what we’re after.
I’m not sure this is true.
He never said that he didn’t want to come to the Browns, he said he wasn’t ready to return to coaching. There is a difference.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 2, 2009 9:32 PM EST up reply actions
I’d put money on that he’ll never hold a job with the Browns organization in the future.
That doesn’t prove anything, I’m just trying to express my level of confidence on this.
I think it is slim also, but with a desperate owner, you never know.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 2, 2009 9:38 PM EST up reply actions
What does the President of the team do and why dont we have one?
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 2, 2009 10:50 PM EST up reply actions
Does this absolve Lerner?
Just wondering if this gives fans some hope that the owner is listening and absolve him of a perceived or real nonchalant attitude?
As K was claimed of doing nothing, Lerner firing him solves nothing. Short term at least.
Dumb fans will applaud, smart fans will be dumbfounded.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:17 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, but what if Lerner’s clearing that seat for someone who’s going to be integral to the organization in a positive way? This firing is just part one. Part two is who comes in next.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
This is where we will see who exactly lerner was talking about with all of that “credible, experienced leader” stuff.
At first glance this moves seems extremely weird, but i agree we can’t really judge until we see who the replacement is.
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
I laughed. So I guess I’m F’d in the head fan.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 2, 2009 10:58 PM EST up reply actions
Not in my book. Kokinis was just a figurehead it seems. He was Mangini’s puppet, and of the new regime, in my opinion he definitely would not be the first person I would blame for the inadequacy of the Browns.
Hahaha, Lerner is a complete and total joke? Absolve? This completely and wholly indicts him as the most inept Manager/Owner in professional sports.
We will not win as long as he owns the team, that is certain.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
No, it’s a “everything I said about him being a joke has been confirmed” laugh.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Al Davis made a Superbowl in the last ten years, and at least he has a cohesive formula… that leads to suckitude, granted, but at least it’s not schizophrenic. Lerner is a joke, Davis is just wrong a lot.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Dan Snyder. Mike Brown.
Lerner is waaaaay down the list.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 2, 2009 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
Again, I don’t know how you can look at those organizations, and then the Browns, and say they’re not better. They have philosophies (spend money like it’s going out of style and extreme loyalty/zero scouts, respectively), so at least they’re consistent. Both the Redskins and Bengals are far less laughable.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Redskins are by far worse off then us.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
Firing a GM 6 months after a draft? A GM your head coach hand picked? A regime you specifically targeted to be “in sync” with each other?
There is no more laughable organization in professional sports, and that is 95% Lerner’s doing. I’m not cleveland.com’er, but I know business and management. Sometimes the simplest answer…
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
by kwoog on Nov 2, 2009 9:44 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think it is possible that Kokinis/Mangini/Daboll are bad for the Browns and we were heading toward more ineptitude. But I highly doubt it.
There is absolutely no legitimate evaluation you can perform on Kokinis with less than a year under his belt in what is a no-doubt-about-it half-decade+ year rebuild.
At some point, we need continuity for continuity’s sake. Kokinis seemed to understand that this team was a salvage job and was inhereting a burning pile of trash leftover from Savage’s farm-betting enterprises. This firing indicates that Lerner thought this season had any meaning attached to it, which is a joke.
I agree completely. Listening to Grossi now and he said “you don’t just have continuity for continuity’s sake, you have to find the right guy.” I disagree. The 32nd worst FO in football, given continuity, is better than our last 10 years.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I’d like to add that it’s possible there is more to the story than we know – that Kokinis was completely non-existent, moronic, cancerous, whatever. Maybe he was Mangini’s puppet. But then why make the hire in the first place? How in god’s name could this not come up in the vetting process? Perhaps it’s the ludicrous timing that makes this so outlandish. The timing leads a casual observer to believe that “fan opinion” affected the managerial decisions of serious professionals – which is, of course, child’s play..How can such terrible moves – either the hiring or the firing – still occur on the heals of a decade of football wilderness?
You two are just the picture of optimism, aren’t you?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 10:00 PM EST up reply actions
You have got to recognize a bad thing when you see it or you’ll never know what is good and dear to you.
We have been screwed way harder by the Browns from 99-09 than by Modell in 96.
I did. And then realized the amount of vaulger language I used would have gotten my post deleted, and perhaps myself banned. So I simplified my post with a little hyperbole.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 3, 2009 10:21 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Come on, man. It’s not about the three years of loss. It’s the way Modell treated the city and the fans with such utter disrespect. It is unforgivable, and being a Modell apologist is tantamount to Yankee fandom in my book. The current state of affairs is sad and atrocious, but at least there is no malicious intent.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Nov 3, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
Okay, I need to clarify that I’m not a Modell apologist. Sorry for even suggesting that.
I think it is reasonable to say that we haven’t really had football in Cleveland for 14 years, and our current “org” is responsible for that.
I didn’t figure you were a Modell apologist, sorry if that was so strongly worded.
I’m pretty much with you here. This team is pathetic, and the reason why I have largely distanced myself from the NFL in general these past few years. But I think it’s still important to not conflate the two situations. What Modell did is about as low as you can go in sports.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
The Browns have been bad most of the time for the last ten years. But give me a break. We aren’t the most losing team in the decade. We have more winning seasons in the last 10 years than the Bengals, Lions, Cardinals, Bills, Texans. And the same number as the 49ers. The hyperbole of the Browns suckiness needs to stop.
We have had a really bad, bottom tier/ NFL team this decade. It sucks. But, that in no way is even remotely comparable to ripping our team away from us. Not even close.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.
You like the Reds?
We need Johnny Bench in our FO.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
Johnny Bench is an asshole. No one who has ever met him thinks otherwise.
by golanbatrac on Nov 2, 2009 10:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Completely Agree
It is undeniable though, that he was a hell of a catcher.
"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.
Quite. And an AFC Championship game in 2003 right?
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
Ah yes, almost forgot, even better point, perhaps my nod goes to Davis than in this comparison of crap.
it should go to john gruden, notice after he left, the raiders began to suck again.
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 10:39 PM EST up reply actions
This move is beyond dumb. Beyond dumb. So shrill and dumb I’m at a loss for words. A stupid fan walkout and a crap record for a team with no talent means a sacrificial lamb fall-guy – wow. We suck so much more now than we did yesterday. Now literally every aspect of the Browns is a total joke.
I’m dead serious: www.dawgsbynature.com is the most legitimate aspect of the Browns, and it’s a fansite.
A janitor gets fired at my organization and he’s escorted out by security. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s SOP but it makes for nice headlines.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 9:44 PM EST up reply actions
management 101… set up the fall guy (kokinis) and the rest of the dominos will fall,
ie. offensive coach, defensive coach, finally, mangina. Thus, you appease the fans, you do not lose credibility and/or revenue. hire a quality coach after the upcoming talks (cowher, shanihan, schotinheimer) and become the hero of cleveland by establishing a credible franchise the league will admire once again.
by D. W. SAM L on Nov 2, 2009 9:36 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
this comment lost credibility after the word mangina
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 10:40 PM EST up reply actions
Good point. I’m trying to take the “Carl Smith will hold your hand if that’s what you need” as a step in the right direction, hopefully to be followed up with an axing.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 9:46 PM EST up reply actions
Ha! With Rufio backing me up nobody can defeat me! But agree.
Unless you’re Mangini himself, Shh.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
Um, cause we’re the WORST team in the NFL. Our “head coach” sees progress in a QB with a GAME rating of TEN!!! HIS QBs rating for the SEASON is 12 points BEHIND JaMarcus Russell, for christssake! Yeah couldn’t be a coaching issue, must be the GM. You Mangini apologists AMAZE me!
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 5:58 AM EST up reply actions
DA is not playing well, therefore the coaches are terrible? And not just some of the coaches are terrible, but so many of our coaches are bad as to be compared to the underwater portion of an iceburg? I personally think Rob Ryan is doing a very good job.
And to not have an opinion on this, but to KNOW it? I was honestly wondering if this person knew something the general public did not.
I am not entirely thrilled by Mangini, but in his role as HC, his impact is much harder to see on the field vis-a-vis an offensive coordinator or defensive coordinator. I can and have shown exactly how Daboll’s construction of the offense is not up to par.
The players seem to have “bought in” as Jamal Lewis said when he announced his pending retirement, so that’s one small piece of evidence that Mangini was at least somewhat effective. Is he truly effective? I have no way of knowing. But anyone at HC would clearly need a year at least to turn this team around.
Thanks for being a jerk, though.
I think this is step one. Step two will be hiring “the football guy”. Keep checking this site in the next couple of days. Unless Lerner was just blowing smoke after the game Sunday, he already has a round in the chamber and is ready to pull the trigger (that is, hire the new guy).
Also, I can’t see that this is good for Mangini. One more thing after the hiring of Kosar to watch him, comments on Sunday, etc. It is hard to see where Lerner has any faith left in Mangini.
Brownsyup
I’m thinking the same thing, Brownsyup. We’re all reacting to the firing, but the hiring is at least as important. Let’s see what Lerner has in mind….
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 9:48 PM EST up reply actions
With the franchise in such a state of chaos and turmoil, I guess it shouldn’t be surprising that the fan base is also. However, it strikes me as somewhat humorous that the hue and cry is that Lerner “should do something.” But, as soon as he does something, the cry is “something, but not that!”. I think Lerner has made a lot of mistakes, but I welcome any action which might lead to long-term improvement. If Kokinis was seen as an impediment to that, then out with him. Same for Mangini, Daboll, whoever.
brownsup, could be a very interesting bye week, but i think lerner will hold out till years end before letting mangina go.
1. Reply button
2. If you say Mangina again, I will find you and slap you.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:51 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
Good God, man…Don’t offend the ballboy!
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:24 AM EST up reply actions
He’s offending rational discourse, not the coach. Mangini could not care less, I’m sure.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
Thank you. But…
1. No subject line unless absolutely needed!
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:00 PM EST up reply actions
This is Kokinis finest day in his life. Just think now he can get a real job. Mangini ran the draft, made the trades, picked his coaches, so what in the world did he do?
I am glad for him. The problem is the two problems are still here, Daboll and Mangini.
Kokinis essentially got a free paycheck.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
Boy, we’re we way off on the over/under.
http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2009/1/28/738660/on-savage-s-firing#11790183
As bad as the Bucs are this year he actually is a pretty good coach, they almost made the playoffs and now they are being challenged by a UFL team?!
by blockersave93 on Nov 2, 2009 10:07 PM EST up reply actions
In Hindsight, Ryan would have been amazing.
I was so high on him during that draft. Why does no one listen.
Or did he get picked before our pick?
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:08 PM EST up reply actions
…Or was that the pick we gave to the Cowboys?
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
Right, right. Once again, that was also the pick we spent on BQ.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:12 PM EST up reply actions
Candidate list:
Marty Schottenheimer
Bill Cowher
Mike Shanahan
Ernie Accorsi
John Gruden
Bernie Kosar (gulp!)
Bill Parcells
Anyone else…?
Bill Parcells is exactly what this team needs
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 10:43 PM EST up reply actions
i don’t think he would, but i can dream can’t i?
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 11:09 PM EST up reply actions
There are no reasons at all for potentially successful coaches / managers to come to Cleveland. It’s like a kamikaze mission.
You forget that all these guys have massive egos. They think they can turn any team in to a winner. I don’t think any of them will be scared of the Browns job if it’s offered. Now, if they have to choose between the Browns and another team with a better foundation in place then they Browns may lose out.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 2, 2009 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
Then again, the man who brings a SuperBowl to Cleveland will be a God among men and forever beloved by one of the largest fanbases in the world. The guy who brings a SuperBowl to Seattle or Tampa Bay or Buffalo? Not so much.
by golanbatrac on Nov 2, 2009 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
True. And he did just that, 11-5.
I just see Cleveland with less appeal for some reason. I’m not one to believe in curses, but do some of these coaches?
I don’t know, that’s probably a dumb point to base an argument off of. I just have a feeling, guys like that would never want to come here.
Back! Get back! Don’t drink from the toilet! Ugh.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
Has anyone heard anything about Mike Holmgren getting back into football?
by Western Reserve on Nov 2, 2009 10:40 PM EST up reply actions
Jim Harbaugh will probably be an NFL coach sometime in the near furure, but I doubt he gets a look as GM.
i didn’t mean GM. i was talking about a coach. that is, if mangini is fired at the end of the season.
Us Cardinal fans like Jim a lot.
That would be sweet if he coached the Browns, but I’m not seeing it happen.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 2, 2009 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
Leslie Frazier
Jim Harbaugh
Kyle Shanahan
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 2, 2009 11:01 PM EST up reply actions
I really don’t view this as a good move. Kokinis is the weak link here? In my mind, if you are firing someone, get rid of the weak link or the person who disrupts the chemistry the most, OR get rid of the whole regime.
Even if we did that, it would be at least another draft and another offseason before we could even think about putting a solid team on the field.
This baffles me.
the firing is very strange, but as has already been said, who he hires to fill the position will tell us a lot more about whats going on here
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions
this is false. we can judge this move already. Either it or the hiring are monumental failures. there’s no need to wait on anything.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
exactly, we don’t know which one was the failure until we see who replaces him, therefore you can’t judge this move yet.
i think you meant “true” instead of false.
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
It’s false that what we need to wait and see “what is going on here.” What’s going on here is horrendous management.
Don’t tell me what I mean.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
i meant we didn’t know what was going on with this particular decision. what if bill parcells is hired to replace him? would it still be bad management?
to be clear, i think its probably bad management, but i don’t know for sure yet.
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
Okay, I understand what you mean. Depending on what’s happened in the organization since he was hired, it certainly may be the right move right now. But if it is, it means it was the wrong move before. Which adds to a long list of wrong moves by the Lerners. Thus, why on Earth would anyone think they’ll get it right this time?
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
There is something of a “gotcha!” element to criticizing Lerner equally for the hiring of an inept Kokinis than for the firing of a sacrificial-lamb Kokinis. Either way, you get to be indignant.
But at the same time, if the reports are true that Kokinis was such a non-entity and allowed to hide and not participate in the draft, you have to wonder if football execs are just the least talented people on Earth.
Sure, half of this situation is a mistake. But which half makes all the difference.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
It makes no difference at all. It just means there’s no reason to have any faith in management going forward.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
So if the new hire is a winner, it doesn’t matter? Please explain your logic.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 11:13 PM EST up reply actions
what influence would the GM have on this team anyway? The GM is a personnel manager. Mangini is the one making all of the personnel decisions so to be honest I don’t see the need to even pick another one up
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 2, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
I think the obvious implication is that Mangini won’t have that power going forward if they bring in someone else.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 2, 2009 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
So if that was the case then why not just allow kokinus to do his job? There are no obvious implications in this situation. Unless they felt Mangini would still hold most of the influence with him being there
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 2, 2009 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
I keep reading these rumors that Kokinis was basically AWOL and didn’t even really know what was going on with the team. (Presumably that means it was all Mangini.) If true, just telling Kokinis to do his job probably wasn’t going to cut it.
You’d think the new hire will actually be doing the job and won’t be a Potemkin GM who’s only there to make it look like Mangini isn’t running everything. Some degree of independence also seems likely.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 2, 2009 11:55 PM EST up reply actions
Accorsi. Wow. Interesting times.
And yes, it’s hard not to see that as an ENTIRELY different relationship!
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:08 AM EST up reply actions
My logic is an uninterrupted history of making bad moves by Lerner. Logic dictates that the next hire will not be a winner, but another loser (or will be fired before any reasonable amount of time is given to build a winner).
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Along those lines...
I agree, and I don’t think you can leave part of the failed regime in place, and expect an outsider to come in and turn things around. This needs to be a move where Lerner turns over control to a proven football guy, and he is given the authority to assemble a coaching staff and roster and team that suit his style. Floyd Reese?
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:44 AM EST up reply actions
Excellent point, although I don’t know who Floyd Reese is, and I’m too lazy to Google him right now.
Former GM of the Titans. Left (unhappily, by all accounts) after last season.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
I do understand the pessimism, kwoog. I prefer to wait and see if maybe we’re learning something before giving up, though. Keeps me from hitting the bottle too early in the day….
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 7:10 AM EST up reply actions
On the other hand, the “blind pig” (or sometimes “blind squirrel”) law of probability reminds us that there is always a chance that the next hire will be a good one. In other words, make enough bad choices and eventually one of them might turn out to be less bad, or even good.
I was just about to bring this up. So Lerner sucks at hiring people, and can get it right about 25% of the time. Isn’t he about due for a “hit”?
Not to be an ass, but how?
And if this was sarcastic, I appologize ahead of time.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 3, 2009 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
I like what he’s done personnel wise. While it’s far too early to grade the ‘09 draft, the early returns look promising. Dumping Sean Jones and Kevin Schaeffer, and trading Winslow, and Edwards was the right thing to do. I’m happy that we have a boatload of draft picks in 2010.
We have two pics in the top 64. Rarely do impact players come from outside of that.
And his main job is the product on the field. It’s in arguable he’s gotten less from his talent, not more.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
We have two pics in the top 64. Rarely do impact players come from outside of that.
There are impact players outside of the top 64, though. There are also many, many good players who may not make an immediate impact but can develop into impact players or, at the very least, solid contributors.
While we should always be on the lookout for impact players, it’s the solid contributors who make or break a team. A core of solid, well coached players is what this team has desperately needed since expansion. Without that core of players, we get what we’ve had for the last 10 years — a ‘rebuild’ every three years and a winning season every five.
And his main job is the product on the field. It’s in arguable he’s gotten less from his talent, not more.
It’s true that he has less talent on the field this year than Romeo had last year. It’s also true that the defense is improving and the special teams are far better than last year. The offense is abysmal, but that’s to be expected when you ship two Pro Bowl players to other teams and replace them with rookies.
The important thing to remember is that we now have the picks and the cap room to improve this team. Had Savage made the right call at the end of the ‘07 season and not hamstrung the franchise with overlong, ridiculous free agent contracts (Williams, Stallworth) and had he done better in the 08 draft, maybe we wouldn’t have needed to blow the roster up this year.
Kokinis is the weak link here?
No, but it’s a political move — Lerner firing a shot across Mangini’s bow. The move is a message to the head coach: shape this team up and do it sooner than later.
by Western Reserve on Nov 2, 2009 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
You might not like what it means, but that’s what it means.
And, no, not with a magic wand. He’s already done enough damage and will probably be canned.
by Western Reserve on Nov 2, 2009 11:03 PM EST up reply actions
the point is why bother sending that particular message if there’s literally no way for mangini to shape up the team?
by notthatnoise on Nov 2, 2009 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
If there’s no way for Mangini to shape up this team, that’s an admission of the regime’s failure.
by Western Reserve on Nov 2, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
Uh, I’m not really so sure it is.
It isn’t like Mangini can fire Daboll, plug in a good OC and then have a second training camp to install a new offense. Not right now, anyway. We can get better this season, sure.
But if you think we are going to look like a competent football team this year regardless of who is coaching, you are mistaken. We could have Ditka, Walsh, and Lombardi coaching and it wouldn’t matter until next season at the very earliest.
I think the point is, Mangini was given total control, he completely revised the roster, brought in ‘his players’, had carte blanche control over personnel decisions, and this is the mess we get. That was his waving of his magic wand and it didn’t work. The point is, the team should be moving forward, but they are MUCH WORSE than last year’s team. The offense is absolutely anemic. Less than 100 yards passing in THREE of the last FOUR games. Positively pathetic at ANY level! I don’t think anybody expected a team that would go deep into the playoffs this year, probably no expectations to even make the playoffs, but nobody could have expected us to be worse. This is where the current management group, headed by the “head coach”, is at fault. At this rate, we are regressing, we would be WORSE next year!
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:39 AM EST up reply actions
Constantly using capital letters makes your comment look like a typical message board rant that people are going to ignore. If you make intelligent comments then people will understand what you are saying; you don’t need to capitalize half of your words to make it look like you’re shouting.
Capitals or no capitals, he makes a great point, thats what matters. If we were all concerned with grammer we should all go to a English 101 board. Goodness.
I think some great points were made there, too.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 9:36 AM EST up reply actions
It has nothing to do with grammar. It’s about not talking like a typical message-board idiot.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, and I don’t see any great points that he made. All he did was rant about how bad this team is. We all know that — what exactly did he say to add anything to the conversation?
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
His point was that Mangini was given control of this team, and it has obviously failed. Lerner made the call and the GM is removed, a GM that Mangini hand picked. Yes he did go on and rant about the team. However his initial point was a good one and spot on.
Right, that was the point, and it was a good one and a fair one.
It’s about not talking like a typical message-board idiot.
Why don’t you try being a little more constructive yourself, Mr. Moderator?
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
Like what? Please show me examples of me ranting like an idiot if you’re going to make that claim.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
It has nothing to do with grammar. It’s about not talking like a typical message-board idiot.
I wouldn’t expect a Mod to respond in this manner.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Really? Is it really necessary to be so antagonistic? Especially when every new poster is immediately attacked for, let’s see behaving like a message board idiot.
So obviously the appropriate response is to behave in kind?
Pot meet kettle.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
It wasn’t antagonistic. And I wasn’t acting like an idiot. I simply stated how not to behave. How do you not see the difference?
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
You insulted the poster to make your point. If a poster would have done that or called Mangini not by his name he would be attacked. I don’t think you are an idiot.
Just seems weird for certain behavior to be attacked and then have a Mod exhibit similar behavior.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
I don’t think I exhibited that behavior at all. I never insulted him personally; I don’t do that to people. I said that if he writes like that it makes his comment look like one from a typical message-board idiot, which is true. I was condeming the behavior, not the person. There is a big difference.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
Like saying someone is posting like an ‘idiot.’ I wasn’t even implying you were ranting.
But this has nothing to do with the Cleveland Browns.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
Mangini’s job shouldn’t consist of picking good GMs. If all the reports are true and he was pretty much acting as GM, then the GM getting fired shouldn’t be an indictment against Mangini.
He chose a figurehead that we (hopefully) want to replace with someone who actually does their job. Getting rid of the figurehead should reflect poorly on the person who made the decision to put the figurehead in place (Lerner).
You can’t decide to rebuild and expect to completely rebuild a team in one year, not from where we were.
Thats not a great point. It is short-sighted and honestly kind of dumb to think that Mangini would continuously revise our roster in the way that he did this offseason.
He got rid of our uber-talented problem children for draft picks and solid but unspectacular players who fit his system, are comfortable with him, will provide a solid environment/good leadership for young players, etc.
He was blowing it up and rebuilding. Once you blow it up, there is nothing left to blow up again.
To me, it was probably something that had to be done. Did it make us worse in the short-term? Yes. No question. But did we have to do it to have any chance of becoming a team that can consistently win 10 games and not just pull a great season out of a hat every 5 years? I think so, too.
I think there’s skepticism of that strategy because we’ve seen a lot of “blowing it up and rebuilding” over the years only to get exactly what the strategy supposedly seeks to avoid: “a great season out of a hat every 5 years.”
by Western Reserve on Nov 4, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions
True, but when that doesn’t work then the only other choice is to try rebuilding again. What else should be done?
Alternatively, you can try building around some of the talent already on the team. Granted, on a 4-12 team that can be slim pickings, but we did have some talent that we decided to send packing. This strategy of ‘blowing it up’ carries risk and requires good execution. I’m skeptical as to whether Mangini can deliver.
by Western Reserve on Nov 4, 2009 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Honestly, it would be surprising if anyone wasn’t skeptical, dreading, or at least concerned about our ability to “rebuild”. After going through it way too many times in the last 10 years, its tough to go through again and its tough to believe that this time we will actually build a consistently good team.
Still, we have no real new reason to distrust Mangini specifically. I think the fact that he traded back in the draft, that he traded K2, and the kind of offseason we just had made it clear that this was going to be a long-term project.
Basically, this year isn’t a strike against him in terms of personnel management in my book—but I am very interested in what he will do with personnel this year. He’s torn it down, time to start building up.
He hasn’t hired a good OC and has overseen a horrendous offense. That will need to change in order for us to be successful.
but nobody could have expected us to be worse.
I’m just not sure that’s true. To be honest, I did expect modest improvement from the team this year, but I also thought they were likely to be 2-6 at this point. I thought they would beat Cinci at home, but the Bengals are a lot better than I expected. To me, the important question isn’t so much where the team is right now, but whether the moves made so far have placed them in a position to improve in the near and long-term future. They’ve stockpiled draft choices in what is supposed to be a deep draft for 2010. So, can they make good use of them to significantly upgrade the talent on the team? Can they hang onto their core of good players and add pieces to it? It’s hard to see how blowing up the entire organization and starting over yet again is likely to lead to any success, at least in the near term. If that’s accurate, then the necessary actions become finding ways to maximize the resources the team has now and plan for building. I know that Mangini is wildly unpopular, but that’s not a good reason for throwing out the baby with the bath.
Peter King expected us to be worse. But I expected us to be better. Only modestly better, but certainly not to take steps backwards.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 9:35 AM EST up reply actions
I expected 3-13 but I also expected Quinn to be learning as he went. I could accept it if our QB was learning but this is something out of the twilight zone….
I agree with you. I’m embarrassed to say that I thought we could go 6-10 this year.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
Most people expected us to be terrible. Many of us thought they were wrong, but it looks like they were correct.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
Yikes, don’t show your face in public!
Actually, at the beginning of the year, I thought there was a chance — albeit a slim one — we could ‘steal’ a 7th win somewhere. Looking back, I don’t even know how I got to 6, but I guess that’s part of the reason I’m as frustrated today as I am: I actually had expectations. Silly me.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 12:51 PM EST up reply actions
I thought we could beat Cincy atleast once, Buffalo, Detroit, Kansas City, Oakland and maybe Jacksonville.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Yeah, I think that was probably my logic, too. Technically, that prediction is still intact.
I said ‘technically.’
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
i predicted the browns to win 2 games this season and I questioned how someone could think otherwise considering the lack of drastic moves for a team that was so terrible the second half of last year. Some may argue that we had minor improvements in some areas, but it takes more than minor changes to improve from God awful to somewhat decent.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 3, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
i think we could sneak another one in there but I don’t think all this drama is good for the morale of the team
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 3, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
A lot of people, me included, thought the Broncos were beatable. So was Cincy.
That’s 2 wins right there.
I am still not so sure Denver is as good as their record. They’ve beaten NE in overtime and Dallas by 7. Their win over Cincy was on that very, very low % play. And then after a bye week, they got dismantled by Baltimore.
They could end up with a very good record, but I am interested in their games against Indy, pitt, Philly, and NYG.
Of course, I didn’t expect them to be as good as they’ve been even against weaker opponents, so they are at least a little surprising to me.
It isn’t like Mangini can fire Daboll, plug in a good OC and then have a second training camp to install a new offense.
Well, of course not. But, ultimately, who is responsible? The buck stops at the head coach. Mangini has made the bed, he should at least be expected to lie in it.
In other words, he doesn’t get a pass even though a Hall of Fame coach would have trouble picking up the pieces in Week 9. He remains responsible for doing the remarkable: making a bad football team worse.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 9:48 AM EST up reply actions
He remains responsible for hiring Daboll and on some level allowing such a terrible offense on the field, I’ll give you that.
But Mangini truly believed we needed to get worse (read: get rid of a bunch of our talented players) in order to become a consistently good team. I don’t think we can say he was entirely wrong about that.
He had a long term vision for this team that was exactly that: long term. I don’t see how you can say there is no hope for the future if our long-term plan was to blow it up this year and our long-term plan is going pretty much as planned.
Here’s one take….
Lerner realized his mistake of not hiring a strong GM and then hiring a coaching staff. He wants to rectify that. He probably realizes no one will come in as president with a weak GM and a strong coach already in place. It would also add too many layers to the organization. Solution, Kokinis is out.
So the next question is, what happens if some reputable candidates for GM talk to Lerner and say no way, not with Mangini there. Does he clean house?
-—————————————————————————————————————————————————————
And on a side note, how in the world does Dabol keep his job? However this plays out, I’d like to see Ryan stick around.
by Monsters of the Midway on Nov 3, 2009 8:25 AM EST up reply actions
If we really need to get rid of Mangini to become a good organization, we need to do it.
I am apprehensive about this for the same reasons I didn’t want to trade K2 or Braylon: making that move will set us back another year in the rebuilding process and will not make us a better team short-term.
But if it has to be done, do it.
that’s what i’m starting to suspect. they were talking about a consultant who has been around this week. the consultant is kosar.
If it means that I get to hear Bernie talk in weekly press conferences, then at least we’d have some entertainment the rest of the season ;)
In the press room, Kosar will be showing the media clips of the offensive line from during the game, analyzing how they have to “cut” the legs of the defenders. Then he’ll foam at the mouth about the abilities of Ken Dorsey (who will be his first player signed).
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Nov 2, 2009 10:39 PM EST up reply actions
He will then crack a cold Bud Light and say “This is my #1 pick.”
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 10:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The guy does literally sound like he is drunk 24/7.
Either he keeps a flask under his jacket, or its just a speech impediment.
At least he didn’t throw picks and he was efficient on the field…
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:46 AM EST up reply actions
Just want to be clear- you are joking about the drunk/drug thing, right?
I mean, there has never been anything I’ve seen to suggest that he has an alcohol or drug problem. He just talks with some slurred speech.
I thought there have been reports about drinking problems in the past for Bernie? Part of the reason for his divorce and other peronal problems? I could be mistaken, though.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
From what I have read you are both right. In his divorce proceedings his wife made accusations, but I don’t think anything has been verified.
Then there’s the divorce. It has been a public disaster, with him being accused of several addictions, of erratic behavior and of giving away the couple’s money. He speaks with a slur and admits there has been drinking and pain medication in his past, but says the only thing he’s addicted to is football. Drugs? Alcohol? “Would my kids be living with me if that were really the case?” he asks. “If I did 10 percent of things I’m accused of, I’d be dead”
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09194/983561-66.stm#ixzz0VoXf4jQF
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
I’m not. I could’ve sworn I heard reports of him with a drug problem. And also he’s had to have done some. His body seems like it’s taken considerable pain to drugs and alcohol.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
His body seems like it’s taken considerable pain to drugs and alcohol.
I don’t have any idea what this means. And I don’t see why you would say “he’s had to have done some.” I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s done prescription painkillers (nor would I be surprised to hear that any NFL player has. Playing football is brutal on the body.) But that’s very different than taking so-called “recreational” drugs. Alcohol use even in excess) is again pretty common among pro athletes.
His slurred speech could be many things, including a result of some of the tremendous blows to the head he took as a player. I don’t think that’s uncommon among people who play contact sports, especially football and boxing. I know that Mohammed Ali’s slurred speech is attributed to his Parkinson’s Disease, which itself is related to the beatings he took in the ring, if I’m not mistaken.
It isn’t exactly proven but they like to think it attributes to it.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 3:04 PM EST up reply actions
It’s a touchy subject as Kosar is such a folk hero to the Cleveland faithful and every hero, unfortunately, is going to have his pitfalls.
by Western Reserve on Nov 3, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
And I don’t have a problem with that, if there was any evidence that he actually had the pitfalls being suggested.
Right, that’s a good point, I wasn’t trying to insinuate anything — I don’t know much about Kosar’s personal life. Just with allegations like that and such, it can be a touchy subject whether they are true or not.
by Western Reserve on Nov 4, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
I do think he has talked about painkillers and how hurt his body is due to football injuries. But not the recreational or outright substance abuse that is being inferred by some of these jokes.
Honestly, I was wondering if I was missing something. But I really can’t find any stories about him being an alcoholic or a drug abuser- that I’ve found so far.
Will any halfway intelligent fan be excited by this move? What does this accomplish besides leaving us short in the Front Office for the rest of the season?
If Bernie is offered the GM job I pray he is smart enough to turn it down. With some grooming he might make a fantastic GM or coach but he’d probably be another Matt Millen if he takes this job with no training.
We really are a mess though. No HC or OC. And litteraly no GM or Prez
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 2, 2009 11:14 PM EST reply actions
We’re freeballing it. Just give it some time.
We’ll learn to be professional.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions
According to Jay Glazer of FOX Sports, Kokinis was fired “with cause”. I’d love to know exactly what the reasoning is.
He stole Lerner’s hot pocket right from the Microwave.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
See, here are these rumors again. If you put them all together today, it sounds like he was so ill informed about the team and did so little with them that it shaded into actual actionable dereliction or negligence. I guess we’ll find out more soon enough.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:03 AM EST up reply actions
If I had to guess, I would say Kokinis thought when he was hired that he would have full control over personnel decisions, but when push came to shove, Mangini always made the final decisions. There were also rumors reported that Kokinis didn’t even know about the Edwards trade. If this is true, it would explain why Kokinis stopped doing his job.
A lot of speculation here on my part, but it might explain the recent events.
Actually this seems like a pretty credible scenario, guesswork though it may be. If true, he just sort of stopped trying instead of actually quitting. Now the organization will probably try to prove that this was a dismissal for cause to avoid having to eat his salary. That could get ugly.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:45 AM EST up reply actions
“Then there’s the bigger question of whether the Ravens can prevent Kokinis from taking the Cleveland job. Although Kokinis might be under consideration for the position of “General Manager” of the Browns, he must be offered the job of “General Manager” as defined by the league’s Anti-Tampering Policy. If he isn’t, the Ravens can block the move if he’s still under contract with the Ravens.
So, in other words, the G.M. job in Cleveland must give Kokinis: “(1) the authority over all personnel decisions related to the signing of free agents, the selection of players in the College Draft, trades, terminations, and related decisions, and (2) the responsibility for coordinating other football activities with the Head Coach.”
So, in other words, if former Jets coach Eric Mangini is trying to create a Belichick/Pioli vibe in Cleveland, with Mangini having final say over the roster and the draft and Kokinis being the right-hand man running the personnel side of the business, it apparently can’t — and won’t — happen, since the Ravens seem to be poised to prevent it.
Unless, of course, Kokinis’ contract in Cleveland says he has final say but he really doesn’t. (Fins G.M. Jeff Ireland thinks that such a move would work; he’ll let us know for sure after he runs it by Parcells.) "
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/01/05/ravens-block-kokinis-interview-for-now/
I’ll try and find a link but I saw somewhere yesterday talking about how Kokinis had to have a specific title for him to be hired. Could Lerner’s cause be that he was duped by Mangini and Kokinis? Could there be some trouble with the league if there were some shenanigans involved with Kokinis’’s hiring?
All conjecture but Mangini has been accused of sliminess in the past and I definitely can envision another firing coming soon or possibly at the end of the season.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes… And then BUDDY RYAN as Owner.
Now this is truly a clusterf*ck of greatness.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 2, 2009 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
Evidently this wasn’t so surprising. The PD is reporting that Mangini and Kokinis haven’t been getting along for months.
According to league sources, both men became disenchanted with the other early on. In training camp, Mangini and Kokinis were seldom seen talking on the field. Rumors intensified over the past month that Kokinis could be fired.
yeah espn just said this had been in the works for weeks, that the two of them hadn’t been getting along for a while.
by notthatnoise on Nov 3, 2009 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
I love this move. Love it. This is exactly what the Browns need — an experienced personnel guy to lead the organization.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 2, 2009 11:40 PM EST up reply actions
I am a big Accorsi fan. Built the foundation of the Giants Super Bowl team. Was GM during the Browns 80’s heyday.
he was the one that made the eli manning trade from the chargers. he must be good at evaluating talent.
good draft picks here we come… i hope.
Why do you feel this way? Not that you’re wrong, but I don’t know much about the guy
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 3, 2009 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
Read his resume.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 3, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions
Built the last successful Browns team. Instrumental in building the Giants super bowl team and mentoring their current GM, Jerry Reese. I live in NYC and Giants fans adore him.
i already like this guy and he hasn’t done anything for the 2009 Browns yet.
Fixed! :)
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:10 AM EST up reply actions
the fact that he got the giants eli manning makes me hope that he can pick out our franchise qb in the draft.
He drafted Osi Umenyiora in the 2nd round in an earlier draft and refused to part with him as part of that Eli trade. It was before Osi got huge, and he knew the kind of talent the guy had. AJ Smith really wanted Osi, but Accorsi would not budge.
Notable draft picks as Gm of the Browns:
1985 Rd 7 Reggie Langhorne
1985 Supplemental Rd 1 Bernie Kosar
1986 Rd 2 Webster Slaughter
1987 Rd 1 Mike Junkin (yikes!); Rd 2 Greg Rakoczy
1988 Rd 2 Michael Dean Perry; Rd 7 Thane Gash
1989 Rd 1 Eric Metcalf
1990 Rd 2 Leroy Hoard; Rd 3 Anthony Pleasant; Rd 5 Rob Burnett
1991 Rd 1 Eric Turner; Rd 6 Michael Jackson
1992 Rd 1 Tommy Vardell (yikes!)
Mortensen just twittered that Accorsi is not the GM and will remain in a consulting role. I am confused, but Mort has been wrong before.
“But the Mangini-Kokinis team has been broken up, forcing Lerner to look quickly for help. One possibility could be Ernie Accorsi, who was Cleveland’s GM from 1985-92, when the Browns went to three AFC title games with Bernie Kosar at quarterback.
Kosar was recently brought in by Lerner to serve in an unspecified consulting role. Accorsi could take over the vacant GM position and serve as a mentor until Kosar is ready."
Michael Dean and Thane Gash…Two impact defensive players in one draft! Ah, the good old days!
Touchdown Tommy…hahahahaha
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:50 AM EST up reply actions
I mean I find this whole episode odd and lacking a clear vision to be sure. Lerner was consulting Accorsi in the offseason about the coaching and GM hire, and yet here we are with him as GM now. Maybe Accorsi saw how awful the team was performing and decided that he would give it one last shot.
It makes Lerner look bad, but we have a guy with a proven history now running the show, so maybe in the end Lerner might have finally hit.
so maybe in the end Lerner might have finally hit.
am i using the term “blind squirrel” correctly here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Accorsi
wow, someone updated “current gm of cleveland browns” pretty quickly lol
here’s the actual statement from the Browns:
“Cleveland Browns General Manager George Kokinis is no longer actively involved with the organization. In response to rumors and reports that Kokinis was escorted out of the building today, the Browns deny those reports. In the interest of protecting the parties involved we will withhold further comment.”
Parties?
My guess is that they’re going to go after Kokinis for dismissal with cause, and there will be legal actions all around.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
Last time I checked… incompetence can be listed as a cause.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 3, 2009 12:26 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t know, that seems unlikely to me.
It’s interesting that ESPN mentions personal conduct:
For the past month, Lerner has independently investigated professional and personal conduct by Kokinis, head coach Eric Mangini and director of football operations Erin O’Brien, who left the organization within the past few days, sources said.
I was being a smart ass.
Can’t wait to hear all the facts in the morning. Should be good and entertaining.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 3, 2009 12:38 AM EST up reply actions
The team’s security and legal department were reviewing phone records to build its case against Kokinis, a team source said.
?
They’re black balling him! LOL
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Nov 3, 2009 12:41 AM EST up reply actions
Standard procedure. These guys make lots of money, and he has three years remaining on his contract. If they can establish reasonable cause for firing him, he gets Bupkis.
Very true. But it’s also starting to sound like maybe Kokinis found himself in a powerless position and responded by just not working any more, ‘retiring in place’ instead of actually quitting. Actionable I’m sure.
Maybe his phone records show that he spent most of his business hours on the phone with the Kenny Kingston Psychic Network.
All speculation, needless to say.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 3, 2009 12:54 AM EST up reply actions
AMEN!!!
No more players the Jets didn’t want!
by guambrownsfan on Nov 3, 2009 6:20 AM EST up reply actions
Actually, most of the players we brought over from the Jets have been an upgrade over who we had last year so I’m not sure why so many people are complaining about them.
That doesn’t mean the players aren’t better than their replacements.
If all you’re going to do here is remind us all about how terrible the Browns are then please leave. We’re all well aware of that fact. We don’t need you mentioning it ever time you post. Go to the Steelers board and talk about how great Ben is with all your buddies there.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 3, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Two heads are better than one. George Kokinis was hired to be Mangini’s yes man. Now we can bring in someone with an opinion and some insight. There’s a reason that two different people in the GM and head coach positions (plus additional advisors, presidents, etc.) is the standard blueprint for success. Hey, even the Tuna is buying the groceries for Tony Sparano.
Seems Randy didn't remember the Butch fiasco
Remember when Butch Davis tried to be like the Big Tuna and be both HC and GM? You would think someone would have pointed that out to Randy before allowing the current HC not to get the input from the GM.
Doug B
Two key things in this Newsday article: speculation about Gettleman being Accorsi’s guy, and that we shouldn’t forget the Rooney Rule.
So no Accorsi, then?
I want someone who:
1. Can evaluate talent and has the track record to prove it.
2. Will actually have final say on all personnel issues.
3. Can and will stand up to Mangini when the job requires it, while…
…4. still being able to work closely with Mangini to get him players with the types of skills he needs.
by rufio on Nov 3, 2009 2:24 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
INSANITY: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results
Look, everyone is disappointed and everyone needs to think about this team. In the 80s, the Browns had an identity. The team was effieicnt and creative on offense. We had pounding and slashing backs in Mack and Byner, a very efficient, but not prolific QB in Bernie, we had deep threats in Web and Langhorne, and posession guys in Ozzie and Brian Brennan. That sustained the team for the smash-mouth DEFENSE. Our DBs were all hitters, and Hanford and Frank could cover like crazy! LBs were proficient in blitzing and in coverage, and the D-line was tough and had time to attack because the coverage downfield was solid. Martyball…
I am not ‘reminiscing’…Well, maybe just a little…The point is, the “new” Browns have never had an ‘identity’. We have had a collection of players with no common goal in mind. We need a management TEAM, not one guy who makes all the decisions, that will decide the team’s identity, and then find players that fit our TEAM. The Colts are a passing team and all of the players they bring in compliment their team, the RatBirds are a defensive team that needs the offense to do just enough, etc. This is what we need from a management TEAM. I am not advocating any one person or group, but a guy like Marty, maybe not actually Marty, who can run the operation with a coach that can get the most out of the players is what we need.
So if Shaq shoots 3 free throws and misses all 3, shooting a 4th is insanity?
And actually, I thought all the personnel moves made by Mangini have been pretty coherent: intelligent guys who work hard, sacrificing problem cases with exceptional talent for team players and reliably hard workers.
Not saying it has been successful so far, just that it is coherent as a philosophy.
sacrificing problem cases with exceptional talent for team players and reliably hard workers
Sounds eerily like the Shapiro/Wedge “Plan.”
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Nov 3, 2009 10:26 PM EST up reply actions
sacrificing problem cases with exceptional talentfor team players and reliably hard workers
Sounds eerily like the Shapiro/Wedge "Plan."
Fixed.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
I think the original statement is the truth.
Looking at the advantage of having someone who has potential and an enormous upside, but burying them on the bench in favor of a known commodity (a “gritty” platoon/utility player).
Both coaches have shown a desire to have “their” guys put in position to succeed. With Wedge, it unfortunately meant not giving the younger players opportunity to play on a daily basis. For Mangini it seems that he went out of his was to bring his guys over from the Jets. They are taking the same approach with the younger players.
so you want the browns’ identity when they have the ball to include: efficiency, creativity, running the ball with speed, running the ball with power, deep passing threats, and possession passing threats. got it.
i’m not sure that qualifies as an “identity”, man…i think you’ve just defined “offense”.
by DontCallMeJoey on Nov 3, 2009 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
An offense would also be able to control the clock with running not throwing interceptions.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
According to ESPN, Lerner has been and is talking to former Giants GM Ernie Accorsi, who is also good friends with Bernie Kosar.
Hmmmm…Kosar as GM, and Accorsi as President of Football Operations?
http://dawgscooper.blogspot.com/
Dawg Scooper: An Unofficial Cleveland Browns Source
Never Seen This Situation Before
It’s one thing to lose – and to lose consistently and badly – it’s quite another to have a team descend into chaos like this.
God help us.
Can’t relax – beginning to feel like a Raiders’ fan (and not one of the meth heads), wondering about the sanity of the people running the team.
Cocktail hour can’t come soon enough.
Fact: Cleveland has one of the best fan bases in the country.
Nother fact: They fought for this franchise.
Unfortunate fact: The club is not what the fans deserve.
Fortunate fact: It will be.
You Should Be A Therapist
or at least a self-help guru.
Will you be my Deepak Chopra?
If the rumours are true about Ernie Accorsi, then I will be able to watch the rest of the season with a calm feeling of acceptance that – as you say – better times lie ahead.
I am astonished that people are upset at this move and that some have used it as a reason to find fault with Lerner. Especially when it has been made very public and very clear since before the move even happened that a President or director of Football Operations was coming in.
Here are the things we know about Kokinis’ time with the Browns:
- Mangini basically picked him to be the GM.
- He didn’t address the media or even talk to them after huge trades like the Braylon Edwards deal.
- Rumors are he didn’t know about the Edwards deal or at least had nothing to do with it.
- He and Mangini were upset at eachother as far back as training camp.
- He was hired with “final say on football moves” in his contract, but with a wink and a nod agreement that Mangini would make these ultimate decisions.
I think it is clear that firing him was the direct result of at least one of the following (if not some combination):
- the new president didn’t want to work with Kokinis
- Kokinis didn’t want to work with the new President
- Lerner/the New President wanted to show Mangini this was unacceptable and showed that they weren’t going to allow him to just have a yes man above him.
- Mangini said he needed a real GM or that he no longer got along with Kokinis.
All these are valid reasons to fire the GM of a 1-8 team. Also, we don’t know what Kokinis has been doing the last few weeks. Since he didn’t have a big role in the Edwards trade, we would hope that he was preparing of the draft and offseason. What if Mangini/Lerner were not happy at how he was doing this? We need to get someone in as soon as possible, so we can have a clear strategy going into the offseasaon.
I think this was a move essentially made by circumstance. There was no real option. At the least, we have to wait for the other shoe to drop to evaluate it. Does that mean Lerner was at fault for hiring Kokinis in the first place? Probably. But should we consider Lerner a bad owner for that bad move that he corrected in 6 months? Absolutely not.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 3, 2009 10:31 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Christ- this new SBN format makes longer posts impossible to read. Sorry guys. I had extra spaces in there.
Not so fast on that last line. I think Lerner’s hiring practices have been awful by all accounts (hiring Pats defensive coordinators Ravens execs). Maybe he shouldn’t take such a massive risk by hiring a shim GM after years of Savage rolling the dice like a maniac.
Quite frankly, there have been many questionable personnel moves and unwanted attention brought on to the Browns that, I suppose, are entirely attributable to Mangini. You can only withstand so many PR hits before your credibility is gone. I’m guessing Mangini is done.
/agree. All signs seem to point to the eventual dismissal of Mangini. I’m thinking the strategy of bringing in the new football office exec is to see if he can work with coach Mangini for the rest of the season. If either he can’t work with Mangini OR the rest of the season goes as bad as the first half (with much easier teams to play) I think Mangini will be fired.
Brownsyup
You can only withstand so many PR hits before your credibility is gone
I think that there was a time when this was true, in general, but not anymore. We see all sorts of public figures who are disgraced, then perhaps lie low for a while, then return to their former glory. If Mangini toughs it out, Lerner doesn’t fire him, and in two years the Browns are 10-6 and make the playoffs, everyone will be talking about what a great story it is. Winning cures all ills. The bad PR is probably more injurious to the Browns franchise than to Mangini himself. If they can weather it, I think he can too. The big problem is not the negative PR, it’s that the team looks terrible. That’s less PR than poor performance on multiple fronts. Is it all Mangini’s fault? Certainly not. But neither is he blameless.
So, what on earth is wrong with hiring a defensive coordinator from an organization that has won multiple Super Bowls in the last 10 years and an exec from one of the NFL’s more consistently talent filled teams? Is it just because it didn’t work once before, three years ago?
Savage was hugely respected in the league and his supposed talent-evaluation skills were a source of envy. Crennell was a football-lifer due his shot at a team of his own.
I wasn’t crazy about the Mangini hire, but he had a near-.500 record and looked to have been fired pretty hastily by the Jets. I was and still am willing to give him a chance.
I guess I just don’t see the horrible pattern of decisions by Randy Lerner since he took over the team. At worst, you chalk it up to small sample size and realize that people can and do improve their processes for things like this. At best, you see that, with the information available, he made some respectable decisions and they just haven’t worked out.
Knowing what I know now, I am for this move. I am worried by the fact that it was made in the first place, and about other behind-the-scenes things we might not even know about yet.
I just thought Lerner was angry about the product on the field and that this was in direct response to that because Lerner wanted to change the team for the better in the short term, which seems a little irrational because a GM really can’t do a whole lot right now.
If the reports coming out have all been true and if done for one/more of the reasons you listed above, then this is a good move.
So much wrong here, where to begin. One, we already have a president. Also, there is absolutely no reason for the GM to speak, especially when the coach is the face of your franchise. Kevin Colbert never talks, it was/is always Cowher/Tomlin. Newsome rarely talks, and only now b/c he’s got so much cred, but 95% of the communication “to the fans” comes/came from Billick/Harbaugh. The GM sits behind a curtain and finds the best football players in the world. That’s his job. His job is not to communicate anything. That’s the President’s (which we have) or more reasonably, the coach’s. (Incidentally, this should have been the case w/ Savage, and led to his downfall. He couldn’t deligate that role out, if he had, he’d still be adding pro bowler’s to our roster every single off season).
Finally, it is not circumstance that a guy who is hired almost solely b/c of his ability to work “in sync” with the pre-selected head coach is fired 8 months later for not getting along with the coach. It’s idiotic management by Lerner.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I still think you are delusional about Savage. He had strengths and glaring weaknesses. Also, the Browns President, Mike Keenan, only operates from a business and financial perspective, he is not a football guy.
You can think I’m delusional about Savage, but it’s been proven multiple times that I’m not. It’s hard to find many better 3 run eras as far as top-end talent goes. Everyone makes bad moves, but Thomas, Rogers, Cribbs, Edwards, Wright, Steinbach, Bentley, and Baxter in a 4 year period will not happen in Cleveland again for a long time… and arguably hasn’t happened elsewhere very much either.
If you have a football GM with final say on the 53, the President is a business operation.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
it’s been proven multiple times that I’m not
well, that’s clearly not true.
by DontCallMeJoey on Nov 4, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions
That’s 6 pro bowlers in 4 years, with two others as potential. It doesn’t include Wimbley and Jackson, who also have potential. So, clearly it’s true, by any reasonable definition.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
i count 4 pro bowlers (thomas, rogers, cribbs, edwards…bentley never made a pro bowl as a brown).
at the time that savage left, there were approximately 5 players on the roster who would have started for “good” teams in the NFL, and there’s just no disputing that. thomas, steinbach, edwards, rogers, jackson. i may even be willing to give you wright, but at the time savage left he was not a top-shelf corner. so, call it 6.
that sucks. hard.
by DontCallMeJoey on Nov 4, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
This. He may have brought in a few great players, but the supplemental pieces just weren’t there. Great teams have good players at most positions and the Browns didn’t have that under Savage.
(reply to thread in general and not specifically to Brad)
I do think kwoog goes a little far, but it is hard to say Savage did a bad job when you look at where the team came from.
Zero pro bowlers in how many years?
We didn’t only lack depth, we lacked any starting talent. I think it was clear that Savage’s plan was to get impact starting players, then to fill in with backups/late draft picks who were success stories. It is hard to say he didn’t execute the first half of his plan.
Sure, he missed on some picks. Sure, he didn’t give enough consideration to players’ attitudes or what the coaches wanted. But he took a team that had literally close to nothing and he brought it up into the realm of decency.
That hardly “sucks”. And I know NotJoey and kwoog are just playing their little hyperbole game, but seriously, Savage certainly wasn’t bad at finding talented players.
I try to take the balanced approach and say he had strengths and weaknesses. He definitely had the ability to get some really talented players on the Browns which has not happened since the return.
On the other hand, he made numerous moves with the benefit of hindsight that we can actually point to and say they were horrible decisions.
On the other hand, he made numerous moves with the benefit of hindsight that we can actually point to and say they were horrible decisions.
Which is true of every GM. Specifically for Savage there are three (and only three) “horrible” moves. Not trading DA after 07, the Williams contract and Stalworth. All of them weren’t horrible at the time (25 year old PB QB, up and coming franchised DL, WR that hadn’t missed more than two games in the previous 4 seasons). Perhaps Shaffer, but he was much better than what we have now and I don’t think the contract is was as bad as you.
To offset that, the positives are far, far more numerous, thus making a “balanced approach” far more weighted towards success (Thomas, Edwards, Steinbach, Rogers, Cribbs, Bentley, Wright, Jackson, Baxter, Wimbley (Romeo said LB, that’s why no Ngata), Quinn, McDonald, Zastudil).
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
To be fair, if you are going to include draft successes, you need to include draft failures.
Also, I don’t know what Quinn is doing on this list at this point.
Schaeffer is not as good as St.Clair. At the time we dumped him, he had already been paid 18 million, and had we kept him, we were on the hook for 18 million more. 36 million dollars for a turnstile who couldn’t land a starting position on a Chicago team with one of the worst offensive lines in the league? That’s not a bad contract?
I consider your evaluations subjective. Either way, even if Shaffer is a miss, it’s not a unique or egregious one.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Subjective in what way?
Are you disputing the contract numbers, or the fact that Schaeffer is now a backup on one of the worst offensive lines in the league?
The harm of the contract and that Shaffer isn’t much, much better than St. Clair.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
(Romeo said LB, that’s why no Ngata)
you can’t throw lerner in the shit for listening to mangini (hiring kokinis), and excuse a savage mistake b/c he listened to romeo.
by DontCallMeJoey on Nov 6, 2009 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
It’s impossible to accumulate depth when you have 3 years (after the first year of overhauling, which everyone is lauding Mangini for).
Depth only happens after 5, 6, 7 years. Emphasis on only.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
There is probably no worse “bottom half of the roster” in all of football.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Detroit would tend to disagree.
Their top half is our bottom half I’d like to think.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 6, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
Either way, I’ll disagree with the premise. There are 32 teams in the world. The lower 20 players on a team don’t decide shit, they’re a wash. It’s about hitting on your first and second rounders, which Savage did (“hitting” being getting average-probowl type players).
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Absolutely wrong. The bottom half of the roster is important and must be solid before you can expect much of anything from the top half.
ESPN’s Matt Mosley points out a timely excerpt from a new book on the Eagles by Reuben Frank and Mark Eckel. Harbaugh was asked why the Eagles have had so much more success than the Cowboys over the last decade.
“Why is that? Because what Andy Reid and his program stand for the opposite of what the Cowboys stand for. The Cowboys are a star system. It’s all about building around individuals first and collecting talent, collecting great players,” Harbaugh said.
“Andy has always been about building a team. And over the long haul, it’s a team sport, and one of the greatest examples of that is what’s happened with the Eagles and the Cowboys over the last 10 years. The Cowboys stand for everything that’s wrong with the NFL.”
Irrelevant to my point. McNabb, Westbrook, Owens, Jackson, Dawkins, etc. The Eagles have always had “stars.” The difference is they have continuity and a stability, not some made up placed importance on the third string LB.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The Colts are hitting the complete bottom of their players in their secondary and receiving core.
They seem to be doing fine…
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 6, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
I think different respected NFL folks would disagree about this. (Yes, kwoog, it is possible that someone that disagrees with you and yet they make a valid point).
Belicheck, Parcells and Mangini all extremely value “their guys” to help build the foundation of their team. Even if they aren’t the most talented, they want guys there to help implement their system and get everyone on board with how they do things.
Savage clearly went for the stars at the top of the draft and through free agency, but he lacked a team-building strategy or vision to complete the roster.
Also, its a good thing your arbitrary cut off is the 2nd round, because Savage’s 3rd and 4th rounders were really bad.
The great, great majority of 3rd and 4th rounders are bad. 1st and 2nd round picks should be starters and/or 5 year NFL players, at the least. There are 1600 people in the world on an NFL roster. You don’t have an influx of 120 (4th round picks) newly worthy candidates to break into that job market every year. That’s why the top of the draft is so much more important.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Sure. Just pointing out that Savage’s 3rd and 4th rounders were really terrible. Like much, much worse than league average. I’m not sure any of them are still in the league except for Charlie Frye and his 3rd string QB status and is Sowells still on our roster?
Also, you missed my larger point that many successful coaches value building depth before anything. Getting their guys in place first so that those golden early picks come into a system that is structured and makes sense.
That is certainly one way to go about things, but the current Browns are evidence that it is not the only way.
Our top line talent is worse than 06-08. But the depth is much better.
Our depth can’t be “much better” than anything, b/c it’s the worst in the league. 31st in D and 32nd in Offense. It’s either his fault in coaching or his fault in personnel.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The team is amongst the worst in the league. But I think that can be attributable plenty of things before lack of depth. Such as:
- bad offensive coaching, scheming and gameplan
- lack of top line talent at skill positions
- youth and inexperience, especially in a new system
Mangini gets his share of fault for the teams’ results so far. But we are talking about his personnel moves, and I think the depth of the D-Line, LBs, Safetys, O-Line, and WRs are much better than they were at the end of last season.
Another year of Joe Thomas, Braylon Edwards, Eric Wrights, Kamerion Wimbleys, Brodney Pools, Josh Cribbs, Eric Steibachs, LeCharles Bentleys, etc.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Thomas was a no brainer for a team who relied on Shaffer to play Left Tackle, Stone hands is gone and hasn’t exactly done much since he left, Wright is a good player, Kam Wimbley is good but he’s no Ngata (though we did desperately need that 7th round pick), Brodney Poole is good at best and below average most games, Josh Cribbs wasn’t drafted, Steinbach is solid if unspectacular (and not a draft pick), Bentley never played a snap for the Browns (and wasn’t a draft pick).
Characterize them how you want, but those are starters on most if not all teams in the NFL.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
Which brings us back to my initial point:
The important thing being the lack of depth behind those players. That’s where Savage got it wrong.
And that point is fine, but probably no reason to turn around and belittle those quality pickups.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
I think your laundry list that disparages every quality decision, from ‘no brainer’ to ‘stone hands’ to ‘never played a snap’ does just that.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
It’s irrelevant; that’s obviously your opinion of those players — and that’s fine. But your premise is that there was no core, no depth, behind them. By your own admission, that was the ‘important thing;’ therefore, disparaging the more consensus quality picks does nothing for your argument.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
Once again, I didn’t belittle (or disparage) anyone.
Providing a fair and accurate assessment of the merits of the players kwoog lists as reasons why Savage was the king of the draft does speak directly to the disagreement at hand.
Call it what you like, but you surely downplayed a lot of Savage’s decisions that were pretty highly touted at the time — and indeed ended up in many quality NFL starters — including chalking up the #3 pick of Thomas, with virtually everyone still on the board, as merely a ‘no brainer.’
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Who would they have selected other than Joe Thomas?
I don’t see how I’m ‘belittling’ ‘disparaging’ or ‘downplaying’ Savage or anyone else. He took the consensus safest choice in that draft. It’s not like the Thomas pick involved some sort of miraculous insight on Savage’s part. Everyone knew that Thomas was a stud. He was a top five talent at a position of desperate need for the Browns.
I suppose you’re right though, Savage should get a gold star and a cookie for not fucking it up.
Could have been anybody. There may have been some temptation to take a QB at #3 which likely would have been Brady Quinn. Adrian Peterson was still on the board.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
Russell was already off the board. Quinn freefell through the draft for a reason. He wasn’t a top five player, and there were lots of quality second and third round QB prospects in that draft (Kolb, Beck, Stanton, Edwards).
Peterson had a lengthy injury history including a collarbone that hampered him at the combine. Besides, we had just drafted a back in ’06 and signed Lewis to a multi-year free agaent contract weeks before the draft.
With Russell and Megatron off the board, it was Thomas or trade.
Perhaps, but I don’t think Savage makes the Winslow move or the 1st pick move or the Edwards move.
And that’s where most of that depth came from.
Odds are likely he moves Winslow, as was speculated since the drafting of Rucker (and his refusal to extend him). Whether he moves out of 5 is open for speculation, but based on his entire resume it is also likely.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Savage’s ’08 draft brought Rogers, half of Quinn, Williams and busts. He said explicitly that he “punted” that draft. There is no “Savage ’08 draft”, it was a “Savage ’08 off season.” His drafts were successful.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Yea Quinn and Williams are evidence of a good draft? Quinn has to be viewed as one of his worst decisions as a GM at this point. Not only did we move up and burn a pick on a guy who hasn’t found any success yet in the league, but we also gave the following year’s first to get him. That seems like a huge failure in my book.
Come on, it does not take seven years to build depth. Heck, most teams’ rosters are completely turned over in seven years. If you think it takes 6 or 7 years to build a great football team then you haven’t been paying attention.
I’m paying attention to the fact that every deep team has had stability of at least 6 years. You’re not paying attention. Name one deep team who’s overturned their front office inside of 6 years.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Of course great teams have front office stability, because great teams have great front offices and there is no reason to fire them. But that doesn’t mean it takes 6 years to build depth. That’s a completely different argument.
And front office stability doesn’t always lead to depth — look at the Lions under Millen. he was there 7 years, and they were bad the entire time. So front office stability isn’t good if the front office makes too many mistakes.
So ideally you want continuity with the right front office. You probably aren’t going to build depth with a constantly evolving vision.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
There is no such thing as evolving vision.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 7, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
Bentley obviously counts.
The middle paragraph is opinion, not fact (although it’s a fact Wright would be a top 2 corner on more than 50% of NFL teams going into 09).
5 pro bowlers, plus Wright, Jackson and Wimbley is a wild success, and the equivalent won’t be seen here very soon, and hasn’t been seen elsewhere much at all.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I think you give a little too much credit to some of those players and also project Baxter and Bentley as superstars when we can’t say for certain they would have lived up to their huge contracts. You also neglect his penchant for trading away draft picks for terrible players both to acquire players from other teams and to move up in the draft for players that are not good at all (Quinn, Hubbard, Rucker, Bell.)
Bentley was already a superstar. The impressiveness of his acquisition isn’t in question at all. Baxter I’ll listen to, with the biased caveat that an average starter is the absolute floor of his abilities.
With the exception of Quinn (who is not, or perhaps more accurately was not, a terrible player) all of his examples but one of “trading away draft picks” (Williams) are completely innocuous. Teams aren’t built by hoarding 5th and 7th rounders. Kevin Colbert, Ozzie Newsome, et all have all gone through a 5 pick draft.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The impressiveness of his acquisition isn’t in question at all.
That’s exactly right. It was a huge get.
Bentley counts.
by Western Reserve on Nov 6, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions
I think he was extremely talented and made some damn good moves. Increased our talent level and assets incredibly given what he started with.
That said, I think he wasn’t the right fit to build a long-term winning team. And I think he was too enamored with his own good moves to continue to better the team.
And none of this matters because he was so terrible at getting along with others in the front office, the coaching staff, the media, the fans, etc. He was so unprofessional that he undermined his own success.
the “he improved the talent from the time he took over” line is tired and bogus, in my opinion. the roster was an abject disaster when he took the con…he literally had nowhere to go but up.
by DontCallMeJoey on Nov 6, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn’t go so far as branding it a ‘success.’ Obviously it was a work in progress. He had some huge strikeouts: Imagine DA being worth a 1st and 3rd rounder these days. But he was coming into a rather precarious situation as it was, he was a good talent evaluator and his drafts usually received high marks. He didn’t get a lot of help from the sidelines either.
The mess we are in now, the Savage days look pretty good.
by Western Reserve on Nov 6, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions
Well, our resident Pittsburgh scribe (Mary Rose) was happy to see him go. The rest I couldn’t care less about. It’s inarguable that he did more player-acquisition-wise than any Browns regime in 20+ years. He’s a skilled talent evaluator. GMing takes more than that, but he was learning. Stability, stability, stability.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
This is wrong. Eric Turner, Michael Dean Perry, Michael Jackson, Thane Gash, Rob Burnett, Greg Rakoczy, Webster Slaughter, Bernie Kosar, Kevin Mack, Ernest Byner, Reggie Langhorne, Brian Brennan? All in the last 20+ years.
Literally, 20+ years includes most of the Browns franchise. But if what was meant was, in about 20 years or so, as some of those very guys had been acquired about 20 or so years ago, I think the point stands.
by Western Reserve on Nov 6, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
take away the “+” and you’re left with Turner, Perry and Jackson (haha, seriously?).
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Its not like he added the “+”.
And if your argument is that Savage acquired more talent than any GM of the Browns between 90 and today, isn’t that like being the king of Turd City? So is better at acquiring talent than Palmer/Policy and Butch Davis. Nobody disagrees with that- though Butch had just as much team success.
Ouch.
My monitor just burst into flames from that burn.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 6, 2009 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
He said nothing. I’ve proven that was Savage’s plan and how he was executing a long term rebuild. SB Golanbatrac just said “2+2=5.”
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
He continues to “prove” his arguments by quoting himself as his proof. For a guy who complains about other people’s use of logic, it’s quite hilarious.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 7, 2009 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
No, I want Phil Savage, the man who helped make the ’01-09 Ravens, and was in the process of doing it again here.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
So you want the starting point to be a Super Bowl championship?
Sorry, but even as an optimist, we are a lot closer to the ’07 Dolphins than the ’00 Ravens.
Fine, let’s go for a decade of success. But if your model is the ‘01-’09 Ravens, then we need to START with a Super Bowl Championship team.
Savage was the engineer of making a Super Bowl Championship team into a long term contender? Doesn’t really apply to our Browns.
Right. I have no idea how that situation is applicable to the Browns. It’s easy to build great depth when you start with a Super Bowl team and an all-time great defense, as you said.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 7, 2009 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
It’s easy to build great depth when you start with a Super Bowl team and an all-time great defense, as you said.
Is this a counter argument or a supporting one? Because you just made Savage’s job in Cleveland sound a lot more difficult.
by Western Reserve on Nov 7, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
I think the argument is that the kwoog wants to start off when the Ravens won the championship and not where they worked to get in that position. So yeah depth would be easy when you have a team talented enough to win the Super Bowl.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Why wouldn’t you want a Miami 08? I’d gladly take middle-of-the-road talent, a good coach, and a great GM.
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 6, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
I think you really are failing to understand what is actually happening.
Mangini, Kokinis, and Lerner all thought that Kokinis could work well with Mangini 8 months ago. Obviously they were all wrong. Kokinis was reportedly left out of major decisions. Kokinis and Mangini reportedly weren’t communicating as early as training camp. For several weeks the Browns have been gathering information on Kokinis, preparing to fire him with cause.
How is any of this idiotic management? What on earth would you have done differently? You can say it was a mistake to hire Kokinis in the first place, or to give Mangini so much power, but this decision seems pretty much like a layup. A no-brainer.
I really wonder if the Ravens forcing the Browns to hire Kokinis for a certain position has anything to do with either his lack of ability to do his job, lack of being asked to his job, lack of being allowed to do his job (not sure which is the case yet) and his subsequent firing. I think this issue could have an effect on the length of Mangini’s tenure as Browns coach.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
You can say it was a mistake to hire Kokinis in the first place, or to give Mangini so much power,
I think this is what he is saying. If this decision really was a “layup”, then the previous decision to hire Kokinis was atrociously bad.
Well, I think kwoog was saying much more than this. Besides, I’m not so sure. I mean, it seemed like Lerner had one huge qualification for the GM job- that the GM get a long with Mangini. Mangini and Kokinis were friends and Mangini wanted Kokinis as the GM.
I guess that I’m saying the decision to hire him was only atrociously bad if you could reasonably expect Lerner to foresee that Mangini and Kokinis relationship would fall apart on a professional level. I don’t really blame him for failing to see this.
I didn’t think the process of hiring Mangini and then Kokinis was very good. But the result looked like a decent fit.
If you were named President of the team last Sunday-with all power over the football operations- would you have kept Kokinis?
Chance, it’s the most violent game on Earth. Same could happen to Manning, Polamalu or Brees on any down.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
point
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
kwoog’s head.
by golanbatrac on Nov 6, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You didn’t have a point, like most morons. If you knew anything about decision making, objectivity and logic, you might be able to make them.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I understood his point.
Also, you must have trouble with logic, too, because you failed using logic above. You tried to prove a statement (it takes 6 years for a front office to build depth) by using the converse (all teams with depth have had their front office in place for at least 6 years). Of course, the converse of a statement is not necessarily true. So maybe you shouldn’t be lecturing others about logic and calling other people morons.
The Colts just lost Marlin Jackson AND Bob Sanders for the season. Something tells me they will still be fine.
Thank you for validating my point with my exact same example.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 7, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
To all of those talking about Kosar. He was already hired by the team as a consultant last month.
http://www.news-herald.com/articles/2009/10/18/sports/nh1583278.txt
Might the firing, and the disagreements between Mangini and Kokinis, have anything to do with the QB decisions?
Bringing in somebody independent of, but complimentary to Mangini, could be a good thing.
I also like the grooming of Daboll, rather than an outright firing. It is unfortunate that he is learning on the job, but that does not mean he will be unsuccessful in the end.
I’m still ok with Mangini’s “process”, and believe it will grow into something. Not all of the necessary steps could be made in one year. I also think the team will look better as the season progresses. With special teams and defense looking better, progress with the offense will make a big difference.
bum
The guy was an offensive line coach. His imagination consists of block left,right, a gap, b gap. Line coaches have no imagination and no ability to see any play down field which is why the Browns have no big plays in their play book.
Line coaches have no imagination and no ability to see any play down field
Sorry. Violates the “sweeping generalizations without a shred of evidence” rule. 5-post penalty, and replay the down.
by drjeo on Nov 4, 2009 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I said yesterday that Mangini as GM would be my perfect scenario, as I’ve been on board with most of what he has done in the personnel and draft areas. But I also said that it would never happen.
On TV they are saying “the Browns” have been investigating Kokinis, so they don´t have to pay the remainder of his contract. I don´t know about sources.
Kokinis was fired? Right?
Lerner has not spoken since.
Kokinis has not spoken since.
Let´s not help with speculation, how he may have been treated.
Unless you know he´s been wronged.
I think the Browns will do everything they can to NOT pay Kokinis. It will be interesting to see if they have been building a file on him in preparation to fight the inevitable court battle. That would mean they knew they were going to fire him for some time.
Brownsyup
the rumor is that this has been in the works for weeks
by notthatnoise on Nov 3, 2009 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
At this point I’m beginning to wonder if they have some way to avoid paying Mangini. If not, then they are left with the choice of either finding a GM who will go along with Mangini (which is looking like a suspect route to follow right now) or finding a GM who will stand up to him – which would seem to me to be a recreation (in some ways) of the Savage-Crennel antagonism. Can you say lose-lose?
There is more to this story than we are seeing (obvious i know), but his lack of being in the public almost makes me think he wasnt doing his job, whatever it is a GM does. Maybe he was visiting forums like this while on the clock….umm….uh-oh…
But ya something is there…gonna be a fun bye week.
Wouldn’t it be great if he were mooncamping…?
by golanbatrac on Nov 3, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Just tried to scan through these billion posts…
Summary:
- Kokinis fired for cause, no reason, because Lerner is stupid, because Lerner is smart, to make room for “the new football guy”, because “the new football guy” didn’t like him, because coach Mangini didn’t like him (though he picked him in the first place)
- Accorsi will be “the new football” guy (accompanied by cheers)
- Accorsi will NOT be “the new football” guy (accompanied by sobs)
- Bernie K. to be the new GM? (accompanied by laughter)
- The new coach should be [insert unemployed potential coach, old QB, and former Browns stadium janitor here]
This board is a fun place to be right now.
Brownsyup
This board is a fun place to be right now.
I see it kiind of like one big ‘over-the-internet’ group theorpy session.
Heck, if you’re at work, you’re getting paid for it.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Based on what?
I love Ryan as a personality, but as a Coach, I have serious doubts.
His defensive scheme is 132985723957897923938 times better than what we ran last year, and I believe if we had the talent that the Ravens/steelers had, we would be an extremely good defense.
our defense has been just as predictable as our offense. Thats how QB’s have been able to predict our safety blitzes. Ryan doesn’t confuse offenses and give as many different looks as those teams you mentioned, its not even close.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 3, 2009 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
Ryan completely tries to disguise blitzes and coverages. Did you not see the Bears game? The DBs and LBs wouldn’t stay in one place before the snap, learned the count and moved the exact second Cutler called for the ball. It was extremely unpredictable.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 10:57 PM EST up reply actions
Yea he tries, and at times it definitely can be more effective then last years defensive schemes. But Ryan’s skill is still a FAR cry from the really good defensive minds and he still has glaring weaknesses that are exploited far too often for me to sing his praises
by The Licensed Pessimist on Nov 3, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
He just doesn’t have the right personnel yet.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 3, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Ryan has at worst given me a lot of hope for the defense, unlike the offense.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 4, 2009 12:17 AM EST up reply actions
P.s. I disagree with everyone no matter what.
Sincerely,
Rocland.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 4, 2009 8:33 AM EST up reply actions
ONE PLAY. We got pwnd on a safety blitz on one play.
Last year I could correctly predict what every player in our Mel Tucker defense was going to do on 60+% of the plays.
Furthermore, it is Ryan’s first year as DC. In subsequent years, I would expect more and more wrinkles to be opened up, further disguising and nuancing our looks. This is why continuity is important.
Lastly, a player can disguise a coverage or a blitz more and more as they are a better and better player. Polamalu can show blitz in the A gap and still get to play deep in a Cover-2 against a really fast WR running a go route because 1. he is great at knowing/reading/reacting to the snap count and 2. he is fast. The slower you are and the less mental capacity you have, the less you can disguise.
The principles of disguising your defense are 1. don’t show too early while 2. still being in position to do your job. The more talented you are the later you can show because you can make up ground and accomplish #2 due to talent.
Garbage
The only person who should not be relieved of duty is Rob Ryan. If anyone has notice, the first 2 and a half quarters of basically every game, the Browns are in them. The offense is so pathetic that the D cannot catch a break long enough and eventually fade toward the end of the game.
They can add opinions from Mike Martz of the high flying rams and Daboll will still mess it up. You can’t just bring your buddies with you to start up a football team. This isn’t biddy league. These guys aren’t your kids or your friends kids. This is big boy football and you should have some kind of credentials to coach. It shouldn’t be your first time as a coordinator on a new team.
Mangina is a joke right now. He had tons of draft picks and not one of them has panned out this year. The WR are bums; Mack is average; the RB is out for the year and blah blah blah. Next year this team has 10 draft picks due to trading away all of its talent. The Browns need a plan and soon.
You know, we don’t take kindly to Manginaists around here. Mindless slurs get under our collective collar these days.
Totally agree about the D though. I hope Rob gets to keep his job through whatever personnel changes happen in the next couple of weeks.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 4, 2009 9:16 AM EST up reply actions
You can’t just bring your buddies with you to start up a football team.
Really? Why not? What if your buddies are the most qualified guys around? Do you have to disregard them because they’re people you like? Would it be better to bring in people you genuinely dislike instead? Also, if nobody ever hired first-time coordinators, where would all the coordinators come from in the future?
As has been said here before (even in this very thread), there is a plan in place. You might not like it, and that’s fine, but it’s just not accurate to say they “need a plan.”
We all feel your frustration, believe me. And I too like Ryan.
Ineed a fix real bad!!!
The only reason the Browns are sold out each week is because there are enough addicts out there to fill the seats. But I think by December even us hardened addicts will be hard pressed to get our fix on Sunday afternoons. Too cold gotta stay inside. We’ll have to go to a sportsbar or travel to Toledo or Columbus to see a game.because the last few home games will be blacked out. When a home game gets blacked out you know you’ve hit rock bottom. And we have hit rock bottom.
I hope so. That would at least indicate that it can’t get any worse!
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 8, 2009 1:49 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
