DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns News 2.0

Even for you, this is a huge stretch. Callahan wanted to coach with his son. What father wouldn’t?

Just more justification that the Watson trade was the worst in NFL history. Hmm, seems to me there was one individual that was responsible for both the Johnny Manziel draft disaster and the Watson trade disaster.

The homeless dude did this?!

No kidding. I about spit up my coffee when I read that.

The person listening to the homeless dude.

The Athletic’s Jason Lloyd On Deshaun Watson:

“For three years, the Browns contorted themselves to match Watson’s strengths and desires. But teammates ultimately grew tired of the organization catering to an ineffective quarterback, and he never really fit in Cleveland. He received at least one death threat. But after he arrived in Cleveland, Watson never embraced Stefanski’s system. He wanted to be in shotgun, and Stefanski wanted him under center to make the play-action component more effective. You have to bring Joe back; somebody has to teach Deshaun the offense,” one member of the organization said as the season neared its conclusion. “Joe picked it up faster in 30 days than Deshaun has in two years.”

So the entire problem is watson. I think most of us had a pretty good idea that was the problem.

Wonder if he gets bumped up to TE coach for us going forward.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DE2lKZ_xJX1/

Along lines of one the posts above. On my phone so apologies if this is a duplicate.

I think Callahan saw it as an opportunity to first and foremost get out from what he saw as a sinking ship and secondly, an opportuniy to coach with his son. I lend credence to Jason Lloyd's report. The Athletic doesn't put out stories to just make "noise." Lloyd talks to players and has always been close with Bitonio.

In 2023 when Brian Callahan was interviewing for HC jobs, Bill Callahan told him he would not be joining him if he landed a job. Additionally, the timeline of Callahan's departure fits.

From an article back in Feb. 2024 after the Titans made the hire.

"I always wanted to work with him, never knew if I'd have the opportunity to be honest," Brian explained. "It's one of those things when you've got guys under contract and we're in different places, never knew if it was gonna work. We had a conversation really the year previous when I was interviewing for a couple jobs and he had said that 'we wouldn't work together.' He was very happy where he was at, didn't really wanna leave and felt like I should do that on my own,. But it just timed up great. It's kind of where he's at in his career."

Bill's departure didn't come until about two weeks after Brian left his post as the Bengals offensive coordinator to take the Titans job, giving credence to the idea that it wasn't entirely clear if he would leave Cleveland. Brian also explained that his father was always adamant that he blazed his own path in the NFL and made a point in not working with him along the way.

"I didn't really know if he wanted to come or not until he got the job cause I was kind of working off the assumption that he was that way last year where he wasn't interested," Brian added. "Thrilled to have him and be able to work with him every day."

https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/news/...bill-callahan-didnt-want-to-leave-browns

My signature will never die.

LOL Not exactly a bombshell.... more like common knowledge.

Fixing the Browns Part 2: Moving on from the Deshaun Watson era
Story by CurtissBrown

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ot...7e05f5cb75446e965cac3059f5995c&ei=40



A couple of excerpts from the article that stood out to me.

Former Browns offensive line coach Bill Callahan would’ve stayed had the team kept offensive coordinator Alex Van Pelt (Callahan eventually left for the Tennessee Titans to coach with his son, Brian)

Head coach Kevin Stefanski was hesitant to call out Watson’s struggles which led to some frustration from a few players
When Watson tore his Achilles, the team felt a cloud was lifted (which is a telling sign about how they felt about Watson being there)

A member of the team felt they should’ve brought back quarterback Joe Flacco because Flacco knew the offense better than Watson isn’t a surprise (it wouldn’t have mattered if Flacco came back considering how he played poorly in Indianapolis)

I think it more the opposite. Coach with the son would be the bigger influence, but getting out was also a consideration. I do think he disagreed with the teams stance on treating Watsons fragile ego with kid gloves.

It was a serious mistake to have one player on the team who was more or less "untouchable". You remember that "teacher's pet" back in grammar school. It became clear you couldn't rough him up, but you sure as heck could ignore him.

Watson was the pariah in the room.

All I can say is that I hope they learn from this.

A sinking ship? You mean right after the Browns had just made the playoffs? If you look at how many players there on the roster I'm sure you can find one that thinks like what Loyd described. I don't think that represents what most of the OL has to say on the matter. And Loyd is reporting the juiciest thing he heard among all of them. Because you know, that makes for a good story.

Fixed it for ya.

Hmmm - it might be common knowledge on the inside or those with sources close to the inside. But I dare say that if a poster had suggested this was going on back in the middle of the season most would have disagreed and said it was hyperbole or hating on DW. I think common variety fans who may have had serious questions are still gobsmacked by just how bad this reads.

The glaring issue (other than confirmation of the Browns making the worst trade and contract in NFL history - certainly most neutrals would probably agree with that) .... We have another situation where Stefanski is weak and can't handle a player. That right there is beyond troubling. With Baker, sure Baker was a Butt Head and immature - but you'd want the HC to be able to help a young guy on the wrong track and that clearly didn't happen. Baker wouldn't sit when he was injured - and you'd want a HC strong enoough to simply do what's best for the team and player ... didn't happen. Instead we had a 3rd string rookie playing RT going one on one with TJ Watt in the final game of a crappy season to cement and ensure the rift was never going to heal.

So that's what you got out of it then? Interesting......

What’s concerning are the weak leadership, the inconsistency when it comes to accountability and how dysfunctional everything seems to be.

Cuddling him in front of his teammates.
Didn’t hold him accountable when everyone and his dog saw that he was cooked.
Let him start the 2024 season undoubtedly unprepared and physically not fit.
How could the FO accept him going back to Florida after his injury instead of doing his rehab in Cleveland?
(a QB with his salary must lead by example on every level - including being part of the team and the FO must show the fan base that he respect his contract even when he’s injured)

There’s so many mind blowing decisions that’s hard to defend from a neutral standpoint.

What’s your take on how the FO and Stefanski handled Watson situation?

1. I think the complaining about the whole complaint about the offensive system changes (KS offense to Dorsey) and Conklin's comments are valid but also a bit of MMQB'ing. We sold the farm for Watson and he was our starter. Continually molding the offense to your fQB (which it was assumed he'd be) is what you're supposed to do. When it works it's a good move. The trouble is Watson not only didn't improve with the tailoring of the offense, but got measurably worse. NOT molding your offense to the strengths of your QB (especially when he looks like he's struggling) would be the dumb thing to do.

I think, if anything, it further highlights the issue with getting a QB that doesn't fit with the offensive system.

2. I also think it's wild that a QB that has enjoyed the success Watson had in the past has struggled so mightily to pick up an offensive system.

3. I always chuckle when people refer to Watson as a "mobile" QB. Dude lost his wheels when he left Houston... Flacco and Winston looked like they moved better than Watson.

4. Callahan bailed when AVP got axed... honestly, I buy this rumor. Especially seeing the abortion that our offense become trying to marry some of the things we were doing well to spread concepts to hopefully help Watson, it's not hard to imagine that once Callahan heard the plan then he decided he wanted no part.

5. Stefanski not pointing out Watson's mistakes is the mark of a weak coach and a failing locker room. I'm probably a KS apologist on here, but you'll never convince me that this part of the story isn't anything but a massive 'L' in the column of Stefanski's leadership ability.

100%. That right there ^ is why the comments about the QB dump and the QB trade will live longer than the Couch/Holcomb debates could ever hope to have lived...at least as long as the decision-makers are still in the organization.

They dumped a QB who is a perfect fit for a KS offense and sold the farm for a QB who was/is the polar opposite of the prototypical KS offense QB.

I'm not sure that Watson (the skill set) not fitting is as clear cut as laid out. Watson (the person/ego) not wanting/being willing to fit appears to have been a problem.

Alas, the contract gave him a lot of power. Further to our detriment, the rest of the team didn't fit what Watson wanted to do.

My take is Stefanski works for the FO. Just like everywhere else you are required to follow the instructions of your bosses. Stefanski is stradded with the meal the owner and FO have put on his plate. Knowing the basic way corporations are structured can be quite beneficial. I'm pretty sure the bosses didn't want anyone upsetting the apple cart with their 230 million dollar man.

Have you have heard about the book “Tear down the pyramids”?

Having a chain of command that involves too many layers of isn’t only ineffective and slow but also dysfunctional because sooner or later those who execute the decisions is more concerned about their own position than what’s best for the organization. Today modern organizations are using a more including process when they make decisions that affect their employees or their working environment.

An NFL organization has basically three key positions. GM, HC and the QB. They’re all depending on each other to be successful and the HC is what we call the middle man, the bridge between the FO and the players.

The idea that the owner, the GM or the FO is planning to change QB without the HCs input is laughable.

Secondly the owner or the GM doesn’t take such a crucial decision without knowing that everyone affected are fully on board.

Most likely the GM and the HC have a weekly meeting where they discuss and calibrate their plans how to move forward. (If they don’t you should be really worried)
When necessary they involve the owner if they need some sort of confirmation.

Kevin Stefanski has several times mention that he almost every week talk to Jimmy Haslam.
What do you think they talk about. The weather or who’s their favorite cheer leader?

Sorry but it's the upper management which consists of the owner and FO. Then under them is the coaching staff. And while the GM, owner and HC probably meet, it would involve discussing what the HC job is involved with. You know, coaching the team.

No NFL GM or owner, unless you have a HC like Andy Reed, is going to allow a HC to dictate their jobs or decisions. The Browns pay millions to both an analytics and to a scouting department. Yet you seem to ignore the fact that much of what you are describing as Stefanksi's job is actually their job. And this team isn't paying them for nothing.

People being more concerned about their own position than the organization is a feature of the people involved not the organizational structure. I think Berry and Stefanski try to put the team first. Unfortunately, Watson may have been more concerned with his own position. The idea that they didn't put enough emphasis on that area before signing DeShaun, I could get behind. The scheme fit and on field decision making not so much. I believe the football stuff could have worked. That got trumped by the ego stuff. Considering that appeared in some ways to also be an issue with Baker, it probably should have been looked at more thoroughly.

How exactly you actually get accurate reads on a player's ego is another question. QB requires a certain amount of confidence. It's also easier to appear team first when having success.

I don't know man. I think the HC is a part of upper management. He may have some limits but he has a voice at the decision making table.

He clearly isn't on par with the asst coaches or the VP of ticketing or legal. He is way above that. He does have a large voice in football operations, and in any company operations has a huge voice.

So do you think the FO, which the HC is not a part of, has an analytics department and a scouting department they pay millions of dollars to and are professional experts at those skills, only to defer to the HC on such matters?

See, that's where I'm at. A HC is heavily involved with the team on an every day basis. In creating a game plan week by week based on his opponent. Installing that game plan. Now I'm sure that the FO asks him how players are doing. If they're coming along and if he thinks players fill the role he has in mind for them. What type of or style of player he needs at different positions.

But beyond that you have a scouting department that gets paid to evaluate players 52 weeks a year. You have an analytics department full of statistics and number crunchers who specialize in exactly that.

I think there is clearly a line at where a HC's input ends and professionals who have been hired to specialize in doing their part picks up.

Here’s the thing.

The analytics and the scouting department provide hard facts. Second hand information.
Stats. Personal background information. Scouting stats like numbers from the combine a s o.

When it was time for the final decision I assume that the owner asked the GM and the HC for their recommendation and then they made a joint decision where Jimmy had the decisive vote regarding the size of the contract.

The tragic failure the Browns FO, the analytics and the scouting department did was to totally ignore the mental and the psychological aspects.
Either by incompetence or plain arrogance.

It’s in this stage of the process Berry’s and Stefanski’s inexperience and lack of common sense is shining through and that’s why I don’t fully trust them.

This feels like you are assuming facts not in evidence. Or possibly purposely making things up to support your own agenda or have simply got caught up in your own narrative.

Did they not get it right? Obviously. To characterize it as "totally ignore" is BS.

Incompetence and arrogance aren't the only options. Assessing psychology sounds simple enough, but it's likely one of the most complex areas in all of human existence and the hardest to quantify. Most people don't fully understand their own. No one can have full access to someone else's. It can be expressed differently in different situations. You can't know how someone will react in a novel situation without seeing them in that situation. The novelty of life makes that essentially impossible. Throw in the fact that people can change psychologically and you add more complexity to the situation. People can become depressed or suffer anxiety, these states aren't always present. Assessing "psychology" "accurately" also requires the honesty of the one being "observed"/evaluated.

Hard facts and statistics aren't second hand information. I think we can stop right there.


Here it seems like you get it.


Yet here not so much.

I totally agree with you about the difficulties to evaluate the mental and the psychological aspects but in that line you also find the answer why this trade should have been a no go from the very first second.

A young man with 20+ sexual allegations.
A FQB who end up in a serious conflict with his organization to the extend that a separation is the only option.

Right there any sensible GM would have immediately walked away and looked elsewhere.

You simply don’t gamble and giving away 6 high draft picks and 5 year monster contract on a personality who has a track record of ending up in serious conflicts with so many of his relations. It wasn’t a just a minor brawl with a team mate, it was way more serious than that.

It’s right here our opinions separates.
It’s from this moment you and many other evaluate the outcome totally differently from me and those who was against the trade from the very first second.

I expect two professionals like Berry and Stefanski to have enough common sense to foresee this.
Their job is just this, to make a serious risk analysis and to pass even golden opportunities when the risks are too high.

Watson’s problems wasn’t unknown so either they ignored it or didn’t took it seriously enough.
That’s the definition of …….. incompetence.

A gif of flogging a dead horse was appropriate 500 posts ago....

It is what it is. Let it go. That'd be my advice for anyone like me that wanted FO change.

Another thing to remember.

Berry and Stefanski also evaluated Baker a couple of months earlier and decided that he was too immature and not talented enough.
There’re many on this forum who agree with that assessment even if Mayfield have proven them all wrong.
One season later he becomes a FQB in Tampa with two division titles, and all in that organization seem to like him, the Bucs fans simply love him based on what you read on social media. Not only that. Most TD in the NFL the last two regular seasons.

So they had enough competence to evaluate how bad Baker was but not enough to find the problem with a guy who had 20+ sexual assaults hanging over his head and had a conflict with his own organization to the extend that they decided to trade him away.

Explain that to me.

You’re right. It’s just so frustrating to see all the blind horses running around.