Dolphins fan here!!

Good- He had a good game plan against the Pats, Jets, and Saints this year.

Bad- Just about every other game plan.

Mangini probably lost his job because of him.

Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder

by jerseywahoo on Jan 18, 2011 5:33 PM EST reply actions

This is probably the funniest answer I've ever seen...LOL!!!

If you dont love the Pittsburgh Steelers then kiss my ass..I like bacon...and Rashad Evans is a pussy...
#1 Quinton Rampage the Dragon Slayer Jackson fan for LIFE..FTW!!!
A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic."
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his"
...

by Big-dawg on Jan 18, 2011 5:56 PM EST up reply actions

The Saint’s game plan was good? What was that? Let the defense be awesome?

by StuckInPa on Jan 18, 2011 6:55 PM EST up reply actions

That was the offensive game plan all year.

Your friendly neighborhood Mangini apologist.

by North Coast Flea on Jan 18, 2011 7:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Run into an unexpected lead and then drain clock. I can’t really mark that gameplan as a negative, we could have done a lot worse.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 19, 2011 4:08 AM EST up reply actions

He really, truly , honestly sucks.

sorry, but there really are no hopeful solutions for you.

start a grass-roots, fan-led movment to get rid of him as fast as humanly possible.

by discoinferno083 on Jan 18, 2011 6:04 PM EST reply actions

Now Browns fans, can you tell me the ~~good and~~ bad about Mr. Daboll?

Haha, everything he does is bad. NO and NE games were exceptions, weirdly enough. Somewhere, Brandon Marshall is crying.

If you haven't watched Inception, do it now. Right now.

by SpecialBrownie on Jan 18, 2011 6:08 PM EST reply actions

he’s showed flashes, but overall he’s pretty bad

Jake is my hommeboy

by davus on Jan 18, 2011 6:14 PM EST reply actions

Yes, in fact he developed Brett Favre at New York and Jake Delhomme right here in Cleveland.

You also might be interested in a bridge we currently have for sale…

It goes right to nowhere.

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is. -- Yogi Berra

by JustPlainBrowns on Jan 18, 2011 6:20 PM EST reply actions

I’m worried he may have made McCoy worse, yeesh.

If you haven't watched Inception, do it now. Right now.

by SpecialBrownie on Jan 18, 2011 6:21 PM EST up reply actions

The best thing Daboll ever did for us was leave.

Your friendly neighborhood Mangini apologist.

by North Coast Flea on Jan 18, 2011 7:14 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I’m not sure all of these are fair. I’m not a huge Daboll fan, by any means. But, I think Mangini may have held him back a little. Daboll had flashes of really nice use of trick plays and set up a running scheme that benefitted Peyton Hillis. Unfortunately, those aspects all but disappeared down the stretch. As far as plays, it seemed to me like he frequently had plays designed to overload one side of the field. This can work, but he didn’t often account for narrowed throwing lanes and you saw three routes run to similar places, which eliminated some receivers and led to so INTs due to tipped passes. I’m not sure about his developing players, as I don’t know how much progress we really saw in anybody here. There are pluses to Daboll, but he has a lot of growing to do to be an elite offensive coordinator. On the plus side, he’s young enough that could happen.

by Fundamentals on Jan 18, 2011 7:37 PM EST reply actions

Agreed. Our fans liked to scapegoat Daboll, but until we see what he can do with offensive talent, it’s really difficult to evaluate. Like our new head coach, your new o coordinator might as well be a complete wild card.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 18, 2011 7:41 PM EST up reply actions

so you are defending an offensive coach on speculation that a defensive minded HC handcuffed him? Lets not speculate and make mangini the scapegoat.

He definitely had his moments, but he was not at all consistently good and that blame is on him.

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Jan 18, 2011 9:29 PM EST up reply actions

Did you see Mangini’s article on how to beat the Pats? One of the first things he said was “most game are lost, not won.” That would indicate he might be handcuffing his offense in order to prevent turnovers.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 19, 2011 9:05 AM EST up reply actions

If that quote isn’t the most damning affirmation that Mangini “played not to lose” more often than not I don’t know what is.

Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. -- Vince Lombardi

by burntorangeandbrown on Jan 19, 2011 10:36 AM EST up reply actions

He did but he wasn’t entirely wrong. Every coach worth his weight in salt will tell you that turnovers are the stat that correlates the strongest to W/L and that mitigating risk is extremely important.

Winning the risk battle helps you win games in a big way…

…it’s just that you have to win that battle in an aggressive, tactical way.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 20, 2011 4:35 AM EST up reply actions

I saw that article, but I would not say that at all proves (or even significantly indicates) that he was handcuffing the O

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Jan 19, 2011 1:34 PM EST up reply actions

I didn’t say it proves anything, I said it indicates that he might be handcuffing his o coordinator. I challenge you to find a Mangini quote that indicates he pushes for an aggressive offense.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 19, 2011 3:30 PM EST up reply actions

but how do we know the difference between an OC that is conservative and a HC that is handcuffing him to be conservative? Speculation.

It is entirely possible that mangini handcuffed him, but all we have is some loosely related quotes.

I also challenge you to find a quote that indicates that Daboll pushes for an aggressive offense.

I would say all this boils down to is speculation into How much control mangini had over playcalling and speculation into the playcalling of daboll and how close that resembles our playcalling this year.

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Jan 19, 2011 3:50 PM EST up reply actions

It’s definitely speculation, that’s a lot of what we do here on the internet when we don’t have access to the team.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 19, 2011 5:36 PM EST up reply actions

this is true. all we can do is speculate, but it doesn’t make sense in my mind to automatically defend the OC based on one quote that might suggest its the HCs fault. Imo they are both to blame but since I know with greater certainty that Daboll had a lot of involvement on the offense, I av inclined to put more of the onus on him.

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Jan 19, 2011 11:24 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t know if the intent was to defend Daboll but to consider him more of an unknown.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 20, 2011 9:14 AM EST up reply actions

i think daboll is worthy of defense from the “he flat out sucks” claim … and i would put saying he’s an “unknown” (which is a pretty good characterization) down as a defense from that.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 20, 2011 12:03 PM EST up reply actions

okay. I understand that. I would say that he definitely is somewhat of an unknown

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Jan 20, 2011 12:35 PM EST up reply actions

(or even significantly indicates)

Not trying to be a smart@ss, but he did specifically address what you said

"They kept throwing it at me. I don’t know why. They just kept trying, and I just kept knocking it down." -- Joe Haden

by Kimble_79 on Jan 19, 2011 3:55 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t have the article link anymore, but I thought that was something he said he learned from Lord Ewok?

by Villeslgr on Jan 19, 2011 3:39 PM EST up reply actions

Yea, he was basically saying Belicheat coaches his teams so well not to lose and that they don’t beat themselves which is why he was envious.

by Roger Dorn on Jan 19, 2011 3:44 PM EST up reply actions

Trick plays don’t make an offense. They are tricks. When you resort to them, it means you aren’t good enough to score without them. I have a hard time putting trick plays in the “positive” category.

by Tyler T. on Jan 19, 2011 7:51 PM EST up reply actions

i think you have to give credit for effective, timely use of trick plays, though.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 19, 2011 8:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I guess it really depends on how you define “trick plays” but Bill Walsh potentially disagrees:

4. SPECIALS. One of the interesting things about Paul Brown Football is that he would always be terribly upset if someone would run a reverse before we did, or a run pass before we did. He would grab the phone and scream in my ear, “They did it before we did!” This was very distressing because it sounded so dated. But you know something, over the years, I found that Paul was 100% right. If you run your reverse first, and you can make 5 yards or more, the other guy won’t run his. If you have a special play of any kind, get it into the game quickly. How many of you have had a ball game and you have practiced two or three things that you thought for sure would work. The game is over and you didn’t try them or you are so far out of it, it doesn’t matter whether you try them or not. Paul was right. Set up your special plays early and run them early. Get them done, it affects your opposition.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 20, 2011 4:38 AM EST up reply actions

The forward pass was probably considered a gimmick or trick play by many at one time.

It’s all about the execution.

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is. -- Yogi Berra

by JustPlainBrowns on Jan 20, 2011 5:37 AM EST up reply actions

It was, but I still believe there is such a thing as a gimmick play.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 20, 2011 6:10 PM EST up reply actions

His playbook seemed incredibly broad but not very deep.

A simplified version: he would have a play and then one counter off of that play. He’d run the play over and over and over and then run the counter once or twice a year.

He was usually pretty conservative, but it’s hard to know if that was his idea or Mangini’s.

He was never not committed to the run.

He used some pre-snap movement but not as much as I’d like.

His offense went through the middle of the field; we passed to backs, tight ends, and slot receivers, and our plays seemed designed to get them open.

The outside WRs ran a lot of vertical routes, seeming to make a sight adjustment based on the CB to either run fade/go routes of deep comebacks.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 19, 2011 4:13 AM EST reply actions

I think the fact that the offense ran through the middle is a positive strike for Daboll. We didn’t really have any legit threats on the outside of the field… Shows he found the strength of our offense and planned accordingly. I think that’s the biggest reason Daboll is still an unknown. I think there were so many holes on the team that they couldn’t really give him the players he needed to do what he wanted to do. But I think he did maybe as good a job as possible with what he had to work with.

by shep615 on Jan 24, 2011 11:56 AM EST up reply actions

Chicken/Egg.

Many of us believe Watson is very good and our WRs are very bad based on their production. It could have just as easily been that Daboll wanted to minimize risk as much as possible, and believe throwing to the outside WRs was riskier.

Not saying we have world-beaters out there, but what he did didn’t work to perfection; our passing game left a lot to be desired last year.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Jan 25, 2011 4:30 AM EST up reply actions

Don’t listen to the people crapping on Daboll. We really have no idea how good or bad he is because we have very little offensive talent. The same people that think Daboll sucks are comfortable with our new HC, who is basically coming from the same situation. Your remark about developing QBs should have been particularly eye-opening, but I guess not.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Jan 19, 2011 9:53 AM EST reply actions

In two years as Browns’ OC, he had exactly five games in which we had a healthy and competent QB and a healthy RB at the same time. Five games with a healthy McCoy and a healthy Hillis. These five games include a loss to the Steelers, a close loss to the Jags, an OT loss to the Jets, and wins against New Orleans and New England.

Daboll can be good, I think.

Dawgs by Nature -- where Mike Holmgren, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Jan 19, 2011 10:39 AM EST reply actions

Not a lot positive to say about the guy. I wouldn’t be happy knowing what I know now were he made DC in my town… I think there must be better alternatives out there.

Brownsyup

by Brownsyup on Jan 19, 2011 10:58 AM EST reply actions

I wouldn’t want him as DC either.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Jan 19, 2011 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I’d take him as our OC, though.

Dawgs by Nature -- where Mike Holmgren, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on Jan 19, 2011 4:28 PM EST up reply actions

Did you not watch this?

You are reading my signature.

by rolub on Jan 19, 2011 1:33 PM EST reply actions

Daboll spelled backwards is ‘lol bad’…. sort of.

It’s not a lie if you believe it.

by Brownie's Year on Jan 20, 2011 7:24 AM EST reply actions 6 recs

Daboll

When I watched the browns play this year I was frustrated because it seemed like the coaches wernt taking advantage of the players natural talents. The browns seemed to have two opponents, the enemy and Dabolls plays. I honestly feel like Miami made a mistake on this one. Maybe they hired him as a puppet OC?

by Eric Vandergriff on Jan 28, 2011 5:42 PM EST reply actions