|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512
All Pro
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512 |
It is just weird to get a view like yours, that seems to be against the grain. I have been reading these boards for a long time, just curious thats all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
Quote:
Your argument is that LR thought that EM's choice of FO personnel was crap. Well, let's say that part is true. Why not just take the FO part out of it & let EM do what he does best & that is coach.
That's a different discussion.
The FO part is pertinent to the discussion as it pertains to evaluating everything Mangini did. To that end it can't be dismissed.
It has no relevance and most certainly can be dismissed. It no longer matters; he won't be calling those shots anymore.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
It is just weird to get a view like yours, that seems to be against the grain. I have been reading these boards for a long time, just curious thats all.
I'm still a little confused as to what you are talking about.
If it's Mangini, I'm hardly the only one that thinks he was a bad hire and should go.
If it's my take on the "media" that one is even simpler. All the guys (on here) that groan and moan about an individual media member only do so when they disagree with that writer/blogger/TV personality. If he writes something they agree with the guy is "spot on". I find that hilarious and hypocritical all at the same time. After all, free speech is one of the bedrocks of our country. A lot of people on here forget that on a daily basis.
If it's neither one of those I don't have a clue what you mean.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
For the record, I'm lost too. Now if he said otto is a cranky old man ... I would have a better idea where he was coming from. 
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
It has no relevance and most certainly can be dismissed. It no longer matters; he won't be calling those shots anymore.
So you're saying that even though most would agree that he screwed the pooch, for the most part, on the draft and totally mishandled the QB situation while gutting the roster to the point, that for a good portion of the season this team was stomach-wrenchingly unwatchable he bears no responsibility for that going forward? Mainly, I assume, because he managed to cobble together 5 wins against four turds and a team that missed the playoffs (that team losing 6 in a row during the period when we beat them).
Surely, you don't mean that......
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
So you're saying that even though most would agree that he screwed the pooch, for the most part, on the draft
So you're saying he's definitely going to have final say in the draft moving forward under what is surely to be the new structure?
Quote:
and totally mishandled the QB situation
This is an opinion that is based soley on another opinion that more time with either QB getting starter reps in TC would have mattered. That opinion carries no weight since each got significant reps during the season with little to no improvement. Maybe the QBs just suck. Maybe that's why the QB comp went as long as it did. Surely, that can't be a legit reason. It's got to be Mangini's fault.
Quote:
while gutting the roster to the point, that for a good portion of the season this team was stomach-wrenchingly unwatchable he bears no responsibility for that going forward?
Short-term sacrifices for long-term gains. He has mentioned it as much in his pressers. Whether he is blowing smoke up our butts remains to be seen, but you have already decided that he is. With the way we finished the season, stockpiled draft picks, and escaped paying Winslow and Edwards big bucks, I'd like to see if he is really blowing smoke or if he's the real deal.
Quote:
Mainly, I assume, because he managed to cobble together 5 wins against four turds and a team that missed the playoffs (that team losing 6 in a row during the period when we beat them).
You can argue that every single one of those 5 teams is better than we are. I guess that's not progress.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
So you're saying he's definitely going to have final say in the draft moving forward under what is surely to be the new structure?
Nope. I'm saying Holmgren will look at that (past involvement in a bad draft) in his evaluations. Are you saying he won't? Because if you are then you're just arguing as exercise for your fingers.
Quote:
This is an opinion that is based soley on another opinion that more time with either QB getting starter reps in TC would have mattered.
Yes, it is MY opinion. Just as the opposite appears to be your opinion. We may never find out who is correct. Doesn't mean my opinion isn't viable just because it doesn't match yours.
Quote:
That opinion carries no weight
I'll ignore that and chalk it up to the fact that you're just not used to being wrong..... 
Quote:
Short-term sacrifices for long-term gains. He has mentioned it as much in his pressers. Whether he is blowing smoke up our butts remains to be seen, but you have already decided that he is. With the way we finished the season, stockpiled draft picks, and escaped paying Winslow and Edwards big bucks, I'd like to see if he is really blowing smoke or if he's the real deal.
Coaches ALWAYS say this crap when they're losing. (See Chris Palmer, Butch Davis, Romeo Crennel. They all used a version of "short term sacrifices....yada, yada, yada...."). So, yeah, I think he's blowing smoke up your keister. You probably thought that tickling sensation back there was your shorts riding up.....nope.
Quote:
You can argue that every single one of those 5 teams is better than we are. I guess that's not progress.
Hell, apparently, YOU can argue about anything....  .....but yes, I can argue all of them are pretty much like us or worse, except for the Steelers, so what's the point? Have we progressed? Only if you give credit to the guy that starts an apartment building on fire then rescues the inhabitants. Because that's pretty much what your buddy Eric has done. Now Fire Marshall Holmgren gets to decide the merits of the case.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
Nope. I'm saying Holmgren will look at that (past involvement in a bad draft) in his evaluations. Are you saying he won't? Because if you are then you're just arguing as exercise for your fingers.
What I'm saying is it won't carry much weight - if any - in Holmgren's decision to keep him on as coach. So I guess I'm getting plenty of exercise for my fingers.
Please tell me - anyone tell me - why it would matter if he's only being kept on as the coach anyway. I'm still waiting for a legitimate answer.
Quote:
Yes, it is MY opinion. Just as the opposite appears to be your opinion. We may never find out who is correct. Doesn't mean my opinion isn't viable just because it doesn't match yours.
I never said that my opinion carried more weight, but it needs to be pointed out that every anti-Mangini guy lists the QB comp as a screw up by Mangini in a very matter of fact way ... like it's case closed. And I'm yet to have anyone account for the fact that in the absence of getting more reps in TC, as each guy got more reps during the season, neither improved. So what makes anyone think more reps in TC would have even mattered? It's just more piling on.
Quote:
I'll ignore that and chalk it up to the fact that you're just not used to being wrong.....
Hell, I'm wrong all the time. But I feel pretty strongly about Mangini getting another year. It started as a small inkling ... which dates back to the start of this thread ... and has gained steam each week that we've gone out there and got victories.
Quote:
Coaches ALWAYS say this crap when they're losing. (See Chris Palmer, Butch Davis, Romeo Crennel. They all used a version of "short term sacrifices....yada, yada, yada...."). So, yeah, I think he's blowing smoke up your keister. You probably thought that tickling sensation back there was your shorts riding up.....nope.
Maybe so ... but just in the same way I prefer to believe what I see and ignore the stats most of the time ... I'm believing what I'm seeing. I'm seeing progress in certain phases of the game.
Quote:
Hell, apparently, YOU can argue about anything
Actually I'm not much of an arguer on here. We just disagree on this topic.
Quote:
I can argue all of them are pretty much like us or worse, except for the Steelers, so what's the point? Have we progressed? Only if you give credit to the guy that starts an apartment building on fire then rescues the inhabitants. Because that's pretty much what your buddy Eric has done. Now Fire Marshall Holmgren gets to decide the merits of the case.
Again, I disagree, but it most likely won't matter. You're going to get your way. Mangini will probably be gone by week's end.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Nope. I'm saying Holmgren will look at that (past involvement in a bad draft) in his evaluations. Are you saying he won't?
Quote:
What I'm saying is it won't carry much weight - if any - in Holmgren's decision to keep him on as coach. So I guess I'm getting plenty of exercise for my fingers.
Please tell me - anyone tell me - why it would matter if he's only being kept on as the coach anyway. I'm still waiting for a legitimate answer.
Mike Holmgren quote:
(On who will have final say on the roster) - "I get the final say on everything, which is fun. Now, does that mean I go in and pound the desk and say, ‘We have to do this and this is what we're going to do'? No. The coach is involved big time. The general manager is involved. I am going to be involved. I anticipate a couple other really good football men to be involved.
clevelandbrowns.com
So Holmgren will depend on his HC to be involved "big time" in final roster decisions. If he likes the roster-type decisions he's seen from Mangini in '09 that's a good mark for Mangini. If he sees negative roster-type decisions from Mangini in '09 then that doesn't fare so well in the eyes of Holmgren given that he'll depend, big time, on his coach to add valued input.
I think that's a legitimate answer to your question.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
I think that's a legitimate answer to your question.
So in essence you're saying that Holmgren will evaluate Mangini's past draft, and if he decides it goes in the 'negatives for keeping EM' column, will possibly fire him because of that ... even though MH has final say ... and EM is only going to get to offer an opinion?
I'm not buying it.
And keep in mind, MH may not even find the draft or the player acquisitions all that appalling.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
You also talked about trading our 2 best players, but did Mangini do an adequate job of replacing them with even marginal, reliable talent? I can see bringing in draft picks at those positions, but Robert Royal? Mike Furrey? Those moves were failures.
You know as well as me and everyone else here that bringing in Furrey was in no way to be construed as a replacement for Braylon. Unless he was planning all along to trade Braylon when Furrey was signed, then his signing is little more to bring in a journeyman vet as a placeholder while our two rookie draft picks grew into their positions. I can see the argument that perhaps a viable #2 should've been signed between the start of free agency and the draft to start opposite Braylon. However, painting Furrey as a replacement for Braylon is 100% spin and you know it. Even as I type this, Mark Sanchez just threw a pass to Braylon that hit him in the ass while he was looking the other way. I didn't want to see Braylon go mid-season, but I also understand that there was not and has not been a viable replacement to hit the market since we dealt him to NY. Stuckey has been spotty, and Trusnik has been a bit of a pleasant surprise, so I'll wait to really judge the Braylon deal after I see what we're able to get with the picks we acquired from the Jets.
As for Royal, I don't think anyone expected him to come in and produce like Winslow did, and he's failed to meet even modest expectations. Mangini also brought in Evan Moore who has proven that he can catch the ball, and if he can even block remotely well then he's already more valuable to this team than Winslow was.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
*shrug* Mangini will stick around. Mark my words.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512 |
well we can hope 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
*shrug* Mangini will stick around. Mark my words.
I'm not buying it. I think Mangini is gone sometime this week. I guess you can mark my words as well.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
TRUST ME. Mangini will be back for more. Oh yes he will.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
So in essence you're saying that Holmgren will evaluate Mangini's past draft, and if he decides it goes in the 'negatives for keeping EM' column, will possibly fire him because of that ... even though MH has final say ... and EM is only going to get to offer an opinion?
No. Not at all.
You specifically asked what it would matter. I just pointed out what it would matter. In no way was I claiming that to be any defining evidence that would cost Mangini his job.
In all likelyhood if MH considered Mangini's roster decisions and player evaluation to be poop then he may simply take Mangini's suggestions with a grain of salt.
But if I'm a betting man I'd bet MH would be hoping for more valuable input from his coach.
But all that hinges on MH finding EM's decisions to be bad. In fact, he may like what he's seen of EM's decisions in which case any of the negatives any of us can come up with will be that which doesn't matter.
Personally I think he's made plenty of mistakes in regard to personnel decisions.
MH will also want to look at who Mangini played and who was inactive. He may want to hear reasons for some of that. (For instance, why hadn't Harrison seen much of the field until the end of the season? If I'm MH I'm going to ask that queston. Mangini may have an answer to satisfy MH.) After all, that is one area where MH will not interfere with his coach. He'll have final say on the 53 man roster but the HC will have final say on who plays and who sits.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Mangini and Next Year
|
|
