Friday Browns Notes: Rob Ryan's Interest in Oakland
by Chris Pokorny on Jan 15, 2010 11:44 AM EST
in General News
Email
PrintYesterday, I fielded suggestions on what you would like this daily feature of news and nuggets to be titled. The most popular suggestions are listed in the poll attached to this post; please vote for your favorite. While I can't guarantee that the highest vote-getter will be chosen, it will factor into my decision nonetheless.
Rob Ryan Leaving Cleveland?
I wouldn't worry much, folks -- I don't think he'll be leaving the Cleveland Browns this season, especially since Al Davis has yet to fire Raiders head coach Tom Cable. Understandably so, Rob Ryan would love to be a head coach in the NFL. Among Ryan's quotes in the USA Today piece...
"I will be a head coach in this league, and I will be damn successful, too."
"Hell, yeah, I'd have interest [in coaching the Raiders]," Rob says. "I haven't talked to Mr. Davis because he has a coach. Let's see what happens."
"Nothing comes easy," Rob says of his wait for an opportunity. "There are a lot of good coaches out there, but there are only so many Ryans."
Even if Cable was fired, that still doesn't mean Ryan would be guaranteed a head coaching job. Ryan interviewed for Oakland's head coaching vacancy four years ago but did not get the job.
Todd Grantham Hired at UGA
Former Browns defensive coordinator Todd Grantham has been hired by the University of Georgia as their new defensive coordinator. Grantham has been serving as an assistant coach for the Dallas Cowboys, working with the team's defensive line. His only NFL experience as a defensive coordinator was with the Cleveland Browns from 2005-2007.
Scrutinizing Every Edwards Quote
Just to pull another gag here, I'll partially edit one of Braylon Edwards' most recent quotes:
"Finally that situation [referring to his court case] is behind me, so I’m able to forget about it," he said. "I’m able to fully step out of Cleveland and do everything I can as a Jet. I’m happy I can relax and just
playreturn to dropping footballs."
NFL Divisional Playoffs Schedule
Just in case you can't remember which games are on Saturday and which games are on Sunday, here you go:
- Saturday, 4:30 PM: Arizona vs. New Orleans on FOX [SB Nation Preview]
- Saturday, 8:15 PM: Baltimore vs. Indianapolis on CBS [SB Nation Preview]
- Sunday, 1:00 PM: Dallas vs. Minnesota on FOX [SB Nation Preview]
- Sunday, 4:40 PM: NYJ vs. San Diego on CBS [SB Nation Preview]
Previews of the game and my predictions will be unveiled in the open game threads Saturday and Sunday.
Partial Overhaul by Tom Heckert
Heckert dismissed the pro personnel group Thursday, spokesman Neal Gulkis said. The department was headed by senior director Steve Sabo, who had been with the Browns since 1998. Keith O’Quinn, Jim Jauch and James Kirkland were also let go. ... Heckert, Philadelphia’s former GM, is expected to bring in his own people to oversee pro personnel and scouting.
Off-Beat Notes
- The Cavs supposedly "tanked" purposely for LeBron James: "They trade all our guys away and we go real young, and the goal was to get LeBron and also to sell the team,'' Lucas said in an interview with FanHouse. "I didn't have a chance. ... You can't fault the Cavaliers for wanting to get LeBron. It was hard to get free agents to come there.''
- As the late-night war continues, reports surfaced yesterday that Conan O'Brien would be out as the Tonight Show host and that Jay Leno would promptly take over. Those reports have since been denied, and a decision from NBC is reportedly still pending. Until that decision comes, it's too fun listening to Conan and the non-NBC late-night hosts bash NBC and Leno.
- Here is some footage from the Browns 1957 Championship Game between the Lions and the Browns.
- SB Nation lists the key offseason dates for the NFL to remember.
- Don't forget to vote in the poll below!
74 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m not happy with how they set up the draft this year. Thursday night?? C’mon man!
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Jan 15, 2010 12:27 PM EST reply actions
Really, Thursday? Will it be exclusively on NFL Network as well?
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
ESPN and NFL N run it. But I prefer the NFL N over ESPN.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 15, 2010 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
about the cavs supposedly tanking to get lebron: DUH
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
I think this article sums it up well. If you define tanking as rebuilding then they did tank, much like every other bad team in the NBA. They traded away expensive, mediocre veterans for young players that might help them in the future and got rid of bad contracts. They played their younger players over more experienced players who may have given them a better chance to win that night. Losing baseball teams do much of the same thing.
But I don’t think they were purposely trying to lose games. The best evidence is the last game of that season; they had one less win than the Nuggets so all they had to do was lose the last game and they would have finished with the worst record. But they won and tied the Nuggets for the worst record, which reduced their chances to get LeBron. If they really were tanking then they wouldn’t have won that game.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Even if they were intentionally losing, it was for the obvious betterment of the franchise and the city. I find it impossible to find fault with that.
exactly. I don’t have a problem with tanking in the nba. Their system makes it hard to sign a star in free agency or to trade for one without mortgaging the rest of the franchise, so the only way to get one is through the draft. Its also much easier to project basketball talent than most other sports, so the draft is less of a crapshoot. sure there are busts (Joe Smith) but at the same time you can be relatively certain that the first 4-5 picks are going to be cornerstones of a team.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 15, 2010 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
I should also add that you can’t win in the nba without a dominant player on your team.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 15, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions
the draft is less of a crapshoot but you are not guarenteed a top 5 pick if you are one of the worst couple teams in the league. that is why the lottery is so great. it stops teams from purposely tanking (even though some sometimes do it anyways).
no, you are not guaranteed the top pick, but your chances sure are a hell of a lot better than everyone else. very rarely does the worst team in the league not end up with a top 3 pick.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 16, 2010 1:57 AM EST up reply actions
I think the rule is that the team with the worst pick can’t have lower than the third, but I could be wrong about that.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 16, 2010 2:03 AM EST up reply actions
if thats the rule they changed it recently i think. i seem to remember a team getting a lower pick than that recently, but honestly i could be making all of this up.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jan 16, 2010 2:28 AM EST up reply actions
I’m pretty sure that rule has always been around as long as the lottery. The lottery is only for the top 3 picks, as Ryan said, so the worst team is guarenteed no lower than the 4th pick.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
It is completely false. it is actually just as likely (in how the chips have fallen) that the #1 team will draft outside of the top 3. they have done it 3 times out of the last 5 years. oftentimes the worst team gets the second pick but they almost never get the first. that is how rare it was that we got lebron. it is more common (by the results) that the 7th or 8th worst team will get the first pick (like when K-Mart and duncan got drafted) than the worst team getting it. in fact, the last person to go to the worst team as a #1 pick was derrick coleman in 1990. that draft also produced gary payton, bimbo coles, and tyrone hill. it is before shaqs time. it is so long ago that danny ferry had just finished up his rookie season.
It is completely false. it is actually just as likely (in how the chips have fallen) that the #1 team will draft outside of the top 3.
whoa there. You are a overstating your point a lot. B19K is almost exactly right. The team with the worst record can’t have a pick lower than 4th.
In fact, the lottery is ONLY for the top 3 picks. Pick 4-14 are determined purely by record.
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
by Ryan Kelsey on Jan 16, 2010 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
This is exactly right.
Also, bross is incorrect about 1990 being the last time the worst team had the #1 pick. Orlando won the lottery in 2004 and so did Cleveland in 2003 (although they were tied with Denver for the worst record). So bross I would suggest you get your facts right before telling other people that they’re wrong.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
technically, the year orlando won it, charlotte (the expansion team) had the most ping pong balls…I just failed to clarify…I do have my facts right…
That is incorrect. Charlotte was given the 4th pick in the draft and did not participate in the lottery. And you also were wrong about the Cavs winning the lottery in 2003 with the worst record, as I mentioned above, so you did not have your facts right.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
You are right. I was under the impression that charlotte had the most ping pong balls.
yes. the cavs were tied for the worst record. I knew that, you knew that…everyone knows that.
But you didn’t say that.
in fact, the last person to go to the worst team as a #1 pick was derrick coleman in 1990
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 17, 2010 9:40 AM EST up reply actions
yes. I misquoted. I will admit that. I meant since the cavs. I was talking more about the team with the most ping pong balls and I thought charlotte had the most that year.
I admit I was wrong.
still, the basic premise is that the worst record does not alway guarentee a team the worst pick or two. oftentimes they do get the 4th pick, which is the worst they can get. thank you for informing me of that rule
I couldn’t remember if it was 3 or 4.
Thanks.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 16, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
maybe…they have never gotten lower than that so maybe that is a rule…
you are right about that though.
Like that pesky trade deadline I bet.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 17, 2010 12:53 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I didn’t know it was a rule. I have noticed that they do never get lower than the 4th so I do believe you.
No reason to believe us.
http://www.nba.com/features/inside_lottery_050524.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Draft_Lottery
fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com
it is still only a 25% chance. oftentimes the worst team doesn’t even get a top 3 pick. it happens often. it is a crapshoot trying to tank the team just to get a #1 pick. it is not like other sports where you are guarenteed a certain spot in the draft. also, what is the difference between so called “tanking” and trading away veterans to get younger. you could define rebuilding as “tanking” by the way people describe it. sometimes a team needs to rebuild and they ship away expensive and older players and yes, they won’t do as better that year, but they are building for the future. I do not know and do not have the ability to find out if owners have an ulterior motive for rebuilding, to get a higher pick.
Eh, there might be some ‘ethical’ type questions about it. It’s kind of like the arguments about whether teams should rest their starters when they are a lock for the NFL playoffs or should they always play their best, try to win for the fans, go for the perfect season, etc.
Now, I wouldn’t trade the King for the world and it all worked out for us in retrospect, but perhaps there is something about a system where teams find it in their rational self interest to lose games — I don’t know. Heck, teams like the Knicks and the Nets have been tanking for two seasons now trying to compete in the 2010 superstar sweepstakes.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 5:05 PM EST up reply actions
Hah, if people start referring to “rebuilding” as “tanking”… Well shoot… the Cleveland Indians have been tanking for the past what? decade? And the Indians haven’t even gotten their LeBron James yet! What fools!
It’s a weaker argument for the Browns, though. We’ve given and hung onto some bad contracts in our day and we may or may not have held on to some mediocre veterans too long.
Did you forget that the Indians had the best record in baseball and were one win away from making the World Series in 2007? And they also won 90+ games in 2005?
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
Oh I know that…It seems like since then we’ve started trading away most of our good players for young prospects. I mean I honestly don’t know what the strategy is unless we plan on just being a playoff contender every 2 years or so. I guess it would’ve made more sense to me to keep the stars on the team and make another run at the world series after 2007, but I guess the powers that be like rebuilding?
I think the strategy is acknowledging that we don’t have enough money to keep CC, Cliff, etc and that we might as well get something in return for them particularly when the team as constructed wasn’t winning anyway. I could be wrong though.
yes…by the john lucas logic of tanking, half of the teams in baseball are tanking at any given time. some that are even “tanking” end up doing okay. the giants in the MLB would be considered “tanking” because they are rebuilding and they cut bad contracts and played younger players. the giants in fact were in the playoff hunt for a while. tanking is such a bad word b/c most teams accused of “tanking” are actually just rebuilding.
They tried to make another run, in 2008 and 2009. They weren’t successful, because of injury and poor performance, so they decided to get what they could for guys like Cliff and CC and Victor before they left via free agency. It was their only option, honestly. That’s what small market teams have to do; stock up young prospects and hope they can all become stars at the same time.
Do you really think the front office and the owners like rebuilding? Really?? You really think they don’t want to win?
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 15, 2010 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I know what you mean and I think you’re right, the irrational sports fan just got the best of me. I was a HUGE Indians fan back in the day… I remember back when we had people like Omar Vizquel, Sandy Alomar Jr., Kenny Lofton, Jim Thome… My first game was a game at Jacob’s Field was when we SLAUGHTERED the Seattle Mariners and Omar Vizquel and Jose Mesa. I was heartbroken after we lost the World Series to the Marlins. I’ve seen lots of winning teams but none of them have been able to go the distance. And I remember some of my heroes like Jim Thome, Bartolo Colon, Manny Rameirez, and plenty of others leave Cleveland… I remember ‘05 and ’07. I even remember around ’03 or something when we were 1 game away from making the wildcard spot. So I guess this irrationality comes from some bottled up disappointment. I think I’m better now, tho.
Cleveland Indians baseball is depressing because of the gross disparities in the game. We’ve seen too many of our good players pack their bags. It’s a shame.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
I totally agree. It is just john Lucas (IMO) complaining that he never got to coach lebron. he got ousted and just got back into coaching this year as an assistant. he probably feels that not only did he get cheated out of coaching lebron, but the cavs organization ruined his coaching career.
the players they traded away were veterans and they traded them away for rising stars. lamond murray was only a good player when playing on a bad team…same as wesley person. these were horrible contracts (and miller they definitely would not be able to sign). Lucas said the front office “forced” him to play younger players. I do not know the legitimacy of this, but even if they did, I do not totally mind. when you are one of the worst teams in the league, you should play your younger players.
There is still the issue of the lottery, unless people want to say that was fixed…
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Jan 15, 2010 12:53 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
another plus for naming this feature “Around the Pound”; if steelers fans try to say it, it will really bring out their ridiculous south side pittsburgh accents – “Arahnd the Pahnd”.
So incredibly true.
Columbus til I die, Columbus til I die. I know I am, I swear I am, Columbus til I die!
Damn it feels good to be a Buckeye!
FKA BLAZER_FAN_199. Now an author for the Jackets Cannon! Check it out!
by Andrew Tolliver on Jan 15, 2010 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
You are assuming Steeler fans can read.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 15, 2010 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
My roommate is a Steelers fan and he can at least read SOME things. He’s really good at reading Steelers history. I know this because everytime I bring up the fact that we TRASHED the Steelers and ended their playoff hopes and dreams, he comes back with “Yeah? How many Super Bowls have the Browns won? None, that’s what I thought.” Unless he heard that from word of mouth, which is quite possible.
This is how you handle that problem:
Ask you Steeler room mate how many championships that the Steelers have won. He will respond with 6.
You then tell him that the Browns have won eight. If he doesn’t believe you, he can visit the link I gave you, it is a site on NFL history.
He will then come up with, but the Browns have been/won a Super Bowl.
Then ask him this; If Home Depot buys the naming rights to the Super Bowl (it’s not like that idea is that crazy) and renames the Super Bowl “the Home Depot Gigantic Bowl” does that erase the Super Bowls?
You will have to go slow, he is a Steeler fan after all.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 16, 2010 2:02 AM EST up reply actions
Nicely summarized, B19K. Information that should be in the arsenal of every Browns fan!
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jan 16, 2010 9:52 AM EST up reply actions
That old footage from the 1957 championship game is great! It’s actually striking how similar the game looks, some 50 years later.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 5:09 PM EST reply actions
I don’t know, I think I might have to take that rookie from Syracuse. He ran for some 900 yards. Seems like he has potential.
by Western Reserve on Jan 15, 2010 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
I read something really interesting today.
In the 1957 draft the Browns really wanted a QB with their first pick. They had targeted three players, John Brodie QB Stanford, Len Dawson QB Purdue and Halfback Paul Hornung Notre Dame only because because everyone thought he was the best player available.
Hornung went number 1 overall to the Green Bay Packers, Brodie went third to the San Francisco 49ers, and Dawson went the pick before the Browns, fifth overall, to the Pittsburgh Steelers.
The Browns were forced to take the fourth player on their draft board, Jim Brown. Sometimes, it is better to be lucky than good.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 15, 2010 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
Dawson was then traded to us. I know this because he went to my HS and we learned up on his history.
If I hear "There's always next year" one more time...
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 16, 2010 2:17 AM EST up reply actions
yeah…just a bit…
I know brown was on the team but there is a lot more footage out there of jim brown playing than otto graham…it was also partly commenting on how awesome it would have been if they played together…at least a year or two.
Otto Graham has some pretty good running backs playing with him, though. Marion Motley is in the Hall of Fame.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
I know marion motley was great. you do not have to quiz me on browns history…they also had dub jones who was a great player. I know my browns history.
the only point I was making is that brown is easily the best RB of all time and graham is one of the best QBs and it would have been awesome if they played together…
I’d say that Graham was easily the best and that Brown was one of the best.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jan 16, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
I would switch that. graham was one of the best QBs in history and Brown was easily the best RB. with RB, it is a very easy argument and it is hard to argue against brown. With QB, everyone seems to have their own opinion. since the QB is the leader, there have been many greats. it is easy to argue that montana or staubach are better than graham. you could argue manning or brady. there is much more of an argument when it comes down to QBs. there are many more factors and it depends how you weigh each one.
I never said you didn’t know your Browns history.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 16, 2010 11:32 PM 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.
Related FanPosts on Dawgs By Nature
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
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
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
