DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Crennel Likely to get another year - ABJ Article

As we are more often than not, we agree.

I just don't see how Romeo is going to be able to function as a head coach...a real head coach....without being able to set his staff.

This is a set-up for failure, and as usual, we are the ones who will have to watch it play out every Sunday.

It is now to the point we will have to keep Romeo. If we can him once we find someone else, it is clear we are playing the guy....and I have a real problem with that.

There is a way to operate, and using people isn't the way to conduct business.

And just another thought on the matter....my mind races with thoughs so I will share this one.

Some time back, I brought forward the idea Romeo and Phil's fates are linked. All of these manuvers by Savage make me think even more so that might be the case. Savage is in a hurry to get it right with Romeo and isn't going to put his fate into Romeo's hands any more than he has to...who knows??

Who knows is right...

Right down to that IMO [censored] article Toad threw out from PFT...

WTF Knows...NOONE around here...

Carry on with the speculation...U guys r good at it...

I came across some info last nite that made me blink if true..Peen I keep telling U Rac/Phil are NOT LINKED..in fact Rac might be under MORE pressure than we think..
Watch who comes in as OC and the assistants, and when we anaylize their personalities see if they're strong characters or if they SEEM like they'll answer to Rac ...

They might not be....I am just throwing out some thoughts.

I fully admit I tend to thinks things from many different angles...some even seeming bizarre....and maybe it is the job or just me, but I have to do that.....and with the Browns, bizarre isn't far from the fact in many cases. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Sorry, but you are wrong on this one too. Savage is setting RAC up as the fall guy.

Mo was sacrificed earlier this year, and despite what Toad says....RAC did not mishandle that. There were problems between Mo and some of the players, but it isn't even close to what he is saying. Mo had problems w/Coleman and Andruzzi, mostly because he would call them out for poor play. Well, the fact is.........they did suck and did not play better after Mo Meanie was gone. There were conflicts w/Davidson and Mo too. Other than that.........there wasn't nearly as much as OT says. You might wanna keep in mind who has called everything that has happened this year.

Now, Savage got rid of more coaches, including Lott........and I told you that was coming, even though some said I was nuts. Next year, it will be RAC's ass that goes, and believe me......Savage's won't be tied to it.

It will get really interesting if that move doesn't work either.

One more thing..........Toad's article, which he posted to trash RAC........states that RAC does NOT have the power to hire or fire assistant coaches. Yet, coaches are being fired and RAC is being blamed for hiring them. Makes no sense. You guys allow Savage to run along on this path of destruction and instead focus on the scapegoats. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

You're not seeing the big picture, man.

Nothing in this is an arguement with your posting Toad. I just haven't been on the board much in recent weeks/months and it's time for one of my long-winded BS rants. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />







Makes me wonder who "butchered" the Mo situation.






I think RAC, in his experience, which is a lot, didn't think changing coordinators mid-stream was going to help the offense. Which it didn't. It may have made for better morale, which it seems it did, but really didn't improve the offense much at all. I'm thinking he would have rather kept the status quo until the season was over rather than start anew which would usually only serve to confuse everyone. If it got better, great. If not, then find another coordinator for 2007.

I don't buy Davidson being "hand-cuffed" by Mo's playbook. Mo didn't invent that offense. It's a proven offense. He just called plays out of it. As did Davidson. Neither of them accomplished much with it.

RAC is what he is. Still a rookie head coach. I'm sure he spent the first year just learning the responsibilities of a head coach and how to handle them. He did that amidst his team being torn down.

In his second year he got a few of "his type" of players. It was the first rebuilding year. But the level of talent is no where near what it needs to be.

On top of that the Browns played the 3rd toughest schedule (IIRC what Savage said about it in another thread). Not an easy task. Combine the lack of talent on a team that was just torn down the year before with the brutal schedule they faced and it sure doesn't bode well for obvious improvement.

Add to that still the distraction of Braylon Edwards and perhaps being "forced" to fire a coordinator six games into the season and it's a wonder they did as well as they did.

It just seems to me, and I'm not saying you're responsible for it, that a little too much of the blame is laid at RAC's feet for yet another dismal season. Of course, when you're in the position of head coach, "the buck stops here", but still, I mean, really.

I know RAC has seemed to waffle somewhat. Especially in the handling of Edwards. But who's to say his approach is the wrong one? Just because fans and media want to see Edwards get a public spanking doesn't mean it has to be that way.

Braylon's latest comment regarding his recent silence of, "I'm tired of crusifying myself", just might mean someone is getting through to him.

A lot of RAC's comments, from the beginning, for instance, when he said he believes Braylon "can become" a productive member of the team, shows that he never looked the other way on that issue. He never coddled Edwards. He just chose to handle it his own way, probably through personal talks, and he should have that right.

But public opinion is noisy. The media also jumped in and helped make it look like RAC was a non-factor in the Edwards issues. Everyone wanted to see for themselves that the player was being punished. ("Everybody likes to see Herbie get a beatin'" - if you remember the Bill Cosby thing <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />)

RAC did not give them that enjoyment, so he was painted as being milktoast.

He has also been portrayed as being a "deer in the headlights" on the sidelines. No one with the amount of time that man has spent on the sidelines in NFL games is a deer in the headlights there. I saw him as a coach who was intensely on the game and felt no reason or desire to wear his emotions on his sleeve. Some do; some don't. It's a matter of character and personality. It has nothing to do with the knowledge, intelligence or ability to coach. Players and fans both have their preferences on the demeanor of their coach, but it has nothing to do with their coaching. It has everything to do with theater.

All reports seem to indicate RAC saves his intensity for the players in private rather than to display it for everyone. To each his own.

I know RAC made some questionable "red flag" calls, (he lost every one if IIRC). but I think some of those were for the players more than he thinking the call would get reversed. He said so himself after one such call earlier in the season. A way to show support for the player/players.

Add to all that a 3rd round rookie quarterback.

Add to that his top three cornerbacks being out for the vast majority of the season.

Add to that his two biggest offensive weapons returning from serious knee surgury.

Add to that his biggest FA signing, (the stud meant to solidify the center of his offensive line), being out since the first day of training camp.


All I'm saying, and I'm saying it too much, is that RAC will likely be back for 2007 and it is only fitting.

He hasn't gotten much of a chance so far. There hasn't been a lot to work with.

What the article, taken with a grain of salt considering the source, really says is...

"Nothing in the contract says that he has the exclusive ability to build and change his staff."

Not that he has nothing to do with it but to offer his opinion.

So I do believe he very likely did hire those coaches. He may have had to talk it over with Savage and/or Collins, but it's possible he did hire them.

It's also possible he did fire them, or at least some of them. Just as it is possible that he was simplying doing as he was told.

Somehow, I can't wrap my mind around a man taking the job as head coach, even a man who was running out of time to get the chance, with a team in such disarray on his way in, and then agreeing to have someone else call virtually all the shots that would make or break him.

It just doesn't seem like the thing a man would do. I do understand that as RAC was becoming a first-time head coach some fail-safe restrictions were placed in his contract. Actually, the whole thing REEKS of JOHN, "Everything goes through me first", COLLINS to me.

We'll see how it all shakes out.

If Savage is setting RAC up, as you say, I see no hope for this franchise. At this time I refuse to entertain the thought that it is the case.

Hopefully you're wrong this time.

Good post.

A few things:

The offense actually got worse after Mo left. We did not score an offensive TD in 3 of the last 6 games, and we played lesser defenses.

Savage hires/fires the coaches, yet RAC gets blamed. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

RAC will be here for 2007, but he won't be here for 2008. That's not a positive, but it's farily certain.

After that????????? There is one scenerio that can save Savage's ass. I'll reveal that soon, even though some will say I'm nuts again. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

You are one of my favorite posters and I respect you a ton. But, come on bro.........do you really think that RAC is the one who fired the coaches?

Another thing.........I'm not really saying Savage is setting up RAC...LOL.....I'm saying he is covering his ass. He did a bad job in FA and the draft his first year here. It's costing us.

Actually, I very much doubt it.

I'm just trying to hope the man has more to say about his own destiny than might be the case. Also hoping a real football guy is calling at least some of the football decisions. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

I see now what you're saying about Savage setting up the fall guy. I read that funny.

Don't tease us Vers... <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> If Parcells or Gibbs is coming here, tell us..... It'll make next year much easier to handle.... <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

If it turns out to be Cowher, like the media is salivating over, I'll be sick for much of the remainder of my life.

Nah, you didn't read it funny. I just went back and reread my post and I actually made that statement. That's not what I meant, but that is what I said. <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Sorry about that. My mistake.

The strength of schedule thing is one of the great distortions of the truth that is used to mask the reality of things.

Teams that stink are going to have a SOS greater than .500.. Why.. they lose and the other teams win.

Teams that are good are going to have a SOS less than .500. They are not very good and the other team wins.

The Browns played a 4th place schedule, that meant they faced 2 teams (Houston, Jets) that were different than their division foes. Who did Cincy get. (Indy and NE). Pittsburg got (Miami and Jacksonville), Baltimore (Buffalo and Tennessee).

If you win your division, you can complain about the 2 teams that will be tough, but a 3rd or 4th place team should be thankful.

where do you get that from that article?

it says president of the club....not gm...that means randy not phil....

and not having "exclusive" rights simply means he can't just hire who he wanted...he has to get approval to do it...

No matter how you look at it, we faced some pretty tough teams this season unlike last season.

We all knew that, even before the season started and those teams got a chance to increase their winning percentage by beating the Browns. If you look at their winning percentage from the year before, which had nothing to do with us, it added up to some strong opponents.

That was a brutal schedule.

The only games based on our previous season was the two that are different for each team in our division. Other than that the opponents are already set way in advance.

In fact, we already know who our opponents are for 2009 and every team in our division will play the same opponents plus a home game vs. the AFC South and a road game vs. the AFC East.

Of course, the first place team in our division will play the first place team from the others and the worst will play the worst. That is how we earned a 4th place schedule for this season. But that was only for those two games. And one of our opponents decided for our 4th place schedule, the Jets, are in the playoffs now.

The schedule was a very difficult one.

Ask the Bengals and Steelers if they thought our division played a tough schedule. As for the Rats, well, they just happen to have their freak on this year.

The schedule was much tougher in the first half of the year than in the latter half.

I agree that it was a much tougher schedule than the 2005 schedule, but it wasn't as tough as the schedule the team played in Butch's last year. Now, that was a brutal schedule.

You do know what Charger is saying, don't you?

I do.

It's just that calculating strength of schedule after the season is over is one thing, and I agree with him on that. Our own ineptitude makes our opponents look that much better when all is said and done as we contribute to their winning percentage.

Still, it was a real tough schedule. To have gone 6-10, as we did last season, against this schedule would have shown marked improvement.

[color:"white"]
You mean that Mo wouldn't last to mid-season? Nah, I don't think I want to remind people of that <img src="/images/graemlins/naughtydevil.gif" alt="" />

[color:"white"]

You have your take on it, and I have mine. Everyone under the sun knew that Mo should have been dealt with sooner. RAC didn't, so people had to step in and do it for him. That's a loss of credibility that very few can ultimately survive.

[color:"white"]

Need I point out the difference between having the power to hire and fire versus having input?

RAC doesn't have the power to pick and choose his personnel. Yet as we all remember, Savage went to RAC before he signed Baxter. I'm sure RAC had input on the selection of Mo, as he probably had a hand in bringing Davidson over. However, now that RAC has mishandled how he dealt with Mo, I seriously doubt that he has nearly as much influence on how the next set of coaches are selected, which was my point.

You should be somewhat happy that RAC gets his 3rd year. If anything, Savage saved his butt from the unemployment line by going this route. I'm not sure most teams would have done the same.

Then there's the question of Savage's fate being linked to RAC's. It's not. Most GM's get a 2nd shot with head coaches. Savage will as well. He deserves to be judged based on his moves, but it's too soon to judge him based on his 1st draft. RAC, in some ways, should get more time as well. However, unlike Savage, we have far more info to go on when judging whether or not we like what we see. From where I'm sitting, the only thing that I can say positive about RAC is that the players are continuing to play hard for him. While that is important, I can also say that Butch had his players playing hard for him as well, yet that wasn't enough to make him a good coach.

Now people can say I'm jumping the gun on how I feel about him. That's perfectly fine. However, I'm not comfortable with what I see out of him. I'd like to keep the defensive format but find a new coach. We're going to redo the offense anyway, so what in the name of continuity are we really accomplishing here? I think RAC is too old and set in his way of doing things to adapt to the HC position. I don't think he can grow that much more as a head coach. Time will tell, as he's getting that extra year that everyone wanted. [/color]

[color:"white"]

Well shame on you for spending time with that biological family, when your REAL family here has been sittin' waitin' for you <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

[color:"white"]

I'd ask you to consider that hiring and firing power is different than having input. From everything I've read that's leaked out, they gave RAC time to handle it himself, probably because MO was his friend and his recomendation. When he couldn't/wouldn't do it, the team had to get tough and do it for him. Now, who carry's the blame for hiring him? Everyone in the organization who put their stamp of approval on it. However, that doesn't mean it's ok to stick with a failure just because you selected it. It appears they left it to RAC, and RAC refused to take care of it until he was called into the office and told to handle it.

[color:"white"]
To a point, I would say you're probably right, in that RAC may not have thought it'd help the offense. However, by the time he was thinking that, it didn't matter. Mo had to go. He clearly wasn't going to get any better as an OC, and the team clearly wasn't ever going to respond to him. Therefore, staying the course made no sense. All it really did was make people question RAC's ability as a HC.

Now, here's another angle to this. Firing MO gave us the opportunity to put Davidson under the lights to see what he had in his tank. We made him the asst. HC for a reason, most likely because we think he has a great future in the league and within the organization. If we waited until year's end to fire Mo, that would have meant we'd have not given an audition to Davidson until '07, and if people's opinion is that Davidson isn't qualified to be an OC, all that would have happened is a mid-season firing or a full season of bad OC'ing, in which case we're even further behind the curve. So firing Mo had to be done, and waiting would have cost us more time. Therefore, if that's what RAC HONESTLY thought, his thinking was flawed, which would be yet another bullet in the holster for those that believe he's not qualified to be the HC.

Jeez, did that come out right? *L*

I'm skipping through much of what you said because I want to only make one more point here:

[color:"white"]

That's absolutely true, but it comes with a disclaimer. If a person is only basing their opinion of RAC on wins and losses, then no, he hasn't had a chance, or had much to work with. However, if one were to base a judgement upon everything that isn't measured in the wins and losses column, then RAC's actions over the last two seasons easily come into question. That's why we're all having this discussion, hehe. [/color]

[quote]

Very funny Autumn, milkdud, lmao. Ok, I do like your suggestion of Fisher, though I"m not sure if he's all that great on drafting talent? However, Phil is handling much of that here in Cleveland. So I think I'd be happy to see Fisher as our HC.

That's F'n Hilarious, lmfao. This team has been mediocre since '99. However, I do think we will turn the corner in the next 2 or 3 seasons. Just don't think RAC or Frye will be here for that.

I'm going to [paste this on several threads..so no one get annoyed..

[color:"orange"]In between 120 minutes or so of inane ramblings by Kevin Keane, Andre Knott came on to give his report. He answered the exact same question I had about why Coates was let go when the TE's had a great year. Here is a recap of Knott's take on the coaches & the situation....


* RAC's offensive assts were not cohesive. Ben Coates was Mo Carthon's boy and had his back even after the move. Coates mimicked Moe's surliness and bad assed demeanor and didn't exactly try to help Jeff Davidson , to say the least.

* Said "Terry Robiske was on the Terry Robiske plan". Tells you all you need to know. Biske was like Peter & Dennis in Easy Rider, doing his own thing in his own time.Easy to get why Q played Quincy Morgan Football..lol..

* Lott got in a personality clash with RAC despite the fact that he is very, very close to RAC. Said this one really had to hurt RAC. Said the reason was Phil didn't like his style, that Lott was too confrontational with players and taunted and swore at opposing players on the sidelines during games. Said Phil is having no tolerance of this stuff.

* Said that they really have a very serious interest in the Garrett brothers - both of them, with Jason being a very serious candidate for OC . Said Phil really likes them
Keep Grossi's point in mind in his column today that says the NFL take is that RAC isn't in a good position long term and that it will be very hard to land established & experienced offensive coaches.

* Confrims Rip Shearer is safe, probably Atkins at RB coach as well.

* Lastly, he says that this coaching purge & search process is described as a "power play" -, between Phil & RAC.
Says Phil is running the search and using this to put his imprint on the coaching staff to do things his way. Really made a point of this when talking about Lott's firing which was purely Phil and a huge blow to RAC. This really sound similar to the takes by PFBT that is a site which is often treated w/ derision.

Make of it all what you will. Just trying to faithfully pass along what the Browns' sideline reporter from the flasgship station reported today at about noon.

[/color]

Once again from what I've learned..there is tremendous heat on Rac FROM LERNER..the situation was if Rac stays the assistants (whom he hired) GO..
Phil batted for him but it was also a check swing..thats the best way to describe it..Lerner wanted him removed..a lot has to do with Brayba...a lot has to do with the patheic offense..as I said keep a eye on the TYPE of OC that comes in..

j/c
I feel that Romeo is catching too much heat here.
He refuses to wear his emotions on his sleeve or throw anyone under the bus so he is being ridiculed as a worthless coach.
He knows more about the ins and outs of the NFL game then any 20 of us posters combined do, probably 50 of us.
Hell he's been around football longer than I've been alive.
I have yet to here him blame any one individual or coach for any of the losses. He even says he needs to coach better.
Most of this board wanted him to come here and was ecstatic when we got him and Savage. A "Genius" defensive coach and one of the top talent evaluators in the game.
We even applauded them when making some of the moves that they made in the offseason.
Washington was the load we needed and the veteran/coach we were looking for. Basically an improvement over Fisk and a stopgap until we got our future noseguard.
McGinnest was past his prime, but we knew that and thought we might get another year out of him, but I'm sure his knowledge helped to jumpstart Wimbley's career. You can't measure that and rarely is discussed.

JJ is what he was everywhere else, a quiet, solid receiver. If we had a better line or for that matter a better QB, JJ's numbers would have been better.

I almost pissed myself when we got Bentley, but you know how it goes around here.

I guess what I'm trying to say is hindsight is 20/20. Some of the posters on here who were applauding the moves with the FO, coaching staff, and players are now the same ones who are complaining about how bad the moves were.

I know injuries is part of the game, but what did you really expect him to do with the number of injured players we had. There's a reason that some of the players we were forced to start were either 2nd or 3rd string or not even in the league at the beginning of the year.

I don't claim to have the most knowledge on this board. I've played college ball. Coach some sports that my son is involved in and realize one thing. If you don't have the players it doesn't matter how good the coach is. Crennel didn't just forget everything he learned under some of the greatest football minds ever, he just doesn't have the horses to run with. They will take time to accumulate. <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

[color:"white"]Try to keep in mind that we're not judging RAC based on wins and losses. That's a convenient reason to throw bricks at him, while simultaneously a convenient reason to excuse him. What I judge him on has nothing to do with stomping around and shooting spittle at players or Ref's, but rather his moves on the field, how he's handled his staff, and how he handles himself.

Those are two very different things, much in the same way you can't judge a QB based on wins and losses, but rather what they bring to the table. One needs look no further than Trent Dilfer to see how a "winner" becomes a "loser" when circumstances change.[/color]

You could add Garcia to that list, but that would be piling on.