Holmgren's Radio Show Transcript Notes - "Head Coach" Title Too?

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 18, 2009 9:16 PM EST in General News Comment 39 comments

This week, things have definitely been brewing between Mike Holmgren and the Cleveland Browns. After meeting with owner Randy Lerner on Monday and Tuesday and reportedly having further talks throughout the week, Holmgren hosted his radio show on Seattle's KJR 950 AM earlier this morning.

Dan Delco over at No Logo Needed did a great job whipping up a transcript of Holmgren's show. Here are the highlights I pulled from it:

Holmgren doesn't know where the term "czar" came from, and he isn't really a fan of that term. I guess it's better if we stick to something more basic like "upper-management position."
The money associated with a contract was not discussed Monday or Tuesday. Holmgren simply met people within the organization, looked at some houses, etc. to get better acclimated with the city and what Lerner has in mind.
He felt good about his meeting with Holmgren. In terms of what position he would hold, Holmgren stated, "As far as the presentation, it would be any and all, I would say." Other outlets have indicated that this doesn't rule out a coaching position with the Browns (although I really don't see that happening).
If a deal were to happen, Holmgren would prefer that it happened sooner rather than later.
Holmgren stated that he was contacted by another NFL team, but did not say who.

Aaron Ziraks, a writer for No Logo Needed, had these impressions after listening to the interview:

After listening to Mike Holmgren speak on 950 AM in Seattle today, one thing specifically jumped out at me:

He was offered the house by owner Randy Lerner.

It seemed, to me, Holmgren skated around the issue of what exactly he was offered, which didn't surprise me. He did mention it was up to him to tell Lerner what capacity he wanted to work with the Browns. This was a little discouraging. In other words, if Holmgren wants to be the head coach and general manager, that is on the table.

Lerner has made it pretty clear that Holmgren is the guy he wants running the Browns. The offer presented to Holmgren, both lucratively (reportedly $8 to $10 million) and in terms of how much power he would have, seem pretty tough to turn away.

(You may use this thread to continue talking about all news related to Holmgren and the Browns)

0 recs | Comment 39 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: mike holmgren, Cleveland Browns

Comments

Holmgren doesn’t know where the term “czar” came from, and he isn’t really a fan of that term. I guess it’s better if we stick to something more basic like “upper-management position.”

He’s just being humble. Who doesn’t want to be compared to royalty?

by gahnki on Dec 18, 2009 10:09 PM EST reply actions

Almost every Louis from France probably wishes they would have stepped down in hindsight…

I hope thats not the royalty we’re comparing him to.

by SpecialBrownie on Dec 18, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions

The term czar is the Russian version of the title Caesar. The leaders of early western Russia used this title to trace their legitimacy to the leaders of Byzantium and Rome. Caesar was actually just a nickname for the man history knows as Julius Caesar. All it really means is “bald” and he got this nickname because he went bald at an early age. His successors, starting with Octavian, took this title to justify their claim to leadership.

by Bumblyjack on Dec 19, 2009 12:09 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

The above comment was just a joke, but the information is true.

Honestly, though, I do not want one man to be Head Coach, GM, and Czar. Aaron Ziraks’ comments are cause for concern.

by Bumblyjack on Dec 19, 2009 12:15 AM EST up reply actions

Honestly, though, I do not want one man to be Head Coach, GM, and Czar.

Agree. We need a system of checks and balances here. I’m really on the fence about Mangini staying or leaving…but I’d like to keep Ryan if Mangini does leave. Not sure if he would stay, though.

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 19, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions

Holmgren probably knows enough history to remember what actually happened to the czars.

"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay

by woodsmeister on Dec 19, 2009 11:27 AM EST up reply actions

This whole process is really making me lose a lot of confidence in Lerner’s ability as an owner. Pretty much all he has to do is not panic, make good hires, not let the patients take over the asylum, and sign checks. He’s got about 1/4 down right now.

by rufio on Dec 19, 2009 12:31 AM EST reply actions

Is he panicking though? We really don’t know who else he has interviewed, for all we know he has interviewed 10 people.

I do think it will be a mistake if Holmgren is coaching and GMing, but I really don’t see that happening, I think he will sign on in a player personnel role only which is exactly what I want to happen.

I also say Mangini gets another year at least.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 19, 2009 12:40 AM EST up reply actions

i also say mangini gets another year at least.

i believe this is also true, i for one have thought all along he should be given at least two years to see where he can take this team! although not happy with the hiring of mangini in the first place, he should be given the chance at least. i also like the fact that holmgren said he likes mangini, that has to give eric a boost of confidence, although when holmgren mentioned that although not fair to not give a guy a shot of more than a year, tough decisions have to be made and sometime that is not fair?, sounds to me like holmgren has been led by someone( randy lerner perhaps??) that eric may be out regardless. or at least thats what i read into that! holmgren should be vp of football oper. and hire a g.m. that fits his plan, and then they decide, if eric is gone after this season, who the new coach should be. going over to the draft aspect, i have noticed that some mock draft boads have toby gerhardt going in the third round, but they have us takin berry first( if he comes out early) which i would agree with, but they have us picking norwood ahead of gerhardt.that honestly in my opinion would be assinine! if toby falls that far, i say we grab him.what do you guys think about desmond briscoe from kansas? i believe6’4 and 220lbs. but has 4.4 40 speed and pretty good hand, most boards dont even have him in the first four rounds!!

by findlaybrownslover on Dec 19, 2009 2:30 AM EST up reply actions

We don´t need any new hires to have our speculations regarding the draft to have credence. This is not a hall of doors.

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 7:52 AM EST up reply actions

I think Mike Holmgren has emphatically stated that he loves Seattle, his family´s relations and living situation there, as well as pointing to his significant contributions to that franchise.
To force that job on him, constitutes disrepair in the making for him personally.

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 7:49 AM EST up reply actions

No one can force Holmgren to take any job. He’s a rich, accomplished guy with skills, and he doesn’t even need a job.

by rufio on Dec 19, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions

I really do feel like he is panicking. Obviously I haven’t sat down with the man. But a lot of the things from sitting down with fans who are protesting us not winning to latching on to the idea of Holmgren to the point where Holmgren would decide the capacity in which he works with the Browns? Not exactly my idea of a rational, calm, stable guy. More like “Please, Mike, I’ll give you anything you want!!!”

The media knew basically the minute Holmgren got off of the plane, do you honestly believe there could be 10 people out there that Lerner has talked to? I can totally believe 1 or 2 people could get by the all-knowing eye of Tony Grossi. But 5 or 10? There would at least be rumors connecting us to some other names.

Telling him can do anything he wants is really the most discouraging part to me. I also doubt it will actually happen, but when was the last time one person playing all those roles worked out for a team? I am not against the idea of Holmgren in the FO. I am thoroughly against Holmgren (or any person) as Coach, GM, and czar. The fact that Lerner left that option open is discouraging.

by rufio on Dec 19, 2009 3:30 PM EST up reply actions

To be fair, there has been plenty of other rumors for front office hires. Acrossi, the former seattle gm, Kosar, Womack, etc.

And it was mutually smart pr for lerner and holmgren to interview so publicly.

Trying to post from my new blackberry.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 19, 2009 4:17 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

So the plot thickens...

The man who did so good at being both GM and Head Coach of the Seahawks that they forced him to give up his GM duties is going to be hired by Lerner to be the Head Coach, GM and Parcells-wannabee. This has disaster written all over it.

by cleveland.brown on Dec 19, 2009 7:17 PM EST up reply actions

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 19, 2009 7:43 PM EST up reply actions

^ Bastards ^

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 20, 2009 10:11 AM EST up reply actions

What was the image?

by rufio on Dec 21, 2009 5:24 AM EST up reply actions

The titanic sinking.

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 21, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions

It isn’t that Holmgren was a bad GM, its that he was a bad GM while he was a coach at the same time.

So maybe Holmgren could be a great “czar”, I am willing to entertain that. He’s been around a lot of winning football and a lot of great coaches. He can’t be an idiot. He still can’t be a great GM and coach at the same time, and we’ve given him the power to be able to do that (apparently). I just see it as a little desperate.

And then what if we start out 1-11 next year, too? Does Lerner shake things up again? I thought he was sold on Mangini…until Mangini started losing.

by rufio on Dec 21, 2009 5:24 AM EST up reply actions

I rate this as a vote of no confidence in Big O Randy Lerner.
We´re at a crucial point in our ascension, whether certain persons are here yet or not.
I suppose we can´t count on you, then.

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 7:47 AM EST up reply actions

Lerner going balls out for holmgren IMO is the one thing he’s done right.

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 19, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions

To the point of offering him whatever position(s) he wants, though? I’m beginning to think that Randy’s lost his last marble.

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 19, 2009 3:29 PM EST up reply actions

There is a difference between aggressively going after a guy and desperately clinging to him. Maybe its just the way the media is feeding us the information, but I feel like Lerner is tending more toward the latter.

by rufio on Dec 19, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions

Like I eluded to above, I think this is just good pr by lerner. Whatever you think about the chances of actually getting holmgren here, such a public and strong play for him shows how serious Lerner is about this hire. It looks good to the fans and gives credibility to the position for other candidates.

So while holmgren may be using the Browns, the Browns are also using Holmgren. He is that respected.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 19, 2009 4:23 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

This.

He is showing the fans that he is going all out to bring in a respected football mind.

As for him taking everything over, I would doubt this. I think if he is GM/President he would hire a HC. If he is a HC he would hire a Pioli-type person who he trusts as a GM. Maybe even Ruskell.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 19, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions

He is showing the fans that he is going all out to bring in a respected football mind.

I still think that is the problem. He shouldn’t be doing what it takes to momentarily appease the fans, because the fans will hate anyone who isn’t winning. Lerner needs to do what it takes to win. Getting Holmgren could be what it takes, sure.

But ultimately, building a winning franchise takes stability, and for us it will probably take enduring another 1-2 years of looking like a pretty bad football team. What happens if people start protesting next year?

If Holmgren really is a smart guy, he will not take 100% control, and it is unlikely he would at the stage of his career he seems to be at, sure. What I think makes Lerner’s moves problematic are very much that he has offered this as a possibility, and not so much that I think Holmgren would actually do it.

Lerner has to know that no one has been a successful GM and HC at the same time since…Parcells in Dallas? And that is very much the exception, not the rule. Great coaches from Shannahan to Holmgren himself have failed doing it. Why even offer? If that (being a coach and GM) is the only condition under which Homgren will come here, do we really want him? I don’t.

by rufio on Dec 21, 2009 5:34 AM EST up reply actions

Gosh rufio, you´re terribly worked up about this.
I like Mike Holmgren, but he was with the Seahawks long enough to make it his team. There was a distinct flavor, and it´s not what I´m seeking for the Browns.
I was a Seahawks fan as a child and teenager.
I´m German American by the way, and due to scholastic and career decisions, I had no way of watching football through much of the 90´s. I have since been able to watch football on AFN, and I supported the Seahawks up to the Super Bowl appearance in 2006. Then I fell in love with Jay Cutler and tried supporting the Broncos as a consequence, I figured start with players you like and let that lead you somewhere, that failed as we all know.
But there was more at play here, the 80´s Seahawks that we loved, were no longer evident, and they thoroughly flubbed the Super Bowl.
Mike Holmgren is a great guy, a real Teddy Bear, a smart one. And he knows a thing or two about recruiting and winning.
Is it my flavor? Not quite.
Of the bunch you mentioned, I would actually go with Bernie Kosar, because there is a flavor. A very good one. And just like Sarah Palin, he might be exciting with the ingenuity of an All American support team.
Yeah, crazy. But like I said, of the ones mentioned…

by mooncamping on Dec 21, 2009 6:50 AM EST up reply actions

Oh, and I might add, had he been merely an offshoot of the successful 80´s 49ers, you know a Bill Walsh acolyte, I don´t think I would have supported him in Seattle. What had me impressed was the Green Bay team, that won the Super Bowl with Brett Favre.
But seriously, if you gave Matt Hasselbeck free pass completions, he would be 100%, and despite his record setting numbers I never once saw Shaun Alexander hit a hole with abandon. That´s not football gentlemen.

by mooncamping on Dec 21, 2009 7:06 AM EST up reply actions

Well said.

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 21, 2009 12:34 PM EST up reply actions

So while holmgren may be using the Browns, the Browns are also using Holmgren.

Interesting thought, RK. Remember how the meeting with Dawg Pound Mike actually went? A couple of hours of Lerner’s time paid major dividends in how he was perceived. Hmm…

"Everybody loves progress but not a lot of people love change." - E. Mangini, 12/11/2009

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 20, 2009 3:17 AM EST up reply actions

Here’s to hoping that nothing more comes of it than good PR. I just read on ESPN that the Seahawks made an offer to Holmgren over the weekend but he declined it. Too bad. I was really hoping that Holmgren would end up somewhere else so that the Browns would haven’t to start all over.

by cleveland.brown on Dec 20, 2009 6:44 AM EST up reply actions

Horrible news. We’re blowin’ her up again.

Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Dec 20, 2009 10:15 AM EST up reply actions

I have zero problem with either party using either party via the media.

by rufio on Dec 21, 2009 5:34 AM EST up reply actions

Stop playing Dote the Quote, ok?

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 7:37 AM EST reply actions

o_O

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Dec 19, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions

We give permission to Mike Holmgren to leverage against our flirtations.

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 8:05 AM EST reply actions

I think once again a strategic approach is evident. And yes, I discern that it is against Mike Holmgren.
It´s an old trick.
Get a guy to proclaim his loyalty, then wag another choice at him, in hopes that he doesn´t go shopping somewhere else. It´s like a double disloyalty claim at the outset.

by mooncamping on Dec 19, 2009 8:26 AM EST reply actions