DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Kevin Stefanski

Here's some fun facts for you:

In the last two seasons (2020, 2021), only 12 NFL teams have failed to make the playoffs either year. Of those 12 teams, every one of those teams have replaced their HC since 2020.

Since 2020 and including this year's record to date, the Miami Dolphins have the 6th best record in the entire NFL yet has not made the playoffs. They replaced their coach for 2022.

Of the 20 teams that have made playoff appearances since 2020, 5 of those teams or 25% have changed HC's since 2020.

Of all the 20 teams that made the playoffs in the last 2 years, only 2 are on pace for posting consecutive losing seasons without changing the HC - Washington currently 5-5 (2020 & 2021) and Cleveland currently 3-6 (2021 & 2022)

Don't worry about it Bone. Stefanski isn't going anywhere.

That's a shame. He's a poor head coach who might be good at his next stop. He's not a leader. He's a planner. A thinker. He's not a leader. He's not what the Browns need.

The Browns are doing Watson, the organization, and the fans a huge disservice to move forward with Stefanski into next year.

I agree Bone. My opinion on the Browns? Stay the course on O. Keep the O-line together as best as possible. If we lose Hunt, I'll miss him, but we have decent replacements. Keep KS and let him work with DW, one of the top 5 or 6 QB's in the league. Rust? maybe but I'm sure he'll shake it off and be one of the best again. Get another WR. Concentrate mostly on D. We need a couple of DT's a LB and a FS. With what we have now that should shore up our D. Oh. and I would replace Joe Woods. JMO on the subject matter.

I don't believe anyone has any way of knowing "yet" whether Stefanski will be here next year or not. Look towards those last six games this season to be a determining factor to get a sense for answering that question. It will give Haslam and watson a glimpse into the future.

You see, there are two distinct ways of looking at this and neither side knows how Halsam will be looking at it. On the one hand, as you Peen and some others suggest, continuity and building on what you have in place is certainly one way to see how things will move forward. On the other hand if Haslam feels, and a in large part if watson feels that Stefanski isn't the answer as to who can get you to the promise land with watson, moving forward with that belief in mind would seem pointless and a continuation in futility. That's what everything will hinge on.

When you dedicate 230 million dollars and multiple first round draft picks on what you believe is your franchise QB of the future, you don't move forward with a HC who doesn't share his vision. You don't move forward with a HC who you don't have the faith and belief in can maximize the time you have to win it all with that QB. By contrast you would never move away from a HC you believe can do all of those things.

The jury is still out and the last six games of this season will play out before the jury reaches a verdict.

I'll use the series "Building The Browns" here. Haslam bought the Browns in 2012. They've been "Building The Browns" ever since. And still that construction project has not been completed. The unprecedented contract and trade deal Haslam gave to get watson shows the urgency which Haslam has reached in order to get that job done. Unless he's sure that Stefanski is a critical part in completing that project don't expect to see Stefanski here for long.

Follow the money. Haslam married watson with that contract. He's not married to stefanski. Having yourself fooled into thinking the new Golden Boy who the future of the Browns depends on won't be a critical part of influencing Haslam's decision making isn't in any way being realistic. Look around. Tell me which top 5 or 10 NFL QB's have "no say" in their teams decision making? You don't snub the very person you're depending on to make your team great. Take a lesson from what happened in Houston. Do you really think watson agreed to come here with having no say?

This is an easy one if you actually take a look at the events and circumstances here.

Watson signed a contract extension with Houston and only a little over two months later sat out and refused to play because he had no say in the HC or GM. Now I know the standard reply here. "Yes but Houston told him he would have some say."

So we all know watson certainly wanted some say in the HC decision. Did he actually want to name the new HC? That can be debated but he certainly was demanding some input into that decision.

So now let's move forward to the circumstances when he decided to come to Cleveland. Haslam wasn't the only owner bidding for watson's services. There was a competition between four or five teams. So watson had the leverage of where he was going to go. A no trade clause in his contract insured him of that. Looking at his contract alone shows the desperation teams were willing to go to in order to acquire watson.

So with watson holding all of the leverage, why would anyone believe that he wouldn't demand and get the exact same thing he wanted in Houston? It seems your claim is that he would choose to go somewhere that refused to give him any say in the HC'ing decisions when that was the main sticking point as to why he refused to play on another team while he held all of the cards in the negotiations. To me that's some very fuzzy math.

There's no problem having a difference of opinion ... in fact it is healthy. Apparently (according to some on this board) Baker picker Freddie. That's been stated by the poster who shall remain nameless endlessly.

But specifically with regard to Watson ... who was it that flew at the eleventh hour - after the Browns had been discounted - to offer Watson the world? To give him a guaranteed contract? To beg and give Watson whatever he wanted in order to sign for the Browns ?? Yes - it was "senior business man Jimmy. A little hyperbole there? Maybe - but Jimmy was desperate. Jimmy has tied inextricably his image and reputation on the Watson signing ... not to mention one quarter of a BILLION guaranteed..... If you don't think Jimmy will listen and do pretty much anything Watson demands, I think you misread the balance of power in this relationship.

I think you're confusing naming a next HC with having input on not only should Stefanski stay but who the next HC should be. Those are two different things.

I don't want to get into a debate about KS particularly - but one of the biggest issues for me (other than the record and lack of the HC doping something about the defense) is the way the team has repeatedly over multiple years of KS leadership - come out absolutely flat against teams in big games and key match ups. Again, if this was a one time thing, there might be a host of reasons, when it is a pattern of play and team prep - its an issue. Based on your post above - it's like you believe a HC has no impact on how hard players play and how fired up and prepared they are.

Again - I am not saying fire KS. I am saying I have lost a lot or most of my faith in him and the 6 weeks we see him with Watson is going to be very key to how I feel at the end of the season. There are without doubt issues we have seen over 3 years that have not improved ... as a play caller he gets away from what we do best (run) - he's made repeated in game mismanaged calls - in key games we come out flat - as a HC he is responsible for getting out AHEAD of issues on D and Sp teams and resolving or addressing, has not happened. We went to the playoffs year 1 - with Baker who now everyone wants to label as a bad QB. We've regressed since there. This year Brissett is playing well enough to win and our record is 3-6. Where is the blame? Who is at fault for a team with DT's that don't fir the scheme we run? Who is at fault for a roster devoid of talent at key positions on D? Who is at fault for not demanding available players be signed who would have helped? Berry and KS work together as a team - so when Berry owns some of those issues, so does KS.

I think the simplest way to sum up how I feel is that I believe the questions and concerns are real - KS isn't a good HC in my eyes he is in a "he has to prove it to me" situation. It could go either way. Being a good OC, getting QB's to play above themselves is absolutely NOT what makes a good HC.

3-6. The team plays uninspired football. When they play a good coaching staff, we look completely out matched. Your stsr players in the media are implying they weren't ready for their opponents. Do I need to list more?

I am actually a little caught off guard by the amount of support Stefanski is getting...not from you, you will support until the evidence is no longer supportable, you always hold out. But there are some smart people on here who I like who support him as well. As I've stated before I attribute it to he doesn't look like a slob, normally doesn't say dumb things, and caught lightning in a bottle year 1. And people at this point have little tolerance for starting over. I get that.

I will admit the thought of starting over again isn't all that appealing, but I trust what I'm seeing way more than any amount of reasons being used to say he needs to stay. This is Baker all over again. Stefanski is not good and is not showing any signs of improvement. He just keeps regressing. And when the Browns are sitting at 4-5 after 9 games next year with Watson AND Stefanski everyone will start calling for his head like its a novel idea. Meanwhile to me all you did was postpone the inevitable and wasted another year of players talent and our fandom.

Browns fans are so used to losing they will accept mediocre very easily. Expect more.

Yep - but it's how you say it. It's how you conduct yourself. If you think BB saying "Do your job" didn't inspire players I think you are wrong. If you think it's easy to inspire people and "Do your job" is an example of how 'easy' it is - I think that's wrong. I think leading and inspiring and motivating - while being attention and detail orientated is HARD. I think KS has the attention to details part on offense, he simply needs to do it across the entire team, all phases of football AND find a way to be authentic and lead/inspire. As I said - he is has not yet proven to be able to do that and be a good HC. jmo

One thing that sounds so cliche' but I have found to be so accurate that it's almost amazing. A well coached team is a motivated team. You don't have to be a rah rah or a loud coach to accomplish that. But the cliche' I'm talking about is accurate the vast majority of the time....... "Well coached teams find a way to win." Conversely poorly coached teams find a way to lose.

People need to ask themselves what they have been witnessing to know which one of those types of HC's the Browns have in Stefanski.

I agree w/self motivation being important. I dont think a coach should HAVE to be a rah rah guy (they can be, but it’s not one of my prerequisites).

My only issues w/KS is his playcalling at times and his inability to fix the DC malpractice

So some teams are great at identifying "self motivated players" and other team suck at it. Coaching has nothing to do with motivating the team. Do you actually believe that?

The Titans started out the season 0-3. Then went on to win 6 out of their next 7 games. Tannehill is average at best. There were no major roster changes. Vrabel has been their HC for years now so the system hasn't changed.

So why is it Vrabel can manage to accomplish turning an 0-3 team around while Browns fans are watching a team that can't? Which one or combination of the ingredients you listed is it that the Browns are missing? Because seeing the Titans play they can create a victory from the jaws the of defeat while the Browns can create a defeat from the jaws of victory.

Why is it one of those teams most often times finds and creates a way to win while the other team seems to be doing just the opposite?

Vrabel is an outstanding head coach. His players play for him.

Stefanski's players don't play for him. They just play. Sort of.

Here’s my thing about KS, there’s no growth at all. In fact there’s more evidence of players getting worse the more they play for KS. Baker is a perfect example. First two years it looked like we finally fixed the QB position . Then the more KS had the offense the worse he started looking. Denzel ward is another. The only players that seem to get better is Oline and that’s all Callahan. Just looking around the league and there’s tons of evidence that coaching matters and having the right one pays immediate dividends and can turn around quickly, same way the opposite happens, having the wrong coach ruins teams. KS is mediocre as a HC and barely average playcaller and way below as a leader and teacher. He should not be here next year. He’s had his shot. It’s time to stop accepting mediocrity and excuses.

Your reply speaks volumes.

You’re clueless if you think 3-7 is the best ball of his career. That’s like being skinniest kid at fat camp. And baker came into the league good and got worse the longer he played for stefanski. And yes.. look around the league at teams that god better or worse with right/wrong coach.

I've never promoted the idea of firing Stefanski. All I've asked is that people be rational and objective about the situation at hand. I'm really not having much luck with that obviously.

Having a firm grasp of the obvious doesn't require knowing "all about everything".

Why is Richard Bisaccia not a HC right now?
Currently ST coordinator with the Packers but man, looking at the Raiders from Gruden to him to McDanials, he looks like a guy I would want as a HC of my team

Can Stefanski take this team to a Super Bowl
Yes or no.

I think SKI could take us to a Super Bowl and maybe win one. But he is definitely still learning his job and will continue to make mistakes we fans find as firable offenses. Honestly, I would like to see Ski as HC for at least 2 more seasons. He has HIS QB now, get a new DC, and let's roll in 23. But if we are not in the playoffs in 23 and 24, or by the time Ski's contract is up (thru 23?) and we're not 100% sure he's the guy, then yes, get a new HC. But I don't think we are that far out of contention and there is no need to make changes for the sake of changes. Been there, done that.

A new HC just resets the 5-year plan. And I'd like to just once, realize and materialize a 5-year plan's results.