DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Hire Mike Vrabel as a Consultant

pretty surprising and encouraging IMO

Just imagine if we signed Flacco. People would be wanting Stefanski fired to be replaced by Vrabel AND Watson to be benched.

I'll need to set an over/under for which week someone says we should name Vrabel the HC.

If you define "people" as more than one person you may be correct. But let's not pretend it would become a thing.

I feel like Schwartz pulled some strings to help encourage this since Vrabel basically did the same for him.

Great signing! Love his fire.

In a vacuum, it sounds solid. At the same time, we're incorporating a lot of new voices. I wouldn't be surprised if we hired Belichick for something at this point. I'm also a bit curious about who's idea this was. Kind of feels like what some people were worried about potentially being an issue with Flacco backing up Watson could come into play. If the team struggles out of the gate, how many fans are going to be calling for Vrabel to replace Stefanski?

Having said that, it could work out just fine. Schwartz and Vrabel have worked together. As much as Vrabel came in to help us, I'm guessing Vrabel is interesting in seeing how the power structure is working here.

If you were starting a team and your two choices for coach are Vrabel or Stefanski, my guess is the majority of people would choose Vrabel.

Stefanski still needs to win a division, have success in the playoffs, and perform when expectations are high.

The fan boy cult that Stefanski has generated that you lead is kinda weird. In this cult, he can do no wrong and is beyond reproach. It. Is. Strange.

This is a big time hire. Good for the Browns.

It's a good signing. Mike Vrabel is a good coach. The people here in New England wanted him for the Pats HC. We're doing something here we've never done before; hiring very capable and knowledgeable people in supporting roles.

By "fan boy cult" do you mean the NFL that has twice named him coach of the year? I think it could very well be those on your side of this discussion that may be the cult. The "he can do no right" crowd.

I am curious as to what exactly his job description consists of as a "consultant."

Consulting.

another good resource for KS to bounce things off of, He's got 2 former HC's now as a resource. I can't think anything of negative about that.. In fact, I'd say that shows KS is starting to get more comfortable and confident where he's at that he wouldn't feel threatened by it.

Big hire. Looking forward to seeing Vrabel's fingerprints on this team.

I don't get that "fan boy" feeling at all. Not sure where you're getting it from. If anything, our fan base seems to be as fickle as it always was. Just go back and re-read the game day threads if you need proof.

If KS (or he and AB collaboratively) was the one who hired him, sure. If Haslam was, maybe not.


Fortunately, I don't think Stefanski will get intimidated like Pickett either way.

I guess you could count me as a cult member, but I am not sure I qualify, as I am in my early 60s.

Even more than the 2 COY awards in 4 seasons, I would be curious how many of our fans would have predicted more than 7 wins last season. Especially if they were told we would start 5 QBs, Conklin would be out for the year week 1 and a 4th round rookie would sub for him, Chubb would be injured week 1, and on , and on , and on

Vrable is exactly the kind of coach I would think most Browns fans envision as what they want in a coach. There really isn’t usually that “back up QB syndrome” thing with coaches, is there? I mean, I don’t remember Browns fans ever breaking that way.
He’s tough, he’s definitely respected by players, he’s got a lot of experience. I hope his presence brings some intensity and urgency to the team. Seems like a great hire.

This allowed Vrabel to take a job without a demotion. Win Win. And no, I don’t want a new HC. KS proved himself more than capable last year. But I’d rather have Vrabel working here than another AFC team, he’s an asset. And he doesn’t count against the cap.

As long as he prioritizes winning.

Vrabel is sitting back waiting to see if the Ohio State job becomes available!

I have little doubt that next year, Vrabel will get his shot at another HC job. College or Pros. He's just too good to be ignored. I'm still confused how he ended up available.

I think he wanted Belichick levels of control. If he was going to "take the blame," he wanted more power over the personnel he had to work with.

I think part of his coming here is he found that teams weren't willing to have one guy with all the power. So, he wanted to find out how to avoid a power struggle like the one that led him to be let go in Tennessee. Perhaps people think the collaborative set up we have here now is working, and Vrabel wants to figure out how to replicate it.

Hopefully, he likes how it works so much that he just decides to stay.

Having lived in the Nashville area for just over a decade now I can give you my take on it. Not saying it's factual but it's what I see as the reason. I believe Vrabel actually over performed with a poor QB. He made the playoff on the regular with a guy like Tannehill. But that will only get you so far. In trying to find a replacement for Tannehill their FO took a flier on Malik Wills in the 3rd round in the 2022 draft. Then a second round pick in 2023 with Will Levis.

In my view it was a case of a FO not giving a HC a decent QB and expecting him to pull of miracles without one. If anything the guys they drafted to replace Tannehill are worse than Tannehill. At least to this point because they're both still quite young. You know the big wigs in the FO need a fall guy. I don't look for things to get any better here in Nashville. At least not until they address the QB position.

I think Levis could turn out okay if they give him a competent OL, assuming Ridley lives up to the contract and Hopkins doesn't regress too precipitously. Bill Callahan should help there.

Trading away Vrabel's good players (AJ Brown, Byard) and replacing them with busts in the draft (to this point) must have been understandably frustrating.

It's an interesting move.

I half wonder if it might just be a case of Game Recognizes Game.... he had a pretty solid run in Tennessee and we might want to learn from him a bit, and I could see where he would want to learn how we're doing things.
You get two sides that mutually respect each other like that meeting up in Indy and it becomes pretty easy for the employer side to find a place for the needs employment side.

I like this

Browns doing things to improve the team, why not give it a try.

I feel like the Browns really want to give the team and the fans a SB chance, and they are doing things that may help.

Now being totally not serious, but having a little off season fun here.

Could you see Schwartz giving up the DC to Vrabel, then Schwartz takes over HC and Stefanski becomes OC because he loves calling the plays

Just having fun with this.

He did Schwartz a favor much like this.

Also, Ohio isn't a bad place to hang out if you might be interested in the OSU job if it were to open up.
Lot's of talk out there about Day's seat being at least a little bit warm.

I am still perturbed that the NFL still favors the QB position. Teams that are unable to get a top QB suffer. The Browns were close to creating a team that could win 11 games without having a top 10 QB. Sadly, I don't think it was sustainable or playoff-win-capable.

Teams like Tennessee who remain in the middle of the pack can never catch a break because they lack QB talent. Like the Browns, they need to sell out paying a heavy price to obtain a quality QB, or get lucky like Pittsburgh and Kansas City gambling on drafting a potential QB prospect.

I like this move. Him working and learning from Schwartz is a good thing for him. He is still getting money from Tennessee, could end up taking over for Schwartz in a year or two, I'd take that.

I don't understand your comment about the NFL favoring the QB position?

I agree that having a good QB gives teams an advantage, and you pretty much have to suck to be able to draft one. Even then, a good amount of those drafted early in round 1, if not bust out, end up being underperformers for the draft position.

The bottom line is there aren't 32 solid QB's to go around at any given time. Even so, I don't think we are going to see teams go back to 3 yards and a cloud of dust. That is why you see teams like the Browns go all in when a QB becomes available.

Either you lose a lot and get a shot to draft a stud, pay out the nose to get one, or languish away as a 7-8 win team and hope you get real lucky and draft a guy later in the draft who works out above expectations.

The rules are set up where you must have a QB to win. To win playoff games you have to have an elite QB. Here is where there are not 32. There are maybe five or six.

To get an elite QB, teams must tank to get a chance to draft the best QB.

Teams with all the pieces except a QB have a slim chance of winning the Super Bowl.

Teams that favor one side of the ball (defense or offense) have zero chance.

It is next to impossible to build a team unless a team has an elite QB.

You never have zero chance to win, but overall I don't get your point. I think it's been that way for a long time.

My question to you is what would you like to see happen to change things?? How would you lessen the importance of having a good QB? Maybe only allow the QB to throw 4 times a quarter? Allow the defense to have 14 players on the field? QB's can't run past the LOS?

First, allow corners a little more hand usage and lighten up the pass interference rules.

Second, tighten the rules on receivers setting picks.

Third, tighten the offensive line holding calls.

It will never happen because scoring will greatly be reduced.

It's quite true that the NFL is a corporation first and a sport second. As such they set the rules to give an advantage to what the fans want to see which helps generate the most revenue. A lot of us old school football fans enjoy a defensive fight between two teams as much and sometimes even more than high scoring, offensive passing display. But you can't fight such changes. I enjoy both types of games but fully understand the whys of what we are seeing now. If the NFL changed the rules to where we were seeing the kind of defensive dominated games we enjoyed in the past their ratings and revenue would tank. That certainly wouldn't be a smart move on their part.

just seeing this - it's an interesting move. He's a heck of a coach. Hopefully he fits in well as a consultant/assistant