DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Head Coach Candidates

I'm willing to roll with him.

We'd have to really look good and have good results the last 8 weeks for me to hire Gregg for the full time. We'll see.

In true Browns fashion, what will probably happen is that he wins a few games... showing a little promise but leaving a lot of uncertainty whether to hire him back or not. I can see the arguments now:

"GW needs to go, we need to back the Brinks truck up to Riley or Toub's house!" vs. "He won as many games as Hue did in 3 yrs, he deserves a chance!"

For me, it'll be little things like penalty amount, clock management, adjustments at halftime, etc ... at least to tell if our past failures had SOME to do with coaching and we have more talent than our record proves

I'll reserve my thoughts on Gregg as HC after seeing a few games.

If the Browns kept him as HC going into next year, do you all think there would be any chance in bringing in a good offensive HC from college to take the OC position?

Could be. It'll be interesting to see our options. I do think it has some attraction because of Baker and our youth, but we have to show signs of life the last 8 games IMO

YTOWN...love that quote. hadn't heard it before.

More generally, why are people favoring Dan Campbell over Pete Carmichael? Just because of the half-season in Miami as HC? It seems to me that if we want a Saints guy, we should want the one that's been directing that offense.

Not picking on this, just general commentary of a random thought that popped into my head:

It struck me as funny how folks are so willing to take on a guy from the NCAA ranks, or some guy from another team, sight-unseen and knowing realistically nothing about them except what they *think* he brings to the table.... but, then when asked about a guy that is actually here and has begun to establish a track record in this organization and with these players, the thoughts are "welllllll, let's wait and see what he does....".


Just a funny observation

Ha! You have hitched your entire reputation that HUE was the greatest thing to ever walk the earth and was the only reason we were going to be successful.

If you don't put much stock into coaching, then why you acting like someone peed in your cheerios since he got fired?

coming into this situation for Gregg, I want to see decision making improve and penalties lowered each game. We have the talent to win a few games here on out.

But if we are continuing to have bad time management, bad depth chart decisions, refusal to let people play, and penalty after penalty, then Gregg will not have a job at years end, IMO.

Actually, you grossly misrepresent what his stance was.

The stance (correct me if I am misstating things, Vers) was that Hue's coaching wasn't a problem and wasn't the reason we were losing - which I fully agree with and support. We did not lose (or fail to win) games due to coaching fails on Hue's part.

I doubt Gregg wants to stick around. He may not have a choice though. He is under contract after all. The real thing that will hurt is veteran won over by Hue to come here ain't going to want to stick around either.

Understandable. For me personally, its a little weird for people to make crazy claims that this or that will happen if a certain person were the HC in Cleveland. That is where my reserve comes from in commenting now versus later. Hope you can understand a different perspective.

Happy birthday!

I think Williams would be happy to stick around as DC, or HC with his son as DC. He has players that can execute his scheme and a chance for Dorsey to get more of them. It's a pretty good situation to embrace.

I think as a DC, Williams has actually won over his defensive players. Time will tell if he will win his players over as the HC.

As we know, being a great coordinator, doesn't always mean you will be a great HC.

of course




I never buy into anything stated as an absolute like that. Things like that are just people with wishful thinking trying to convince themselves that this one thing will be the Great Panacea of Cleveland Football. Nothing ever works like that.

I absolutely disagree with that. How many times did me mismanage a game clock? I work at a bank and cant even count that high.

how many times did he say he was going to fix the penalty problems we were plagued with over 2.5 years? "Its a problem that's gotta get fixed, and im going to fix it"

If Mayfield was given the opportunity to compete like he should have - we absolutely would have won game 1 this year. No doubt in my mind.

Look how he managed the Kizer situation last year. I wasn't a Kessler fan, but there is no way on earth he was worse than Kizer. If Cody starts last year, we win a game or two.

And just for giggles, THIS


When asked last week why he didn't take timeouts before the half "Honestly, I don't even recall that"

Calling a flea flicker from your own endzone into triple coverage causes you to lose a game.

Thanks Purp. I don't reply to that poster anymore, but I never once said anything close to Hue was the greatest thing to ever walk the earth or that he was the only reason we were going to be successful.

In fact, I was one of the very first people to question some of his moves and accolades.

I started to defend him because I thought he was being unfairly blamed for the record. I also took into account the quotes from actual players and other coaches around the league. Guys like Joe Thomas, John Harbaugh, Mike Zimmer, etc. I also saw how his team played hard for him and believed in him.

And the main reason I supported him is because I think the constant changing of regimes has set this franchise back. The continually upheaval of the roster and the offensive and defensive schematics have bred losing.

He's gone. It's over. I didn't even bring him up. I said something about I don't put as much stock into coaching at the NFL level as many other folks. Someone chose to use that opportunity to take another cheap shot at my previous support of Hue.

Anyway, thanks for speaking up and Hue is gone and that won't change. It's over.

I *know* that you've never said any such thing, but folks can't let that get in the way of good hyperbolic rhetoric.


Yes, his record sucked, and yes he absolutely had his faults, but the vast majority of the non-wins (it is still funny to me to classify it that way) were NOT coaching issues by him. Period.

willit, to build your diatribe, you're bring up last year -- in reply to a statement I made regarding THIS YEAR. Try to get yourself together.

I agree with the part about constant upheaval of the roster and changing schemes. The NFL has shown you can win with different schemes.

Nobody really knows what's going to happen at the end of the season. Having some continuity, at least on defense, would be nice. Stay with the 4-3, or more broadly, the attacking 1-gap scheme we have going.

In an ideal world, we'd find a guy who can win and then stick with him for a long time. If that doesn't happen right away, there has to be a certain patience there, but within reason. For example, if a coach, in his first two years, manages to do significantly worse than every expansion team in league history, you probably don't want continuity with that guy.

However, if a guy shows real flashes of being something special, but just doesn't have all together yet, then of course you stick with him for a while. I wonder if that will be the situation next year. Winning right away is preferable, I believe we'll have the talent to do that, but if it's a first year head coach, there may be some growing pains. We'll see.

The timeout comments where last week. I think not knowing how many timeouts you have at half time in a 7-6 game very well go towards your fault in losing that game. But to each their own. The entire dynamic of that game very well could have been different. I don't think anyone single handily loses a game. But in the NFL HC and QB's get their records attached to them. Fair or not fair - that's just the way the football is. You are what your record says you are.

Every "non-win" as you put it, are because of actions of the team he coached and lead. If you are a leader of the team, which a HC is - no matter what happens W or L, that's your W and your L. You can blame the refs, players, etc. WE had a bad team for two years with little talent, I agree. but our team was not SO BAD that that 1-31 was acceptable to some of us.

Our roster was not worse than in 99. Or any other expansion team that has come into the league - yet they all outperformed Hue in his second year. The team that Hue inherited was bad, but that team got worse not better.

And my point to the poster was that if coaching is not that big a deal, why the tirades since he has been let go? Why doom and gloom if coaching doesn't matter? It was pure hypocrisy.

There was some discussion, I think in the "What Really Matters" thread about general coaching philosophies.

It seems like some people view the head coach as just the guy who schedules practice, gives rah rah speeches, and makes decisions on gamedays.

I see it differently. I see the head coach as the captain of the ship. He's the one who is responsible for all things that take place on the football field. He hires the coaching staff, they work with the players in the off-season, at practice, on gameday, etc.

The play on the field is the head coach's responsibility.

I'm not saying you should take one particular play and use one player's fault against the head coach. What I'm saying is, over the course of 32 or 40 games, you have several thousand plays to evaluate.

It's a game of inches and professional sports is kind of like Olympic lifts in that they are very much go or no go. What I mean is that a win is a win and a loss is a loss. We see these 1 score games and it's not so much about looking at the 4th down conversion that didn't work. It's more like, if one player had just been coached up a little bit better in the summer, he could have made that one play and that flips the game from a loss to a win.

This is not something that can really be tracked, but you can look at other parameters. Ultimately it comes down to wins/losses, hence, "You are what your record says you are."

(Yeah, I know it wasn't the most talented team, but he also significantly underperformed the Vegas over/unders in both years and I believe was the worst coach in the league against the spread during that time. I disagree with the idea that you can't learn anything from how a coach does with a bad team.)

When Vers states his opinion about Hue it is very fair and has a very realistic and appropriate viewpoint. But when he argues with people, it comes across as if he believes Hue had absolutely no fault in the 1-31 record. So I can understand how someone might get that impression.

Thanks Jester.

I have never once said that Hue doesn't deserve any blame. Not freaking once. I don't even say that he is a good coach. I have said he deserves a chance w/talent.

I did like what I saw on Hard Knocks and in the post game victory celebrations. I also liked what his players and colleagues said about him, but I was never a Hue Honk.

I can't believe that you are siding w/guys like will, Memphis, cfrs, Haus, etc.

So be it.

And Jester..............I have always liked you, but you are going to slam me and not even mention a post like this one?




Pfffttt.......

Not intending to slam you. Not sure how you got that from my post.

I didn't mention that post because it had nothing to do with my point. I was trying to point out that your opinion of Hue was fair but that because of the way you present your arguments I can see how people got a different impression.

Later Jester. You wanna single me out and let all this other crap go........which is far more egregious, than you and I are now done!

Quit whining like anyone owes you something. You act like a child.

j/c

Listening to Dan Patrick, Peter King seemed to kinda shoot down the Mike McCarthy to Cleveland rumors ... but thought Lincoln Riley is going to be in play more

Here are some of you comments about Hue - I find them fitting for the context of this topic.






hehe

Cool, you talk all the time about people calling names, yet you called half the board "dumb asses" THATS good for the board as you put it.



You earlier said people should get suspended for saying Hue Honks, but butt hurt is ok I guess?

This one didn't age to well did it!


wait you played and coached? Wow, I had no idea from 50000000 times you posted that.

These were all just from 1 single thread, from 1 episode of Hard Knocks. I would suspect there are hundreds more of your gleaming and gushing over Hue. But yea, we are the crazies ones when we say you thought hue was a great coach......

pfft

j/c:

I have heard that Matt Campbell is a candidate for the Brown's HC position. I know Matt. I know his family.

While I think it would be cool as can be that Matt be the HC of the Browns, I am kind of hoping he doesn't get it. He's a really good kid. He's smart, hard-working, and dedicated. I would hate to see him subjected to ugliness and hate of our fan base and local media. I would hate to see him have to deal w/our ownership. I would hate to see him devoured and spit out just like all of the other coaches who have been here.

They all turn into Hue threads.

I watched Campbell have a Toledo Rocket team ready to play and beat Iowa State in OT right after beating the Razorbacks in Arkansas. (It helped to have Kareem Hunt on the team). He so impressed the Cyclones they hired him the next year, lol. He has an air of confidence and I don't think any stage is too big for him. He sort of reminds me of Urban Myer.

I look at the history of interim HC's and coaching structures that give me an insight of what the future holds. Is it the golden rule? Pretty close. lol

The very definition of interim says a lot.

1.
in or for the intervening period; provisional or temporary.
"an interim arrangement"
synonyms: provisional, temporary, pro tem, stopgap, short-term, fill-in, caretaker, acting, transitional, makeshift, improvised, impromptu
"an interim advisory body"

It's extremely rare when and if an interim HC is ever retained. History dictates that once a new HC is hired, he will bring in his own staff. Nobody wants to take a HC job where he isn't in control of his own destiny in regards to his staff.

I can't swear that's the way things will happen. But if history is any indication, I'd make book on it.

You started off so well. It would have been nice to get your personal perspective about Matt and his family.

About the Browns head coaching job - I see it differently. First, going from Iowa State to a head coaching job in the NFL? That's a huge step up in the coaching world.

The Browns have many things going for them, all the things we've talked about on here - GM who is getting real players, most cap space in the league, and a plethora of young talent including at some of the game's most important positions.

About the fan base: I see passion. There are few fan bases so loyal as to put up with the constant losing, change, upheaval, infighting, and incompetence that we've seen from the Browns. Many fans are frustrated and sometimes we lash out. However, this lashing out means making mean posts on forums or calling into sports radio. These are not things that actually matter in the real world, and every head coach in the NFL should know that if they don't perform, they are going to be criticized.

If that bothers them so much then they shouldn't be a head coach in the first place. Luckily, I suspect Matt Campbell is too emotionally secure to let some mean forum posters get him down.