DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Chudzinski is new Browns' OC...

"lame duck" means his departure is certain... as in a politician who has been voted out but retains the office until the replacement is sworn in... RAC isn't a lame duck.
Honestly ..if the Browns have another season like this past one..U really think Rac stays?
If you can HONESTLY say yes he will(U'd be dreamin') then he isn't..if he stays regardless of WHAT happens he's not the lame quacker..but U and I both know that he would be canned ...even if it's not his fault..

Yeah PPE, that actually makes some good sense to me that two more drafts may be needed to get this ship in the right direction.

The problem as I see it is that the team has to show some progress to get teh wolves away from the door.. I won't worry about wins and losses for the moment, but they just can't come apart like they did several times last season..

Perhaps if it's clear that the team is really and truly showing progress, then it's enough to, as they say, keep the wolves at bay.. I'm hoping for at least that.

I agree that progress is what we should be striving for, but 4 wins isn't going to cut it even if we lose all 12 games by 2 points. If we get to 7 wins +/- then we will be in the gray area where "progress" will have to be judged.... this is just my opinion but if we better than .500, RAC is safe... Fewer than 6 wins and he's probably gone.... it's that 6, 7, 8 win range where "progress" will become the determining factor.

Quote:

---

VERS...

how can we run an attack O with all those disabilities?...

no worse than we ran a conservative one with the same guys...

---

First of all, I don't think our O was all that conservative. We threw deep quite a bit...under both coordinators. We passed quite a bit. We just didn't execute.

However, I would like to say something about your comment. And I DO know you were just kidding. But, here it is...for those of you who actually like to learn about football.

When you have less talent than the other team, the last thing you should do is try and open the game up. It's a mistake to get in a free for all by playing very aggresive. The talent on the other side of the ball will prevail. They can make more plays than your guys.

What you want to do is limit the number of possessions by both teams. You want to play conservatively and not turn the ball over. You do everything in your power to win the field position battle. You want to make them drive the length of the field and you cannot give up big plays. You work to shorten the field when you have the ball. You kick some field goals and try to get them out of their game.

When you have less talent, conservative is the way to go. Not many people realize that, but it is a given by anyone who knows a damn thing about coaching.

Yeah, we agree when we aren't too busy fighting.

I can agree with that thinking...... Some of his coaching choices haven't given me a warm fuzzy feeling,,, some of the things that have happened during games haven't given me warm fuzzies either...

But overall, it would be hard to convince me,,,,if not impossible to convince me that RAC isn't doing a decent job given the level of talent and the injuries the team has endured the last two seasons...

That has got to be the toughest challenge a HC has got to face..

I'm trying to put myself in his shoes for a second.. I'm hired the day after my team wins the Superbowl, which essentially means, lots of the staff I may want are no longer available to me.. that's a reasonable thing for year one,,

That just doesn't work for year two,,, I do understand that the thinking might have been to keep the same group of coaches together... While I understand that thinking,, and I'm using hindsight here, perhaps RAC should have at least given some credence to what dilfer was saying,, Maybe, just maybe, looking back, there was something to it.

Oddly enough, in the end, it's now pretty clear that there was something to Dilfers thinking.

That problem/mistake, I do place squarely on RAC's head,,

Still, I can't seem to find anyone on the planet alive today that hasn't errored in some fashion or form so overall, I'm glad we stuck with him..

VERS...

yeah, i was kidding, but about your football lesson...

i certainly have not called for 'opening it up'...and throwing deep isn't the sort of aggression i'm talking about...where i had a serious philosophical disagreement with Davidson was the 1-2 times/game that our O needed to show something for the team to compete...a first down, a misdirection to counter oppposing D's agressiveness, (or heaven forbid) a TD instead of a FG...

i know that with less talent, playing close to the vest allows you to keep a game close, but IMO, you do that 90% of the time, AND you take a couple well-timed risks...it's the difference between putting pressure on the other team in a close game vs. keeping the score close but never truly threatening the opponent...

e.g. Baltimore (H) vs. Pitt (H)

Carthon's pass call (let's leave out if it was a bad passplay for the situation) at the end of the Baltimore game...we had not been forcing things all game...just biding time with conservative play...then we had a chance to seal the deal and Carthon went for it...i liked it...

conversely, a similar situation where we 'hung around' with Pitt all afternoon...they turned it on and were scoring at will when they needed to...but we've got the ball with a perfect amount of time to spoil their comeback...4 minutes or so...2-3 first downs and you win...we ran twice up the gut for minimal gain, and Charlie was a running target on 3rd down...that's just laying down, IMO...how are we ever gonna beat a divisional opponent if we play like we're scared of them?...

Is it fair to judge him based on the people he's chosen and the moves he's made? Without a doubt.


Thats why these assistants are gone...bring in a cohesive group and the FO sees how Rac handles the team..ahhh what portions he actually can touch..

Actually here's another question...

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/116963203081500.xml&coll=2

Jeff Davidson is the latest coach to leave the Browns for greener pastures.

Davidson has joined the Carolina Panthers as offensive coordinator. His departure was expected since he was passed over for the Browns' top offensive position for Rob Chudzinski on Saturday.

Davidson was considered the front-runner to permanently succeed Carthon - or at least to return as Browns line coach. But he clashed with General Manager Phil Savage over the evaluation of some players and opted to leave. The Browns could not keep him because his contract was up.

Through a spokesperson, Savage declined to comment on coaches leaving the Browns.

NOW who might those players be??

When Frye did play, however, Davidson seemed to have little confidence in him inside the 20. As a result, the Browns failed to score an offensive touchdown in three of their last six games and scored only one in a 27-7 drubbing by the Steelers on Dec. 7.


http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsi...21848&rfi=6


Hmmmmmm..

Wow...how can Grossi throw that out there without some backing up of that statement. How could he not pry and get a hint on what evaluations were questioned? We know Grossi's penchant for a little anarchy and love for Savage...lol

Lets be factual...Davidson moved on not because there was a disagreement in player evaluation - possibly that was a reason why Davidson was passed over...very good reason. But he left simply cause he was passed over and had an offer and not only an offer - by the speed of the hiring probably already a meeting with Fox - had a job for OC in Carolina. Hmmm should he sign in Cleveland as the OL coach after beign spurned for the OC job or go to a step up position that he was coveting with another team?

But I still would like to know what evaluations were different?
OL??? We know as OL coach he had a strong bond with his OL...maybe Savage viewed them as BAD??? or is it the other way around???

WR??? Maybe Davidson being an OL mentality (which btw to me is a good thing lol ) thought - trade his Butt - I'm going to freeze him from the Offense??? Savage was like - he's one of our Talents we are going to make Defense's game plan for?

QB??? As noted and suggested in that other article Davidson's Red-Zone conservatism and lack of use of Frye maybe the biggest difference between he n Mo. Mo was agressive once reaching the RedZone...like ok conservative over thats as Vers mentioned Good to play as overall philosophy to keep the game close. Field position - No long FG tries, etc. etc. But once you hit that 20...Conservative job done...now Score!!! Try anything n everything. Davidson went into almost a deeper shell to protect that 3 pts.

So was it their QB thinking...which might attest to which way the Browns are leaning too regarding our draft pick???

JMHQuestions???

how can Grossi throw that out there without some backing up of that statement. How could he not pry and get a hint on what evaluations were questioned?
That is why I posed the question..now I'll go more indepth in a moment..
The other article seems to point to the lack of confidence in Frye..

But I still would like to know what evaluations were different?
OL??? We know as OL coach he had a strong bond with his OL...maybe Savage viewed them as BAD??? or is it the other way around???


Now lets break it down..who on this oline would anyone ARGUE for?
Take a second....
Now we know Davidson seemed to like his linemen in general..I heard something on another board that said the linemen were not putting in all the effort in practices..(don't know if that was valid or not) but lets go that route..
Suppose Davidson is fond of his guys but Opie isn't..there would be a clash here...
If Davidson thought the linemen were weak and Opie didn't , then we're all in trouble!
But in that presser Opie said the line was going to need attention so that kinda lends me to believe the reverse..Opie KNOWS these guys are weak..JD thinks they're o.k..

Is Sowells in here in somewhere?

Could part of it been on the comment that PS made about top interior lineman are second day draft picks? Davidson may be of the midset as an OL coach that he needed an infusion of early picks...

WR??? Maybe Davidson being an OL mentality (which btw to me is a good thing lol ) thought - trade his Butt - I'm going to freeze him from the Offense??? Savage was like - he's one of our Talents we are going to make Defense's game plan for?

That could be...maybe he felt Brababy wasn't being handled correctly..maybe he didn't like Phil's comments on the future faces of the team....remember also JJ wasn't getting anything thrown to him, then all of a sudden he was being utililized..

QB??? As noted and suggested in that other article Davidson's Red-Zone conservatism and lack of use of Frye maybe the biggest difference between he n Mo. Mo was agressive once reaching the RedZone...like ok conservative over thats as Vers mentioned Good to play as overall philosophy to keep the game close. Field position - No long FG tries, etc. etc. But once you hit that 20...Conservative job done...now Score!!! Try anything n everything. Davidson went into almost a deeper shell to protect that 3 pts.

Once more the other article makes one lean toward that when you put both together..
But lets take that futher..Since JD's preferred style of play is run first/vertical pass it would seem to suggest that Frye was the guy because his arm isn't made for the vertical game.
However, when DA played he rarely let him throw deep even with the big arm. So that may not be the issue, at least until Phil doesn't provide him with a deep thrower next year because he believes Frye is better than does JD.

My suspicions lie on the OL since that's JD's baby. Also he may have wanted Smith to play because he blocks better, but Phil wanted Vickers. Same with other Phil's handpicked guys VS. some vets. And I can't imagine JD wanting Butler re-signed, which Phil obviously did..
Last but not least could Droughns facter in this somewhere?

Maybe the only other player could have been Harrison. He seemed like the lost child after the second half of the season. Maybe Davidson wanted more Harrison and less Droughs/Wright.
Remember after the draft I posted a quote that said Phil deferred to a assistant coach on the drafting of one player?
I have never found out who that is/was....

Attack, both you and Eo are missing the issue,,,

They disagreed on the best way to evaluate toilet paper.... Davidson wanted the extra soft Charman in the small rolls because they fit in the holders better,,,,, Randy and Phil agree on the type of paper, but wanted the larger rolls because of the cost savings and RAC didn't care which as long as it was delivered quickly....

Just having fun with you guys

The question is WHO are the players that Davidson /Phil clashed over?
It had to be more than Frye..unless Gross-me-out used the plural tense to avoid actually pointing the finger at one player..hence maybe pointing the finger AT PHIL ...

Interesting thread...LOTS of good questions...

Thats all?
I thought U might shed some light on the stuff..

And I thought U might have a opinion to add..U usually do..FYI-thats a good thing..

If I knew something I'd tell ya...havent held out anything in the past...

I dont really buy in much to Grossi and think a lot of folks read WAAAAAAY too much into these type of articles...

If this was true and you wanted my opinion on what player Phil/JD clashed over, my answer would be Edwards.

I know where Gross-me out is coming from..and he likes controversial stuff so the GM/HC can take some direct hits..but it is suggested in the other article that Davidson didn't have a lot of confidence in Frye..
Rac seems to like Frye..I think Phil does to a degree..
Perhaps it is Edwards and Frye..

I think Davidson used Frye exactly how Phil wanted...Phil had hoped that Frye would be a manager instead of a playmaker...how the season turned out Frye had to try and make plays too many times, resulting in...well you watched the games.

When Davidson took control, he reigned-in Frye...Which was the plan all along...Phil wanted to protect Frye.

As far as Edwards...he was a cancer for the final 4-5 weeks...Edwards and JD, two different guys from different backgrounds, I could see the clash...I know during JD's first couple weeks I was curious why Edwards wasnt being used more, maybe that's it?

just clickin.....


just got done watching Chud's introduction presser and I have to say that I think I'm pretty happy about this hire.

One thing of note that struck me : We've gone outside the Parcells/Bellichik/Crennel coaching tree and I like it. I think the entire initial staff was of that tree. I love the defenses they use, but I hate the offenses. The thought of that type of defense combined with an attacking offense makes me pretty excited about the possibilities.


Of course it all still needs to be implemented and executed, but I really like the idea. Finally we're not going to have a "chew up the clock from the first snap" offense.

One game of his offense and there are already a world of changes...

Care to elaborate, I'm not sure if your statement is a knock or a compliment.

right now.. a knock.. lol.. if we win some games, then that may change..