DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Chip Kelly Fired

Mangini turned out to be a turd.. No question. Pettine hasn't had much to work with but yeah, he's made his mistakes also.

yet when he came here....what happened?

oh yea, 5-11, 5-11.

Mangini the coach works. Mangini the talent evaluator sucks.

Swish yourself and Rish are easily the MOST emotional posters on this board. I have no delusions about convincing you about how wrong you are about Mangini, but you are.

Mangini came to a team devoid of talent and what talent was here their heads were so big their heads wouldn't fit in 1st Energy. He had NO draft picks and NO money. The second year he was here was only slightly better.

But from that he developed 3 pro bowl players and completely rid the team of the head cases we had and all of the over priced so called talent we had. The fact we had banked cash and draft picks was in no small part due to his taking a huge hit year one then of course PF showed up and Mangini was on borrowed time going forward.

I know its popular to BELIEVE it was Mangini's fault after all some one has to be to blame right? Og course you have to ignore a lot of things to get to that conclusion and that is the course you and many others have chosen.

Instead of judging him based on what he had to work with you choose to judge him based on record. But when you put both of those ingredients together he actually did better then anyone had a right to expect.

I doubt you and most members of this board could ever put that together... That actually makes me sad for you and others.

I'm going to address these two posts.

First, who isn't emotional at times? Aren't we all human? Aren't we all passionate about this team? Doesn't passion bring out emotion? I will never deny I can be emotional. I described my mood last night on the board as "salty". I was in one of those moods and it showed in my posts. But I would hardly describe the majority of my posts as emotional. I try to keep a level head and be objective. Offer praise when appropriate and offer criticism when appropriate. Even on topics where I may lean a certain way, I will definitely offer the other viewpoint if it's warranted. I have been a huge Manziel proponent and offered an opposing view last night. People read what they want to read, but in my opinion, I try to be fair. I can't really control how other people view my posts or interpret my written word. And largely, I really don't care.

The reason I am addressing this passive aggressive comment is because you felt the need to take a shot at me because I criticized your "theory" on why the Browns continue to suck, and it looks like you got your feelings hurt. You actually called me ignorant. I believe the correct phrase was "the most ignorant poster on this board" ... or something very close to that. Would you consider your response to be "emotional"?

The second quote is a common theme in most of your posts. You take pot shots at the intelligence of other posters. You constantly claim people won't get it or won't understand it as if you are president of the mensa association looking down on all of us little people. Why do most of your posts aim to insult others? Shouldn't that be considered an "emotional" response? It certainly smacks of insecurity. Insecure people often resort to passive aggressive behavior and let their emotions dictate their actions. I'm sure that's the way most people view your internet personality.

I'll end this by trying to add some football. Your "theory" is really close to being correct. But any true problem solver knows that in order to truly fix something, you have to address the root cause of the problem. That's where you missed the mark was on the root cause of the problem. I think I was pretty derogatory in my pointing that out to you, but that's because I wanted you to know that sometimes the "little people" can think too. And I like pushing your buttons. You're an easy target and it's fun.

Rish Rish Rish, you mistake emotion for passion.

You start the season by vowing to take on anyone and everyone who even attempts to put down Text. You follow that up with what we see today from you. Follow me so far.

Passionate people stick to their beliefs, your just wishy washy based on emotion. That's my point.

I respect passionate reason, I deplore emotional ignorance. You can guess which category I place you in.

Sound a lot like Chip Kelly.

Rish is not ignorant.

I know some are looking at Kelly's first 2 seasons but I do wonder, how much of that was the newness of his system to the NFL? Similar to the wildcat and even the spread option, they were pretty successful at first until the defenses caught up to them.

I know a large part of his downfall this year was his poor personnel decisions but I'm not so sure I would buy into the success of his system or his coaching after his short success. Add to the fact of the rumors of pretty much everyone hating him, I don't want him here. JMO

Are you sure about that?

My wife may disagree.

Mangini sucks...

His ego, his drafting, his coaching, gutting the team for "his" players, blowing 3 second round draft choices, his snotty attitude, and the fact that he set the team back again.. pathetic pile of dog crap....

How anyone can defend him is beyond me...

mangini is trash. he sucked here, he sucked with the jets, and he sucks in San Fran.

no emotion needed when talking facts.

whats his W-L record here in cleveland? that's all that matters.

yall keep talking about all these other things, but at the end of the day, if he was able to put those things together, he'd still be our coach.

but he didn't. he sucked. if he was so good, why hasn't he been considered for other jobs yet?

I see the fans against Mangini using the o'l win-loss argument. You're telling everyone Mangini had enough talent to make Cleveland a winner!

I also like when same fans forget Mangini's GM rolled and played dead. Oh, that's right Mangini was a bully making his friend cry!

Keep living the dream!!

you mean the W-L argument that determines if we're gonna get into the playoffs or not?

yea, i love that argument, too.

if a HC can't get us into the playoffs, then he's trash. that's the goal people, not these moral victories and silver linings we seem to cling to as fans.

y'all keep getting sold on hope instead of being sold on results.

So, Cleveland's lack of talent means nothing, it is the coach who should win games. After all it is all about the W and L. This is what you're stating? Your pipe dream comes thinking coaches turn crap into gold.

we've had lack of talent for a while now.

i'm starting to think it's less the players and more the Coaching.

hell, people on this board year after year say we have a lack of talent.

they even said we had a lack of talent when we went 10-6 in 2007.

we had a lack of talent, yet somehow won 7 games, would've been more if not for Hoyer's epic meltdown.

HC and GM are suppose to fix that.

we've had how many first round picks?

and damn near ALL of them seem to be bust?

nah, i think we get trash coaches back to back to back. mangini, to me, is simply another trash coach in a long list of trash coaches.

pettine had me sold last year, 7-9, i thought we was finally gonna make a push.

but there wasn't that many changes on the defensive side of the ball that justifies going from a top 10 defense last year, to being last in the league in almost every single category this year.

so you and others can use the talent excuse, but a HC's job is to get the most out of his players and scheme accordingly.

mangini didny, thats why he's fired, thats why he's not a HC anywhere else.

You can't win in the NFL without talent. Schemes only get you so far. If your theory had merit, teams like Baltimore and Dallas don't fall apart with talent lost. Atlanta changed their coaching staff...same results.

Actually it is not even talent that wins. It really is talent playing well at a high level.

well NE hasn't had a ton of top tier talent until recently, they managed to get to the playoffs.

look at some of those guys for seattle. hell, sherman was a 5th round pick. Norman from the panthers was 4th rounder? 5th?

hell, Cutler had forte, marshall, and the other WR, and their team still couldn't get it done, thats why Mark Trestman got the axe.

we've had pro bowlers on this squad. we have talent. we don't have coaches.

and by your logic, using shanny as an example. he help us to 7 games.

what has our current group of coaches led us to?

Cleveland's talent isn't even in the same timezone as NE or Seattle. Who says NE has mediocre talent? NE simply doesn't show up in individual stats. Belichick, as does Mangini, preach/live team before self.

Shanny's also lost 6 and 7 games in a row two years in a row. Once injuries take hold, nothing left in the talent tank continuing the charge. It is one of Cleveland most biggest weaknesses. It is why they played well early last year and struggled in the end. This year Cleveland was hit hard early and weakened fast. They improved each week, but talent wasn't good enough.

Cleveland's schedule this year compared to last provided no favors. Cleveland took care of teams which had less talent this year.

You are still fighting the Mangini vs H and H battle.

here's the truth:

5'11, 5'11.

there is no fight, as since he's no longer on the team, i already won.

5'11, 5'11, your boy is trash.

But But,, Mangini didn't have any talent here... so it wasn't his fault..

Of course, Pettin's team was loaded with talent

I just read on NFL.com that Belichick was surprised by the Kelly Firing., He thought Kelly was doing a great job... he said that the guys that Kelly got rid of aren't doing anything elswhere... Guess he missed Maclin last week..

He also said you can't build a new team in one year. That's how long Kelly had to build his. One year.

j/c:

Chip Kelly's mixed messages led to downfall

Regarding Chip Kelly: Buyer beware.

The Tennessee Titans, or any other NFL team considering Kelly as its next head coach, should beware in hiring someone who so often contradicted what others said or his own actions. At the very least, they should be careful in giving him any personnel power.

Of all of Kelly's moments of truthiness - for he could have believed every word he said - the one that was most egregious was denying in March that he had anything to do with being given control of Eagles personnel. He said it was strictly Jeffrey Lurie's decision.

While every final decision is ultimately made by the owner, Lurie made it clear on Wednesday that he wouldn't have ousted Howie Roseman as general manager in favor of Kelly had the coach not "insisted on decisively" having final say.

"One of the ways to make him accountable was to have him make those decisions," Lurie said.

But Kelly didn't seem to want to be held accountable for some decisions, or at least was more interested in playing semantics than in taking responsibility for every bit of the 6-9 Eagles.

On Monday, he had the gall to say he wasn't the general manager. Technically, he wasn't. But Lurie's paying customers didn't want to hear lawyerspeak after their team had just been embarrassed for the fourth time in six games.

It's possible the boss didn't, either. Kelly was out a day later.

Lurie was never asked if Kelly's deflections bothered him or caused him to trust his coach any less. But after 14 years of Andy Reid, who despite some flaws was as honorable as coaches go, the owner had to be wary of someone who had helped turn the NovaCare Complex into a building of distrust in less than three years.

Kelly had lost some of the players. There were obvious communication problems. Safety Malcolm Jenkins pinned blame on both parties. But players aren't in positions of authority and Kelly had all the clout.

"He's got to have a little more proactive approach to engage with players," Jenkins said.

He struggled with juggling both coach and "GM" roles from the get go. With Roseman's role diluted, Kelly didn't have a bad cop to assume blame when contract decisions were made. Reid had Joe Banner.

That doesn't mean Kelly didn't try to pass the buck. He once sent a text message to a player who wanted a new deal that said, "I'm not in charge of contracts. I know they are not going to renegotiate yours."

Kelly had full authority over both the 90-man and 53-man rosters. There was no "they." He even often cited the salary cap for some of his more controversial moves. The players weren't ignorant to the obvious fact that Kelly wore both hats.

"I think that is a difficult thing to handle and I think that some guys can do that," Eagles center Jason Kelce said Thursday. "I think some guys have the people skills to be able to make that work."

Kelly said on several occasions that LeSean McCoy, through his agent, wouldn't renegotiate his contract on the offseason. McCoy, who was traded to the Bills, said in December that the Eagles never approached him about a restructured deal.

After releasing DeSean Jackson, Kelly gave various reasons for the controversial move, depending upon the audience. He told Redskins media that Jackson's size influenced the decision. But he re-signed the undersized Jeremy Maclin, drafted the 5-foot-11 Josh Huff last year and took 198-pound Nelson Agholor in the first round this year.

There were claims Kelly made that simply lacked credibility - too many to list here. He said McCoy's contract was the sole reason for his departure and then he went and invested as much in the running back position. Kelly said he had nothing to do with Tom Gamble's being hired, but was the only person in the organization to praise him even after he was fired.

He would sometimes offer up a relatively insignificant detail only to be disputed later on. After Kelly traded Brandon Boykin in August, he said they had hugged. Boykin wrote specifically not long after in the Players' Tribune that they hadn't embraced.

Coaches, of course, tell white lies to the media all the time. It is just gamesmanship and done to protect their team's performance on the field. So Kelly's feigned ignorance about injuries - while extreme - was mostly par for the course.

Fans, to some extent, wanted to be deceived as long as it benefited their team. But Kelly did some of his players little favor in downplaying their injuries. And as the losing mounted, the cat-and-mouse games he played with reporters weren't tolerated as much.

Attempts to reach Kelly were unsuccessful. He released a statement on Wednesday evening and said in closing that "life is all about responding to challenges and seizing opportunities."

There have been varying reports on where he wishes to land next year. But if he wants to stay in the NFL, he will have to change more than just his relationship with players. Maybe he can. Maybe he will realize his past mistakes. Some do, most don't.

It says here that he can still coach and be successful in the NFL. His offense - despite some of the disastrous personnel choices he made - still gained 424 yards against the Cardinals, one of the top defenses in the league.

But he was stubborn and set in his ways. The same could be said of almost all of his relationships since becoming Eagles coach. An unwillingness to admit defeat or be candid with others will almost always lead to a web of inconsistencies.

And Kelly, ultimately, spun his way out of Philadelphia.

jmclane@phillynews.com

@Jeff_McLane


Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagl...xsm2VqjoQaQH.99

I don't want Kelly..

We weren't good enough for him before, so he supposedly dissed the Browns..

Now I sure in hell wouldn't want to be the team to bail his ass out and help him stay in the NFL

The only way I would even consider Kelly is if we could 1st bring in a top flight, well established GM, who would make decision in concert with the head coach, but who would not get railroaded by the head coach.

I cannot imagine any such person coming to Cleveland, though, if we make our 4th change in 5 years. Who wants to come here just to be "next"?

Eventually the law of averages will catch up with us and something is going to work.

Yeah, that's worked so well with the 7 (full time) head coaches we've had since the team came back in 1999.

Don't our odds get better every time? It may not be this time or even the next but certainly before the turn of the next century we'll have a combination that works.

Not if we keep firing them every year or 2.

The very worst thing is this: (on a serious note)


We have all kinds of "busts", in some part because the team keeps changing leadership, so players who struggle early on are given up on, instead of being developed. Now, not every player who struggles early on will come around and become a contributing NFL player, but some could.

We had a DL set up for a 4-3 defense. (as an example) So what did we do? We went and hired a 3-4 defensive coordinator for head coach. That necessitated changes at DL and LB both.

Next we could hire a head coach who wants to run a 4-3 next. What happens then? Where does a guy like Shelton play in the 4-3? (this is just as example)

I bet that we have had at least 1 or 2 "busts" over the years because we changed the team concepts and philosophies, and forced players into positions they were never brought in to play.

I am just tired of the constant blowing things up. Pick someone and give them a chance to build something. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work .... but give someone 4 or 5 years to take the long approach and turn this Titanic around.

j/c:

People want Chip Kelly after reading all that has went on in Philly? Or, haven't they read about the lies, deceit, and allegations?

Does it really matter? He is about to fire everyone. In his presser, his first words, "we are going to do our do diligence and get it right this time!" Two years from Monday we will hear the same line.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see anyone saying they "want" Kelly here. I sure as hell don't.