ESPN reports that Lerner wants Holmgren
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 8, 2009 11:24 AM EST
170 comments
Just a few minutes ago on NFL Countdown, ESPN's Adam Schefter reported that the man Randy Lerner wants to bring in Mike Holmgren, former coach of the Packers and coach/GM of the Seahawks, as President of the Browns. He wants Holmgren to play the role that Parcells has with the Dolphins as the top football man in the organization and face of the franchise. Shefter said that Lerner also wants to talk to Ernie Accorsi, Rich McKay, and possibly Ron Wolf, but it's Holmgren's job to lose. If Holmgren would come to Cleveland, he would hire a GM and then those two would decide on the future of Eric Mangini as head coach.
At least it sounds like Lerner has a plan going forward and he wants to bring in an experienced man to run the operations. I wish he would have done this last offseason, but it sounds like he's learned from his mistake and is trying to rectify the situation. I guess this gives us hope for the future, which is all we can have at the moment.
UPDATE: ESPN.com now has an article by Schefter giving some more details.
0 recs |
170 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
i can’t imagine that bodes well for mangini. i would think someone like holmgren would want his own guy coaching the team, and i wouldn’t blame him. plus, i don’t think mangini would take kindly to losing most of the power he was seemingly given to start his run here. of course, i don’t know anything for sure, obviously.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 8, 2009 11:37 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Holgrem will do an overhaul of the current staff. He would deffinately bring in people he can trust. Not saying he couldn’t trust Mangini, but he would want to know about the guy. But the Browns pessimisim takes over and if Cower didn’t want to come here, why would Holgrem?
by holmes213 on Nov 8, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cowher didn’t want to go anywhere last year; he wanted to take a year off. The Browns aren’t any worse off than the Dolphins were two years ago when Parcells went there, so I see no reason to think that we couldn’t get Holmgren or someone like him to come to Cleveland. As I’ve said before, all these guys have huge egos so they all think they can turn this team around.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 8, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
Everyone one of these egomaniacs thinks “I can turn this around, and then everyone will really think I am a genius!”
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 8, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Schottenheimer also refused to coach. He also thinks it’s a mess up top and probably wouldn’t think about coming to Cleveland again.
by holmes213 on Nov 9, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
schottenheimer is retired and probably wants to stay that way. where did you hear otherwise?
by notthatnoise on Nov 9, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was once said that he would coach again if the team had talent. When asked if he would consider Cleveland he stated, “I don’t see that as being likely at all,” he said. “First of all, nobody has presented me with an overture and, secondly, I’ve kind of aligned myself and my life kind of where it is and if they want to pay me $30 million a year I’ll have to talk about it. I don’t see it [as being] likely.”
by holmes213 on Nov 9, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As I’ve said before, all these guys have huge egos so they all think they can turn this team around.
What’s your justification for this stance?
by joeee on Nov 8, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t mean that in a bad way. That was in response to the comment that Cowher didn’t want to come here, and point was that successful former coaches like Holmgren and Cowher and Shanahan won’t be afraid of coming to Cleveland because they all believe that they have the ability to turn this team around (much like Parcells has done in Miami). They’re not going to look at a situation and think it’s so bad that they can’t make it better, which is what the holmes implied. I just meant that they were confident in their own abilities to turn around the Browns if they took the job.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 8, 2009 7:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I do not deny their egos, I don’t think too many people would want to deal with the FO. But I guess if Lerner throws the money they will come.
by holmes213 on Nov 9, 2009 10:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The new person would be in control of the front office. They could clean house if they so desired.
by Roger Dorn on Nov 9, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right. After all, the Browns don’t really have much of a front office right now, anways. It’s just Mangini and some of his guys, but the new person could get rid of them if he wanted to. The person we’re hiring would only be reporting to Lerner so he could pretty much do whatever he wanted to on the football side of things.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 9, 2009 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, if we hire the right guy to run things, then keeping mangini or firing him wouldn’t matter either way, because i would trust the right guy coming in would know best. if we would hire holmgren and he says no thanks to mangini, then i would trust him over mangini.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
can you imagine cowher
and how his presence alone would rekindle the greatest rivalry of the 80s and 90s…Cleveland vs Pittsburgh!! id love it!
by SipedUp on Nov 10, 2009 12:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I saw this as well but knew someone else would post it. They also spoke about how Kokinis was put into counseling because he was so detached from the franchise.
Crazy.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 11:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Which proves why that line didn’t make sense.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 9, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just curious as to the story, as odd/uncomfortable as the circumstances around Kokinis’ firing were, counseling takes it to a new level.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 12:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this is a bizarre story. what could possibly have warranted all of that?
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Stuck into a disappointing figurehead position, reacting with apathy toward the whole mess and supposedly watching other NFL games as a work function. Depression?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 9, 2009 11:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Ihe should have done this in the last off season. I’m on board with bringing in an experienced football mind to approve of the decisions being made from here on out. I would like to see Mangini put his ego aside and work with someone like this for the better of the team. He needs to realize that he is still young and can learn a lot from someome like this.
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
by doggrad87 on Nov 8, 2009 11:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Where does this bit about Mangini’s monstrous ego come from? Honest question.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t say anything or even refer to “monstrous” about his ego. Just sayin that it’s common knowledge that Kotknus (sp) was brought in to be a yes man to what Mangini wanted. Now it seems that the position of power is going to shift and Mangini might need to start taking orders from someone or even need to ask for permission on things that matter. That could be diffuct for him to do. Just speculation on my part. I hope he gets along with whoever they bring in and they give him the chance to see things through. He dismantled this team to make it his own and I belive they should give him the chance to work with it.
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
by doggrad87 on Nov 8, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t intend to misrepresent what you said. There’s been lots of talk (mostly elsewhere) about Mangini’s monstrous/enormous/self-defeating ego since he was hired. I figured there had to be some specific incident that people were referring to.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s cool.
I think that at this point that the quickest way to turn this thing around and be succesfull is if Mangini can work with whomever is brought in and they don’t have to re-do again in the off season.
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
by doggrad87 on Nov 8, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This sounds too good to actually happen. Anyone else feel this jaded?
by L Train on Nov 8, 2009 11:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, too good to be true usually means that it is.
Still, when your a Browns fan do you ever lose hope?
Fooootball has been beary beary good to me.
by doggrad87 on Nov 8, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At least it sounds like Lerner has a plan going forward and he wants to bring in an experienced man to run the operations.
thank god. i really hope this happens.
by emily522 on Nov 8, 2009 12:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, we could really use some good news for a change
by bbstirrd on Nov 8, 2009 12:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting! If it happens, I do hope they get the rules of the road with Mangini clear right up front though. Otherwise this could degenerate into a political power struggle.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 8, 2009 12:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It’s SportsCenter. How is there a link? You just had to be able to watch it.
Fail for being a guy who doesn’t watch SportCenter.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fail for being a guy who doesn’t watch SportCenter.
Sportscenter is awful.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As a guy though, you still must watch it.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I stopped watching when they did the “who is NOW?” segments.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 8, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The stupid, hilarious antics of the reporters make up for the suckiness.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t have ESPN. I’m not interested in paying $40 extra per month for a Monday Night game and 60 channels of ‘Flip That House’.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adult Swim, 5% of Comedy Central, 40% of ESPN, and MNF (all in HD) are worth it, IMO.
by Simmsinns on Nov 8, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Amen my friend. And that sucks Golanbatrac, I get all those included with Dish.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Those are all included on cable as well, but none of it interests me.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t really watch all that much TV. Maybe an hour a day.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I see. I do know a few people like that.
As an insomniac, I can’t imagine the possible for me.
by Simmsinns on Nov 8, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I was lazy at first, and was hoping someone already knew considering the news was posted here.
Then when one suggested that there is no link to something ESPN is reporting, I thought to myself, uh that can’t be right. So I did what many do and searched Google News and to my surprise, the first result shown is the exact article that this post is referring to. Even written by the same guy who reported it on SC, Adam Schefter.
by Simmsinns on Nov 8, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The article wasn’t there when I first posted this, which is why I didn’t provide a link. It was just a report on NFL Countdown. I figured they would post an article soon afterwards but I’ve been busy and haven’t had the chance to update this.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 8, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and really how can you not watch NFL countdown, it is by far, by far the best pre=game show of the 3 or 4 out there. :)
by Red-Right-88 on Nov 9, 2009 8:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What is your avatar? It’s bugged me for months.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Inlayed hardwood flooring. Corner section.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ya cmon how could you miss that? LOL
by Red-Right-88 on Nov 9, 2009 8:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only person who doesn’t really understand this?
I am thinking that Holmgren would want to be the coach. Now if we are hiring him to come in now, look at what we have, and then become our head coach I am cool with that.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 8, 2009 12:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t he leave Seattle saying he was done with coaching but leaving the door open to being a GM, though? Maybe I’m misremembering…
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was understood that he was sitting out on season and would return only if a team gave him full control.
Either way, he could show up drunk and be better than what we have.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 8, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
one*
He has been rumored to be a canidate for the Redskins job. (Holmgren)
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 8, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Even Parcells wouldn’t take that job.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 8, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is that. At the very least, we’re more attractive to talent than the ’skins.
by golanbatrac on Nov 8, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep with those 11 draft picks staring the incoming GM in the face, we would seem to have first dibs on a GM with a rep and name….at least I hope.
by Red-Right-88 on Nov 9, 2009 8:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
right. any potential GM out there should be drooling at the chance to pick/package-and-trade-up with 11 picks. this next draft has a chance to be the most impactful one we’ve had since the return if the right guy is making the picks.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So, we have the picks and a GM generally has a big say in how they are used, but I’m assuming that he has to rely on input from his scouts. That begs the question, just how good are our scouts? Follow-up question: Have most of the Brown’s scouts been replaced over the last couple of regime changes or have they for the most part been carried forward?
by JustBob on Nov 10, 2009 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would to see a proven winner making the hiring decisions for this team, assuming he’ll be doing that as President of Football Operations.
by Simmsinns on Nov 8, 2009 1:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I like Holmgren, but not in a duel role where he coaches and is GM. I don’t think that is on the table. I do want a guy that will control everything from a personnel and football standpoint and let the coach do the coaching, whomever that may end up being.
by Roger Dorn on Nov 8, 2009 4:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
/agree. I don’t like the idea of one guy having complete control of game planning, talent evaluation, contracts, practice, etc. I think it is too much for one guy (in other words a coach/GM combo like Butch). If it is as it says that Holmgren would be allowed to hire a GM and then they’d evaluate coach Mangini and possibly hire their own coach, I’m OK with that.
One thing that worries me a bit though is that Holmgren, being a former coach, would meddle too much in the day-to-day coaching. If he can take a step back like Parcells seems to have done, that would be ideal.
As far as wanting to come here, I don’t think there is anything particular about Cleveland or the Cleveland Browns that would stop anyone from coming here, the owner pays and pays, the fans are great, the stadium is new and the Browns have a crap-load of picks next year. Most importantly, the current Browns are at rock-bottom and the only way to go is up. I can’t think of a more ideal situation in which to create a turn-around.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Nov 9, 2009 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
imagine being the guy to resurrect the browns. your statue would be worshipped for eternity.
as far as Holmgren meddling – forcing decisions on a coach would be bad; giving advice would be outstanding. he’s a super bowl coach, i’m sure he has a few tricks that could help mangini/the next coach
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It seems like the Browns have no option but to double-down (triple-down?) on egomaniacal personalities. Might as well be one of these guys with a much stronger reputation and track record than Mangini.
by APV on Nov 8, 2009 4:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
most coaches have egomaniacal personalities.
by notthatnoise on Nov 8, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
man espn comments are worse than cleveland.com
by notthatnoise on Nov 8, 2009 4:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Haha this is true.
They are way worse.
by skipkirk on Nov 9, 2009 6:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s hard to believe anything could be worse than God-awful.
by Chief WaDrew on Nov 9, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine the ignorant dregs of Cleveland sports fans. Add the ignorant dregs of fans of OTHER teams. Let them argue with each other. Fail to moderate.
See, it’s easy if you know how.
Want out of Cleveland? Easy - mess with LeBron's entourage.
by woodsmeister on Nov 9, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Browns Already Have a President
Are you sure about the prospective position for Holmgren? The Browns already have a president, Mike Keenan. He runs the business side of the operation, and has nothing to do with the football side. I doubt that Holmgren would want to deal with the business side, things such as selling tickets, accounting, information systems, security, concessions, etc.
by JB-Cleve on Nov 8, 2009 10:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Browns aren’t looking to replace Keenen, they’re looking for a guy to run the football operations. I don’t know if the title will be President or Vice-President or whatever, but he won’t be dealing with the business stuff, he’ll be dealing with the football side of the team.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 8, 2009 10:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i believe bill parcells’ title is VP of football operations, and i assume holmgren would hold a similar title.
by notthatnoise on Nov 9, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We want some one fresh, smart and unafraid, some one unmarred by either earlier Super Bowl success or failure.
A president presides. In our case he presides over a good sporting culture and a fan centric franchise, and the wins and titles that will inevitably follow.
What we don´t need is someone who was sent to manage success.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 7:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
As any Cleveland fan will tell you, wins and titles are certainly not inevitable.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 9, 2009 7:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We have a bright future. Why hide it?
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 7:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What we should be discussing is who will be the head coach eventually.
Like I have stated before, we would like Eric Mangini to be part of the club culture and front office. What his job designation will be is undecided.
I would very much like to hire a head coach like Lou Holtz. If not even Lou Holtz himself.
If you´re talking Seattle Seahawks spectrum, Jim Zorn is more interesting to me.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 7:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think Eric is too young to be going to the front office, I am sure he wants to coach. I am also sure he wants to be able to use those draft picks he stockpiled to improve his team. Lou is going to be 73. and has a sweet job at ESPN.
In a perfect world, if Mangini does get fired, give me Gruden. Or if I have to, Shanahan….I just dont like those “wild eyes” and not sure I could look at those every week. ;)
by Red-Right-88 on Nov 9, 2009 8:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i think gruden gets way too much credit. he built a good team in oakland (admittedly no small feat), then went on to have one super-bowl season in tampa with someone elses players. he then followed that up with years of mediocracy. shanahan, on the other hand, went to the playoffs almost every year.
by notthatnoise on Nov 9, 2009 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In the NFC West.
Want out of Cleveland? Easy - mess with LeBron's entourage.
by woodsmeister on Nov 9, 2009 10:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
AFC West.
Same thing, except for that little bit of SD dominance, and KC’s offense for about 4 years.
by rufio on Nov 10, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
those "wild eyes" would look ok on our sideline…
http://www.nba.com/media/cavaliers/come_on_cavs.mp3
by johnnyphoenix on Nov 9, 2009 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How is Mike Shanahan on defense?
I don´t consider a switch to coordinator a demotion, it´s just a different skill set.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You may not consider it a demotion, but any coach in the NFL would.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, we´ll stick with the playbook editor offer, then.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Shanahan had a pretty bad track record for defenses. I think his track record for defensive picks is pretty bad, too. At least in his last 4ish seasons.
by rufio on Nov 10, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
we would like Eric Mangini…
who is “we”?
You are reading my signature.
by rolub on Nov 9, 2009 9:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1. no, we shouldn’t be discussing the next coach; the mistake Lerner made this time was hiring the coach before the GM. we want a GM who will then decide on the next coach, be it mangini or a new hire. let’s get a solid GM, as in holmgren if we stick with the current conversation, and trust him to pick a good coach.
2. if we have to talk coach – lou holtz? really? you actually just said “hire lou holtz?” give me any modicum of evidence that he would even be on a list of the top 10 candidates for this coaching position.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The point is, we will facilitate changes.
A head coaching change is on the horizon. What Eric Mangini does in the mean time, and which of his decisions we will accomodate, is the pressing issue.
Implementing Eric Mangini and consequent changes is not considered a failure at this point.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d honestly like to keep Mangini around for 2 more seasons at least. Maybe I’ve said it before, but any coach that would have come into Cleveland to manage the team we have now would have had the same problems. I don’t know of anyone that would realistically say Mangini was hired because people believed he could take us to the playoffs during his first year. One of the big reasons he was hired was to instill some discipline into our team. Which he is doing. He has won with talent before in New York. Once we get some talent in Cleveland (11 draft picks, anyone? who says Mangini doesn’t have a plan?), we can start judging his performance in terms of wins and losses. We don’t have a very talented team right now, and I think Lerner understands that. So I don’t think there really is a coaching change on the horizon (unless whoever the GM ends up being decides to fire him… which I hope does not happen).
by shep615 on Nov 9, 2009 10:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what good is change if its for the worse? change for the sake of change would sink this organization even further. we need the right changes.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would very much like to hire a head coach like Lou Holtz. If not even Lou Holtz himself.
Reason #53,239,407 I’m glad that you are not our GM.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 9, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Holtz was a great college coach, but he is too old and I don’t think he would fit in the NFL.
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 9, 2009 8:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He didn’t work too well for the Jets.
by holmes213 on Nov 10, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea I know. He is still a great college coach.
by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 10, 2009 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to hire Mike Shanahan as editor of the Cleveland Browns playbook.
He is a master strategist.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 10:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know about “master strategist” but this would be a fun idea.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, here it is.
The GM will take a break. Keep up the good work.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When you are putting together a management team the first thing you need to do is to define your objective. After this has been identified you then have to get people that will do what is required to meet all phases of the objective.
Wasn’t Managini hired because Lerner liked his view of the direction the Browns should take in the future? If this is true the objective has been identified.
The next step is to make the fans and media aware of the objective and explain all further moves in this context. This was never done, this is one of the many responsibilities of a GM.
To date an effective GM could have diffused most of the outcry that has occurred over issues like the Jame Davis affair, the draft or BE/K2.
For example, the losing record is a reflection of the ‘blow it up and start over’ solution to the ongoing culture of mediocracy……no prima dona’s…….a team that reflects cold weather blue collar city.
The extra draft picks are down to Mangini, I don’t have a problem with who he has taken so far.
shep615 beat me to it
by overthere on Nov 9, 2009 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
We would like to hire Mike Shanahan as editor of the Cleveland Browns playbook.
If you remove one more post, moderator, we have grounds for a problem.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 10:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Moon, your Mike Shanahan post is still showing up on my browser, now twice.
by Roger Dorn on Nov 9, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Buckeye has hacked your computer.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not smart enough to do that.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 9, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I apologize. Keep moderating, then.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Was this exchange scripted? I had a good laugh.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
by Villeslgr on Nov 9, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have it once. But maybe twice is better. Repetition helps sometimes.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Just one more thing.
We would like to put Randy Lerner in charge of hiring players. Eric Mangini should be considering what new assistant coaches he wants.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is that like the royal “we” as in “we see our subjects and we wish them to pay more taxes in our mercy”?
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Nov 9, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, it´s the official we as in once and future GM of the Erie Dawgs. Erie Dawgs past tense representing all that is good and true with Cleveland football, and future tense as in former Cleveland Browns.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
We is the more decisive element in our decision making process, as compared to the more imploring I, represented in the internet presence of the GM of the Erie Dawgs, mooncamping.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
so you think lerner is the best talent evaluator out there, capable of hiring the best players? mangini and coach whatever bums lerner brings in? i’m sure you have a long list of players to recommend to randy too, don’t you moon? it starts with abalimiamaham evanstivitch, that amazing nose tackle from the harrisburg barber college, who is capable of 11.5 sacks per game in the nfl but no one has “discovered” yet.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Randy Lerner is the owner of the Cleveland Browns, and thus the only contractually unbound individual working for the Browns.
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it means his decisions won’t be affected by a contract. Therefore, I guess all his decisions will be based on the good of the team and not a contract.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
by Villeslgr on Nov 9, 2009 6:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now I say to myself, as talking to myself is a symptom of the current season, “why would I be hopeful about Holmgren and is my excitement similar to that I felt at the hiring of Mangini?”
Honestly, I wasn’t as excited about the Mangini hire. I accepted it and embraced it as an alternative to Crennel but I was concerned about the rushed nature of the hire. After it was a done deal I supported it as a hopeful fan and looked for the good.
So why should I be excited about Holgren? Stats to the rescue!
The first thing that jumps out at you is 17 years as an NFL coach. Belechik, Levy, Ditka, Schottenheimer and Shula are others that have that kind of tenure. There really isn’t a bad coach in the list of coaches with similar years. His career winning percentage is around 59%. That is really quite good for a coach with that many seasons under his belt. To compare: Belichik 62%, Cowher 62%, Fisher 55%, Parcells 57%, Gibbs 62%. It is really right up there with some of the best. Next 3 conference championships and a Super Bowl championship. The 3 conference championships is a very high number compared to others. I also like that he was successful with two different teams.
So yeah, I have a reason to be excited to see Holmgren associated with the Cleveland Browns in any capacity.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Nov 9, 2009 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah. Just read his wiki page. My god, he has presided, molded, and otherwise intricately involved in some great teams (QB Coach1984 BYU National Championship, 1988(QB) and 1989(OC) 49ers NFL Champs, 96(HC) Packers), great quarterbacks (Steve Young, Robbie Bosko at BYU, Montana and Young at San Fran, Favre at Green Bay, Hasselback at Seattle) and great offenses. Arguably some of the best ever.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That Wikipedia entry makes for interesting reading. (That’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Holmgren by the way.) Holmgren = experience.
Enjoyed the recent update there too: “He is being considered for the position of Vice President of Football Operations for the Cleveland Browns.”
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 9, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wrote that wiki page. Just so yah know. (Not really, just proving a point)
I can also write it to say he is the greatest person alive and rivals Obama for the 2012 campaign.
Never trust Wiki, it might be good for a quick look up but be careful.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 9, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, I’m very aware of the limits of wikipedia. And while I didn’t independently verify each of the above facts, I’m pretty sure each are correct.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the same thing on a History timeline project…
Damn you Wikipedia.
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 9, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I too am aware of the potential shakiness of Wikipedia. (I’ve edited a few things there myself.) Trust but verify.
I didn’t assume that particular quote meant much, but I always smile when I see something updated to current understanding that fast. Take that Encyclopedia Britannica. Sometimes fast and dirty beats clean and obsolete.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 9, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
mooncamping says: Fresh, smart and unafraid.
Good points, though, Brownsyup. Keep on excelling at what you do!
by mooncamping on Nov 9, 2009 11:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Brownsyup – it’s true, you are a good poster. however this is part of moon’s evil plan to convert us all one by one. see last weeks exchanges between him and Roger Dorn.
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 12:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Moon’s evil plan. I like it already.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 9, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You treat Moon like a dog off the street.
He may stink, come of as extremely weird for its breed but you feel sorry for it and sooner or later take it in.
Are you actually a cat lady?
by SpecialBrownie on Nov 9, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
robotic voice What evil plan? Moon is completely harmless. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain either… end robotic voice
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Nov 9, 2009 2:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that if we bring in Holmgren we could be very interested in Gruden. After all, he is a former Holmgren coach. Would he have a huge issue with working for him again?
A Holmgren-Gruden marriage would be sweet in my view. I know that Chucky has a rep for going through QB’s but I think he would be a good head coach for Quinn. He uses a west coast type offense that likes the short accurate throw.
Just my thoughts on a funky situation.
by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 9, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
i don’t think he’d go through QBs if he found a good one. he stuck with gannon awhile in oakland didn’t he?
by Dawg Nuts on Nov 9, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Holmgren and Gruden are two of my favorite coaches. I’d love that marriage.
Funny think, while Gruden went through QBs at a ridiculous pace, Holmgren has dealt with a singular great QB almost constantly throughout his career. Coincidence? Correlation? Causation??
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That sounds like math to me, suspicious…
As for a possible Holmgren/Gruden regime in Cleveland, I would also be quite happy with such a move. If Holmgren is brought in, I can’t see Mangini surviving such a move. Other than Gruden, who do we see stepping in at this point? I’m still skeptical that Cowher would come here unless we forked over some serious cash, and we’re already going to be paying $30 million out to football executives/coaches that don’t even work in Berea anymore. I feel that may play into the decision too (for good or bad, depending).
by Off-the-Chain on Nov 9, 2009 4:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For all Lerner’s supposed faults, reluctance to spend money isn’t one of them. Sure, Savage and Crennel are on the payroll another couple years, but that didn’t stop him from spending cash on Mangini and Kokinis. I don’t think he’ll stop spending money now, as long as he is convinced he is on the right path. Heck, guys like Accrosi and Holmgren aren’t going to come cheaply themselves.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty soon the gravey train is going to run out.
by holmes213 on Nov 9, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s doubtful. The NFL is a money-making machine.
by Buckeye Brad on Nov 9, 2009 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
when you owe people millions and they don’t work for you anymore… It will stop sometime.
by holmes213 on Nov 9, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not in a good football city. the NFL makes boat loads of cash, maybe if we had 12 coaches on the payroll, but not 3
by notthatnoise on Nov 9, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. As long as you’re bringing in more than you have to shell out, you’re OK. Or, if you’re a billionaire who doesn’t mind dipping into personal finances temporarily, that’s OK too. Actually, it’s pretty hard to own an NFL franchise and fail to make money, despite the Modell model.
by drjeo on Nov 9, 2009 8:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Cleveland Browns had 20 million in operating income in 2008. That’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
There was no decline in the Browns’ value as a franchise in 2008, despite the economy and our 4 win season.
So take that 20 million, and let’s call it 10 million due to taxes, interest, etc. There’s your mega-star head coach along with a mega-star GM right there.
If we started actually winning games, I could see their income rising sharply. If the economy rebounds, I think that would only be a bonus.
by rufio on Nov 10, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t deny that the NFL is a money making machine. I guess what I am basing it off of is a “normal” job. Whoe really wants to give someone a paycheck for years to come if you are not contributing to the company? I just think that that would get old after a while. But I am not a mulit millionaire.
by holmes213 on Nov 10, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No one wants to do that, absolutely. But if you could make a bigger profit by replacing your CEO (even though you have to pay him/her to leave, etc.) you replace your CEO.
I am sure Lerner’s goals are to:
1. Win
and
2. Make money
I think that IF he could accomplish both of those to a greater degree by canning Mangini and paying two coaches at once, he’d do it.
by rufio on Nov 10, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really. The Browns make a ton of money for Lerner and Lerner isn’t shy about spending some of his own billion+.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 10, 2009 8:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Very true. I don’t see Accorsi happening though, he seems pretty firmly retired. But you have a good point, either way a veteran name is going to cost Lerner. The state of the franchise means that they can be pretty demanding of Lerner as far as pay goes. Thanks for clearing that up.
by Off-the-Chain on Nov 9, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
count Bill Coher out to come to Cleveland; He likes the owners of the Steeler to much to coach in this division. Also he likes the weather where he is at and is waiting for the Carolina Panthers Job to open up. He is a friend of Richards, the owner of the Panthers.
wbaron
by wbaron on Nov 9, 2009 1:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Saw someone speculate today that Fox would probably keep his job in Carolina.
by Roger Dorn on Nov 9, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, we’ve heard all that before.
While I don’t think Cowher is coming to Cleveland in the near future, he does love the Browns and our history. The longer he is removed from the Rooneys and the Steelers and the longer he is removed from coaching, the less all that crap matters. IF he wants to coach again, he will. Wherever that opportunity comes up.
by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 9, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“opportunity” = pile of cash
You are reading my signature.
by rolub on Nov 9, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
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.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Browns Links
Browns News/Information
Pro Football Critics
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Blogs
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities
The Watercooler
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
Waiting for Next Year
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
