DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Our 2005 plan: Is 2009 an overhaul or a tweak?

This is not a "are we rebuilding or are we tweaking right now?" post in terms of how our roster works.

I'm talking about the overall philosophy of our organization moving forward.

In '05, we changed it completely. It was clear Butch Davis' philosophy on how to run an organization was not going to work. Being the football czar who didn't have an eye for pro talent because him and his personnel guy were not trained in scouting pro players. Plus, even though (IMO) he was a good gameday coach...the players couldn't trust him. Much like the dysfunction that persisted in Atlanta pre-Dimitroff.

In 2005, we set out to install a scouting staff and scouting system that is one of the premier scouting systems of the NFL. That scouting system is still here today and unless we hire a GM out of left field, that scouting system will not change.

In 2005 we set out to hire a coach who comes from a winning background and has a legitimate NFL philosophy. We did, but his ability to discipline the players and make in-game decisions was less than desired. On the front office side, the scouting department is still considered solid, but the leadership aspect of it left much to be desired (a GM getting power hungry, hiring coordinators for the coach, etc.)

Here we are in 2009 with a new coach who shares the same philosophies as the old coach but has a different philosophy on handling players...and we're trying to establish a front office that continues with the philosophy that ownership tried to establish in 2005, but failed due to a GM becoming power hungry.

So, I pose this question. Are we putting forth "indirect continuity" much like the Steelers and Ravens put forth despite new coaching staffs? Our shakeup is definitely greater in terms of coaching staffs, coordinators and schemes, but the general philosophy of the organization remains similar, except we're trying to put together the "right chemistry for success" that wasn't here. I believe our philosophy was right, but there wasn't the right chemistry from the GM side OR the coach side (with Savage being a horrible manager and Romeo being a horrible coach).

And, most of all, will this pay off? We've seen Baltimore's philosophy work, we've seen New England's...we've seen the building blocks with the Jets but the plan never got to fruition. So far the only philosophies we haven't really borrowed from were Pittsburgh's, but IMO Baltimore's are close enough if not the same.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. I'm sure our roster will be quite different next season, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about our mission statement and philosophy as an organization as a whole. I really think we're not completely blowing this whole thing up, so much as we are modifying things as we see fit to create a functioning organization.

And I think that will have major results, fast.

I think Randy realized that Phil was completely wrong, while Romeo was almost there.

I'll be honest, I was completely wrong at how responsible Romeo was. Romeo was bad enough to get fired, but a lot of the problems were created directly from Phil.

I think we are going into a different direction as far as organizational philosophy, as in who reports to who, and who holds all the power. Randy let Phil basically take over the Cleveland Browns and run it how he saw fit. It appears those days are over, as Randy will hold much more power this time around.

As for HC and GM's philosophy, I think it is going to fairly similar, although some play calling should be different. I'm expecting more running and more aggressive defense. I'm expecting more team work, which to Romeo's credit, was never completely unveiled until both were fired and the players said so. I also expect much more discipline from our players this time around, personal accountability.

We'll see if it works. While Mangini and Romeo are from the same cloth, they have different...ways of coaching.

It's clear to me, the wins didn't come without the threat of a running game. If there could be a re commitment to any one thing, I would hope for a re committment to a top running game. Laughable the idea of a top running game, it has been missing for years, and years and years.

I think our scouting staff may just take a big step forward..Coke was scouting pro personnel as his specialty. He would find good players that would fit their team. Example would be Coke watching Rogers or Hampton. Then reporting back to the college staff and saying find us our Rogers....You get Nagata...Identify the player and what he brings to the team and go get as close as you can...This could be a hugh step in the right direction...

nordawg

Figure I will add this here.

http://www.mansfieldnewsjournal.com/article/20090112/SPORTS/901120320



Browns owner Randy Lerner's long, strange trip to front office stability basically ended with last week's official hire of ex-Jets coach Eric Mangini. Sure the ManGenius is the head coach on paper, but somebody's going to have final say on personnel and it's probably not going to be a general manager who hires on without any say in that matter.
Advertisement
Quantcast

Unfortunately, we'll have no idea if Lerner made the right decision until we've all long forgotten the details. Because in between, and as soon as next season I'll bet, the Browns will bounce back to something that looks like respectability because that's how the NFL (and pro sports in general) works.

Baseball fans know this as Bill James' Plexiglas principal, which is an especially adept indicator at forecasting the decline of this and every other year's surprise teams and is a pretty reliable predictor of improvement, too.

Life is the same way. You have a bad day at work, your boss let's you have it and when you bounce back the next day, aspiring Office Manager Patton pats himself on the back for his motivational prowess. Truth of the matter is, we're all pretty disposed to our average days, which are always an improvement upon our worst ones. And your boss ain't Tony Robbins.

Nothing's worse than a pretentiously didactic sports columnist, so I'll quit with the "Five People You Meet on Tuesdays with Morrie" lesson and confess my real point: What I've just described is Mangini's coaching career.

He had the Jets job for three years. He took over a 4-12, injury-plagued team that started Brooks Bollinger at quarterback for more than half an ugly 2005 season. He managed 10 wins his first year. That's when a guest spot on "The Sopranos" and the New York media love arrived, but the real miracle that season wasn't of Mangini's doing: Chad Pennington started all 16 regular season games and the Wild Card-round loss at New England that bounced the Jets from the postseason. And that was Mangini's peak; the next year, injuries returned (like they often do), the schedule got a little tougher, the Jets were 4-12 again and Mangini was a genius no more. Brett Favre made sure he wasn't this year, and even that 9-7 record looks a little suspect considering the awful schedule the AFC East enjoyed (they played the eight NFC and AFC West teams and beat Cincinnati in one of their extra dates). It wasn't much of a step forward considering the major offseason investment in win-now veterans like Alan Faneca, either.

So what's that all mean? Simply put, we have no idea what kind of coach we're talking about. All we really know about Mangini is he's a heckuva interview if you ask Randy Lerner, but so was Romeo "Sufferin' Succotash" Crennel.

A year from now, he'll probably be a ManGenius here because it won't take much for the Browns to get better and that's all that anyone is expecting. For all of ex-GM Phil Savage's shortcomings, he leaves in place a better front office for the figurehead Lerner will soon tab general manager than the mess that awaited him four offseasons ago. Salary-cap guru Trip MacCracken is well-respected in league circles, as is lead scout T.J. McCreight, who might wind up with the GM title (or label) if Ravens director of pro personnel George Kokinas doesn't get the job after Sunday's interview. They're staying put regardless, so whoever takes over for Savage will hit the ground running.

The Browns also boast a a friendly cap number for next year (no matter what Sports Illustrated's Peter King might say) and, get this, a couple high first-day draft picks that could land a front-seven, impact defensive player that could team with Shaun Rogers and D'Qwell Jackson to vault the Browns unit into one of the league's best units.

Here are a few other reasons to believe Mangini will find immediate success here:

# 3-4 prowess. Mangini has coaching experience in both systems and, with new defensive coordinator Rob Ryan, won't have any trouble adapting to the Browns personnel. The key part of that package is already here in elite nose tackle Rogers and defense end Corey Williams, who was hurt this season but gamely showed up week after week. We'll see just how good he can be next year and, if the Browns can add another end, how much better an already much-improve defense can be.

A historically inept offense this year masked the improvement on the other side of the ball that will continue as a young secondary matures. With two guys who work well together, not a head coach and a coordinator who thinks he should be in charge, it could become one of the league's best units.

# Jerome Harrison is a lot like Leon Washington. And Mangini made sure his offensive coordinator used his multipurpose scatback this year, unlike Crennel, who let Harrison waste away on the sidelines all year while Jamal Lewis was averaging a half-yard short of four a carry and Jason Wright was backing up him. But hey, those two can really pick up the blitz, and you can bet they'll be blitzing because nobody is afraid of those two carrying the ball.

# Mangini was right on the biggest Jets acquisitions an offseason ago: No on Brett Favre, yes on Kris Jenkins. With a young, franchise quarterback in place and the components of the 3-4, he didn't have to be asked twice if he wanted the Cleveland job. He'll have the biggest say on personnel here and has shown pretty good instincts already. Maybe, like the older, non-Cleveland Belichick, he knows what he's doing. If hiring any coach, and especially Mangini, before a GM was a mistake, we won't know it until years from now. And you can bet Randy Lerner and his ManGenius know that.

Who knows,, but my guess is the entire thought process will change.

I get the impression that we will see a relentless attack attack approach.

As for players,, not sure. I get the sense that the talent level is there, but that it's not been coached up to it's potential. I guess we'll find out.

I seen it in an article about Coke scouting pro players and it was being said by Ernie Accossi...It's not always about getting the orginal but getting his younger clone.....

nordawg

j/c..

Do you all think that Romeo was happy when Savage when and traded for Kamerion Wimbley?

Only Rac could say for certain..all we know is he said in the meeting they would better with a pass rusher..I'm certain Wimbley's name was there..as well as Ngata..and there was a heated discussion..

Phil had them rated the same..which still boggles me considered Kam wasn't considered very stout against the run and didn't have huge sack numbers or pressure numbers either..he was a big ?mark..what I'd like to know is who the group was that voiced getting the run stuffer...because they had it right..and we would have weakened the Ratbirds..don't give a crap about us having Bentley..even had he been healthy it would have robbed them of a solid piece to their front seven.

Ammo, I think your concern is vital, valid, and crucial to a point. There is a train wreck I saw as a teacher for years, and pardon the ed parallel, but bear with me. Philosophy is great, and it needs shared for all to get on board. I do not have a lot of use for mission statements per se, because they are 'buzz" kind of things, high profile, and it is proven most sound incredibly alike. The folks who advocate these are seldom in the trenches and digging the ditches, so it separates people a bit. But somebodys like Lerner and Mangini and the GM do have to share in the "big picture" IMO. They need to see the end game we are establishing. If it grows too many flowers, people get left out or left behind. This doesn't preclude success, but it certainly limits it if you are shedding the achievers of the dream.
All our chices will still boil down to football success. It is filled with variables, so many approaches may work; the one constant must be flexibility to adapt. We need better players, playing better individually, coached up more, and put in game plans that aggressively let them succeed if they perform. Getting to that point, the devil is in the details. I think it will be tweaking by default in year one. Lerner is asserting himself; new coaches are here and coming; new personnel (and attitudes!) should follow through FA and draft; we cannot roll all 53, nor should we. But we will be saddled with new next season. It is unavoidable.
Tweaks like increasing scouting importance, clear lines of responsibility, respect for who owns decisions, and increased continuity would help. Besides philosophy tweaks, just limiting the power struggles would help tremendously, and Lerner has that ball rolling from what I read. From Butch on, one constant element in our problems hs been tyrants and such. whistles don't pull trains, although they delight us and are their most notable feature. There is a place for this, but it sets the table and is not the meal.
If we can learn from mistakes at last, many repeated and replayed too often, we could improve dramatically. But disconnects of "me over team" hurt; acceptance of lousy play must be emplaced. If you fail to communicate expectations, high ones, then you will not randomly achieve your targets. But wishing, hoping, explaining does not get it done. Relentless insistence on a higher bar will make adifference, and the FO is its start. Tweaks may well be enough for excited improvement.

1. we didn't trade for Wimbley.
2. Actually and I cannot find in print anywhere but luckily there are enough dawgs who remember this as fact.
Savage asked RAC what he wanted (while they were still trying to do this together)...
Pass Rusher/Wimbley or Run Stuffer/Ngata - RAC chose the pass rusher.

So to answer your question regarding RAC's happiness with the pick...essentially it had more than his blessings on it.

JMHRecollection.

I think he meant the draft trade..we let the Ravens hop over us, and take Ngata and we took Kam..and got their 6th rounder..but if memory serves me..Philly also wanted to deal with us ..they wanted Bunkley and thought we were going to draft him.

Another year of excues

To me, this is absolutely a tweak. I think Randy still believes in the vision he had for this team, just not the way it was executed. I mean, granted, the vision he had was the Baltimore style front office (Ozzie) and the New England product on the field (Belichick), so it's not an easy task, but I think he still believes it's attainable. The hires we're looking at are just modified versions of what we had last time without the weaknesses that brought us down.

Mangini is a more disciplined, demanding and less of a "player's coach" version of Romeo. He wanted to bring in Romeo to install the Belichick system, but he was too much of a departure from Belichick on the disciplinarian end to make it succeed. Hence Mangini. He'll run pretty much the same defense with a little more aggression and instead of running Chud's deep ball offense (which IMO was a bad fit for Cleveland football in winter), we're going to the New England style of offense. To that end, what we have now much better replicates New England than the past regime, so Lerner has accomplished the goal of at least building as close of a replica as he can.

If we eventually bring in Kokinis as is expected, it'll be the exact same comparison - a Phil Savage hire (young, bright, same background, inexperienced) minus several of the flaws that lead to Savage's demise. With Kokinis and Mangini on the same page with a flat reporting system, they should work together much better than Romeo/Phil and I highly doubt he'll be as conniving. Plus, Kokinis has much more experience than Phil did in the pro personnel area and with McCreight taking care of the college scouting, more of the weaknesses should be covered. The Baltimore style system Phil installed can remain in place.

So in short, I think Randy wanted to built a Baltimore style FO system and New England team but whiffed the first time... he still believed in that vision and when he saw the pieces out there that could let him take another crack at it with improvements (without as much roster turnover as a complete blow up), he jumped at the chance.

To me, the question isn't even "does Randy want to emulate these two organizations"? The question, to me, is "is it even possible to replicate either product without Ozzie or Belichick in the first place"? Only time will tell but if this fails, THEN I think we're going to see a complete rebuild. Trying a 3rd time to build the same vision isn't going to be something anyone is on board for... at that point, it will absolutely be time to move on.

I have a good feeling Mangini will be thurough and we will be well prepared.
A guy claiming to be so happy to be here will not take shortcuts or do anything to hurt his chances.

Rest assured his failure here wold most likely kill his career.

Will he succeed...who knows, but I'm feeling fairly confident we have an incredibly hard working guy at the helm and he will be Belichickian in his efforts to bring this city a winner..

I think the hope is that there is talent here, and that with a few moves in FA, this team can be a good team in 2009. Which, when considering our schedule, it isnt stretch to see us go 8-8+.

Long term stability will come with solid drafting, which has not been done since 99. Phil got some talent, but also missed alot of first day picks. His second round picks have been "ok" but nothing special. After that, outside of Harrison, his second day picks have been nothing of any value.

I hope this works, what else can we do but be optomistic? It's an upgrade over what we've had.

IMO Until Randy gets a pro executive to to handle the hiring and firing of the GM and HC, I don't think this team is gonna real far. Randy has no idea what he is doing, he has no hired braintrust.

I said it before, look at how the Hunts are waiting to get a exec before deciding on Herm...they've been running an NFL alot longer than Randy, and still realize the importance of a president/gm.

To me, for example, put a guy like Bernie in charge of getting the GM and HC, let him guide Randy through the process. I don't think Bernie is the A chioce for that position, but we need someone to do that.

It's not that Randy hired a HC before the GM, I really don't care, its the fact that Randy did this by himself, and did it way too fast.

Randy is peeing into the wind, that being said, it doesnt mean he can't hit a tree ot two and be sucessful. It's just unlikely to happen the way things are being handled.

Interesting question Ammo.

Part of me believes it will be the same, but part of me realizes there are many question yet to be answered.

Will be in the market for LB help and we are likely to experience a purge at that position.

But I think that would have been true no matter what.

The thing that I see hanging in the air is what will the new regime do with BE and KW2?

Will they keep JL, or will they make a change?

Will they retain Shaffer, Hadnot, McKinney?

Will they retain DS, (not Likely)

There are just so many questions that have yet to be answered, but I will say this. I think that if we had stayed the course big changes where going to happen, I THINK???

I suppose it depends on what you consider a tweak. We do have talent issues in several areas. Depth, WR, O line, D Line and the king of needs LB. The question is interesting I just can’t see an answer to it at this point it could go either way, or it could be a combination of purge and tweak. Stay tuned it is sure to be interesting.

BTTB

It's all a wank until we win consistently.

Sorry to get off point...but I can't see how anyone can say we are closer to a 4-3 than a 3-4.

As a 3-4 we a missing Linebackers...which granted, is a large part of the 3-4. But as a 4-3, we are still missing Linebackers and we are missing Defensive Ends as well. I mean if you haven't noticed our DLine is is stock full of road grader DT's that don't exactly have the speed for the end position. And the Ends are a HUGE part of the 4-3 and putting pressure on the QB.

We are building but we aren't REbuilding. So I guess it's more of a tweak. We have enough of a foundation in place that we need to build upon it.

Yep, I agree...we have a bunch of good players, we just need to address a few holes, and maybe upgrade a few positions......mainly on "D".....