|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
I thought the commentators from yesterday's game made a great point ... Mangini comes from the Parcells/Bellicheck coaching tree, which is Defense oriented ... while Holmgren comes from the Walsh coaching tree which is offensive based, using the WCO. Keeping Mangini while inserting a new WC flavor to the offense, might bring us the best of both worlds. At any rate, I don't think Mangini goes ... it would be wise for Holmgren to keep him. Next year will obviously be a rebuilding year, and keeping Mangini around means he will at the very least have a scapegoat if/when things go bad. That's pretty much what Mangini didn't have this year. He knew he had to clean the organization out, and replace cancers like Braylon with guys who might not produce as much. The problem was, when things fell apart ... he took the blame cause there was nobody else to take the fall for him. If Holmgren keeps Mangini, and we sputter next year, he'll have that extra "luxary" ... and if things work out ... we'll have a Walsh offense paired with a Parcells Defense. I won't complain. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
He should be proud. I think even if he gets canned, he's leaving the team in a MUCH better place then it was when he took over.
Absolutely.
Mangini is going to be the fall guy but for doing some pretty ballsy things that it requires to build a team.
This team, right now, would have smoked the 2008 version.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
Quote:
He should be proud. I think even if he gets canned, he's leaving the team in a MUCH better place then it was when he took over.
Absolutely.
Mangini is going to be the fall guy but for doing some pretty ballsy things that it requires to build a team.
This team, right now, would have smoked the 2008 version.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
Quote:
we'll have a Walsh offense paired with a Parcells Defense.
I'm actually almost giddy at the thought of that.
A Parcells defense being run by a Ryan.... we've already been getting little glimpses of how nice that will be. With improved talent, it's going to be blissful to watch.
Adding in a high-flying Walsh/Brown offense and we're going to be something serious to be reckoned with.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Adam implied that coaches normally to be fired could get another year (2010) ...
...Then I started wondering...just another variable in the favor of Mangini to get the nod for 2010.
EO...I sure hope the above reason is not high on Holmgren's list of "variables" when judging whether to retain Mangini or not.
I still contend, the major reason for retaining Mangini will be to hold the HC position while Holmgren gets the organization set up and running the way he wants, with Holmgren returning to coaching in 2011.
It would make no sense for Holmgren to hire a HC for one year, thus Mangini remains while Holmgren tweaks the organization.
For sure, Mangini will be faced with a "loss of power over"...
...the 53 man roster
...the draft...
...the hiring and firing of coaching staff
...the offensive OC and offensive coaching staff
If Mangini can live with these changes, he could be retained. But there could be changes on the defensive side of the ball too.
Holmgren could decide to..
...switch from a 3-4 defense to a 4-3
...change the DC
...change some or all of the defensive coaching staff
The question becomes..if Holmgren says he wants to make the changes outlined above...can Mangini live with those changes, knowing he may get the boot next season?
IMO, it's going to come down to just how much Holmgren wants to change the team and how much power Mangini is going to be forced to give up. If Holmgren and Mangini can come to an agreement that satisfies both individuals, they may be able to co-exist for one year.
If Holmgren decides to change both the offense and defense, I could understand Mangini saying "no thanks" and moving on.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Holmgren is not going to accept the Prez job and then insert himself as the HC after one year.
Don't see it, not logical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
I hope to God that Holmgren does NOT return to coaching here.
1. He's already proven in Seattle that this is just too much for one person's plate.
2. I want him overseeing the organization as a whole and keeping it on course... the big thing that we've lacked.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Don't you think it would disastrous if a coach was forced to fire his own staff and then hire guys he's not comfortable with?
I could see one or two guys being replaced (Carl Smith, George McDonald.) But a complete offensive overhaul would mean Mangini is gone along with them.
I think Holmgren knows it's Mangini and his coaches or no Mangini and Holmgren's coaches.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Holmgren is not going to accept the Prez job and then insert himself as the HC after one year.
Don't see it, not logical.
Did Holmgren close the door on coaching again?
I had not read that...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 180
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 180 |
Quote:
I want to make one very blunt, factual statement:
If Mangini gets fired, it won't be because of what he did in regards to tearing down the roster and rebuilding the players and team in his image. It'll be because he screwed up the entire organization with his people who were fired by Lerner, and because of that, Holmgren was brought in to rebuild it.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Those might be a fact, but it's not the truth...
Do you think the entire organization is screwed up right now? If Holmgren had not been brought in (but another FO person who could fill in Mangini's gaps), do you think the Browns would be better, the same, or worse next season?
If Mangini screwed up the organization, there is only one answer to that question... They would be lucky to 5 wins.
My point is that Holmgren was brought in because he was a clear upgrade in the organization and the best candidate for the job. Of all the available presidential candidates, who was higher on the list than Holmgren? His pedigree is nearly flawless. The guy has been a key part of three different organizations going to the Super Bowl. He coached one of the most dynamic offensive teams in college (in the '80s). He hand-picked and coached one of the greatest QBs of all time (heck, he has coached Pro Bowlers his entire career). He was part of the big turnaround in GB, going from the dregs to the top of the heap. The list goes on and on...
Most teams in the NFL would not be questioned if they replaced their front office with Holmgren and his lackeys. He was arguably the very best front office option on the market (not under contract). When faced with a choice between someone who might succeed and someone you know can succeed, what would you choose? Lerner's hiring of Holmgren does not reflect organizational destruction by Mangini; it implies that Lerner was able to upgrade the front office.
What if Lerner needed another 2-3 weeks to find someone? The team is performing well, and looks to be going in the right direction. Mangini clearly needs a strong hand in the front office, but would Lerner have reconsidered the type of person he hired? Would he have brought in someone from the Parcells coaching tree (who would likely maintain the same philosophy)?
The real fact is that the Browns were in severe pain when Kokinis was removed from office. Were they growing pains? Were they the pain of destruction? We don't know. What we do know is that from that period of pain, Lerner had the opportunity to bring in one of the best football minds. And that guy has full authority to make the Browns a winning franchise (much like SF, GB, and Seattle).
If Lerner had not hired Holmgren, would we be waiting for the axe to drop on Mangini right now?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
Don't you think it would disastrous if a coach was forced to fire his own staff and then hire guys he's not comfortable with?
If it's the difference between staying employed or getting fired ... yeah, I'd say he'd go along with it.
And my point is that Mangini is a "defensive" type guy ... it's not like he's over there helping run the offense anyway,
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
Did Holmgren close the door on coaching again?
I had not read that...
Yes, he said he would NOT be coaching again in 2010 ... does leave the door open for later, but I think with his experience in Seattle, he should know not to try and coach and GM at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
You're right I think Mangini would stay if given the option of firing his offense staff. Mostly because it would mean that his defensive staff doesn't lose their jobs. He has stated that he is more worried about the job security of his staff then he is about his own job security.
But I don't think it would work. A coach has to be able to hire and fire his own staff.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
So you're shocked that a new HC took over a 4-11 team and finished with a 5-11 record and eleven draft picks? Even though he was forced to use one of the two QB's on our roster - both of which were horrible?
Are U seriously asking me that?
I guess U are,aren't U?
Soooo U think he did sumptin' simply amazing ?
Forced to use both QB's?
Who forced him to?
Oh U mean both QB's forced him because neither did anything or do U mean someone unknown to all of us forced him to? It seems a bit like you formed an opinion at 1-11 and don't want to reconsider your position... What is there to consider?
That at 1-11, the college games were better to watch than the Browns?
Wasn't hard to form a opinon..at least not for me.
Why would any Browns fan want to blow up an emerging running game that's starting to really take hold?
Oh my goodness...the only running game was Harrison and a touch of Jennings..what is there to blow up?
Everytime U [post this image is coming forth more and more...man U must be real giddy after yesterday..just grinning all evening long..
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 01/04/10 03:42 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Holmgren is not going to accept the Prez job and then insert himself as the HC after one year.
Don't see it, not logical.
Mike Holmgren doesn't rule out coaching Browns
web page
Some excerpts from story linked above...
...Mike Holmgren did not rule out the possbility of coaching the Browns in addition to being the head of football operations. Holmgren has been the head coach for three Super Bowl teams.
...BEREA, Ohio -- Mike Holmgren on Friday did not rule out the possibility of coaching the Browns in addition to running them.
...The eye opener of Friday's radio show was that coaching the Browns was at least a possibility.
...Asked if he'd be a coach, general manager or president with the Browns, he said anything is possible.
"I think as far as the presentation [of options as coach, GM, president], it'd be any and all, I'd say," Holmgren said in his first remarks since interviewing with the Browns on Monday and Tuesday.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Holmgren noncommittal on coaching future in Cleveland
web page
Excerpts from story link above...
...Holmgren said his own specific duties will be ironed out next week when he arrives in Cleveland, but said he will report directly to owner Randy Lerner and will hire a general manager to work under him.
...He made it clear he won't be coaching next year, but certainly didn't slam the door on a future move back to the field.
"In the near future I'm not going to do that," he said. "Things can change, I suppose, down the road, but this year I accepted this new challenge in my career and I'm really excited about it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Holmgren will take time making decision on Mangini
web page
Excerpts...
......Holmgren, who took teams to the playoffs 12 times, also indicated he hasn't completely shaken the coaching bug.
"As far as coaching on the field, in the near future I'm not going to do that," he said. "Things can change, I suppose, down the road."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shep...as you can see, I didn't make this up...the possibility of Holmgren coaching again has been in the news for weeks. Whether you or I think it's logical does not matter as it's obvious that Lerner is leaving that decision up to Holmgren.
Until Holmgren knocks the story down, it will remain a possibility based on what Holmgren himself has said to the media. Whether you or I think it's logical, does not matter to Holmgren.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
j/c Quote:
Mike Holmgren can't be kneejerk about Eric Mangini anymore.
I said last night on NBC that despite the Browns' four-game winning streak (longest since Bill Belichick coached the team in the nineties), I think it's 60-40 that Mangini will get fired. But that's a legit 40 percent.
This isn't a typical up-and-down team that makes it easy on a new GM or football administrator to come in lining up the firing squad. This team has a few arrows pointing north -- the cleaning out of the salary cap, the accumulation of 11 picks in the 2010 draft, the sacrificing of good players (Kellen Winslow, Braylon Edwards) on a bad team for the future. The team played hard down the stretch in beating Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Oakland and Jacksonville, and Mangini and his staff began to develop a few unknown young players.
"I've taken a lot of heat for the Opportunity Period practices we run,'' Mangini told me last night, "but we've had a few players who never would have been able to show us much in regular practices show us quite a bit in those workouts.''
The Opportunity Periods are post-practice sessions that allow marginal players to come off the scout team for a handful of plays and work on plays the starters work on. Running back James Davis was lost for the year with a shoulder injury in one such practice in September. But as the season progressed, one of the stars of the Opportunity Period was Marcus Benard ("We never would have had the sense of his progress if he didn't have the chance to work in those periods,'' said Mangini).
The free agent from Jackson State began to play a prominent linebacker role against Pittsburgh in Week 14. That was the start of the winning streak, and the rangy Benard was all over the field that night. He had 3.5 sacks in the four-game streak, and he's a solid prospect for the Browns now.
I asked Mangini if he had a gut feel whether Holmgren will keep him when Holmgren takes over as the club's football czar this week. "This place was a mess when we got here, and it's not a mess anymore,'' he said. "Where we are now, I'm not nervous, I'm not anxious. I'm proud. If at the end of the day Mike wants to go in another direction, I'll understand, but I do think we're headed in the right direction.''
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/01/03/mmqb/1.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,363
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,363 |
IMO and my opinion only I think Eric deserves another year to prove himself, and his system. I said when we hired him he needed to have two or three years to prove if he was the right guy or not, and I still stick by that.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
JC
There's a few things being said here which puzzle me.
First, the supposed "screwup of the QB choice". Is it really the opinion that if EM would have chosen one earlier, there would have been substantially improved play from that position? Really? This boggles my mind, as neither one looks to be starter material, or even a good 2nd-stringer. Another two weeks, or another two years, would make little difference.
Second, dealing KW2 and Edwards without having good replacements. IMO, it could be argued that MoMass, as a rookie, is already outplaying Edwards. Stats show them pretty even, with Mass having far fewer drops. As for Winslow, just how many other TE of that caliber are readily available? He got stopgap players to fill-in, and stockpiled draft choices. St.Clair for Shaeffer was a definite downgrade, but an upgrade in cap space is an upgrade for the team. Because of these moves, we will be able to sign the 11 draft choices PLUS some FA next year.
Then there's the winning streak, against "bad teams". Well, earlier in the year, "bad teams" were cleaning our clock. We are better NOW than we were at the start of the year, and better than last season.
For the last several years, we all saw this team quit, at the end of games and the end of the season. For the last four weeks, with every reason to do so, that did not happen. They are playing hard, tough, and mean. I believe EM is responsible for that, and I want more.
Add some good draft choices, a FA or two, and perhaps a QB who is not a complete PUTZ and we may just get somewhere.
Didn't see anybody mention it, but one of EM's comments in the post-game yesterday was something like "I'm not the A-hole everybody thinks I am", with something about a sense of humour.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
j/c i dislike bud shaw but he got this one right. well, even a blind squirrel will find an acorn afterall. Quote:
If Eric Mangini is still coaching the Browns by the end of this week, it will be unexpected. That does not mean it would be undeserved.
With many Browns fans, the final impression, which is that of an unbraked car rolling down a steep hill, will be what lasts. But all that will matter will be the impression of Mangini that new team president Mike Holmgren brings to their pending meeting. It is hard to see an accommodation occurring between them.
It has little to do with the incidents that caused such a hue-and-cry locally and nationally. The Browns players were not Bear Bryant's "Junction Boys," taken to a sandburr-infested, burning patch of Hell in central Texas and made to live in barbaric conditions. The toughest things Mangini's players did were to take long bus rides, run punishment laps with water breaks provided, and pay for their incidentals on the road.
If the coach enjoyed the same backing by team ownership now that he was given then, the Browns would be heading into next season with a newly forged identity and a proven plan for victory. But he does not. To continue, Mangini would have to agree to work under conditions that are vastly different from those when he took the job as the franchise's generalissimo.
Also, Holmgren, the new great and powerful Oz, would have to cede some of the virtually unlimited power he assumed upon taking the job. He did not come here without assurances he could hire his own people.
There are vast philosophical differences between Holmgren, a West Coast offense guy, and Mangini, whose team's closing rush was fueled by a strong running game and an improving defense.
Amid a nearly unanimous chorus of local and national criticism of Mangini, owner Randy Lerner decided a new vision for the team was needed when the record was 1-and-11. I can't criticize Lerner for hiring Holmgren. Almost no one thought Mangini's methods would work at the time. Yet the Holmgren hiring, coming as it did just as the Browns were turning the season around, is more proof that Lerner has been both unlucky in his hires and untimely in his making of them.
This is not a eulogy for Mangini. It is an appreciation of a coach who was not greeted warmly when he was hired and who had to earn the respect he now commands around town.
Even under the heaviest fire, Mangini was professional in his dealings with critics. He did not talk down to media members and team functionaries, as did Bill Belichick and Marty Schottenheimer. He did not criticize players, as did Bud Carson. He did not sugar-coat shortcomings, as did Butch Davis. He did not downplay lax discipline, as did Romeo Crennel.
He patiently explained both the execution of a play and the philosophy behind it to those of us who are uninitiated in advanced X's and O's. He is secretive in many ways, but he also could de-mystify elements of the game. I appreciated the effort he made.
I do not dismiss the final four games as meaningless, as do some critics. The team learned then, despite a siege of injuries, what it took to compete and win. The final-game Gatorade dousing of the coach in Arctic wind-chill conditions didn't wash away all the problems, but it should be remembered more than the infamous $1,701 bottle of water.
Mangini and his staff made mistakes, some of them big. There is no point in recounting them now. He also changed the culture of defeat on the team.
He might keep his job, but I wouldn't count on it. All that would take would be for two strong-willed men, both accustomed to enormous power, to find a way to share it in what amounts to a shotgun wedding.
http://www.cleveland.com/livingston/index.ssf/2010/01/cleveland_browns_coach_eric_ma.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
That article was written by Bill Livingston.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
don't muddy the waters with technicalities 
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
lol! my fault. dunno how i typed bud shaw but i meant livingston. i'll chalk it up as a case of the post-holiday monday
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
First, the supposed "screwup of the QB choice". Is it really the opinion that if EM would have chosen one earlier, there would have been substantially improved play from that position? Really? This boggles my mind, as neither one looks to be starter material, or even a good 2nd-stringer. Another two weeks, or another two years, would make little difference.
The point is that he did screw up the QB choice in that he only gave Quinn 3 games to show what he had...and it just so happened that later that season he went back to him that we got an idea.
Anyone who says he handled that situation well should be slapped.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
First, the supposed "screwup of the QB choice". Is it really the opinion that if EM would have chosen one earlier, there would have been substantially improved play from that position? Really? This boggles my mind, as neither one looks to be starter material, or even a good 2nd-stringer. Another two weeks, or another two years, would make little difference.
Regardless of whether either would have improved a lot..U name a starter and give him reps and work with him to mold the offense to his strengths..not jerk either around and have the offense look like a Pop Warner team. Second, dealing KW2 and Edwards without having good replacements. IMO, it could be argued that MoMass, as a rookie, is already outplaying Edwards. Stats show them pretty even, with Mass having far fewer drops. As for Winslow, just how many other TE of that caliber are readily available? He got stopgap players to fill-in, and stockpiled draft choices. St.Clair for Shaeffer was a definite downgrade, but an upgrade in cap space is an upgrade for the team. Because of these moves, we will be able to sign the 11 draft choices PLUS some FA next year.
Almost sounds like U talkin' to me since I said EM dealt both off and didn't get the max in return..well he didn't.
First K2.. a catching TE...a TE that could go into the seams and catch the ballw as lacking form a while..Royal was a mess and the only reason he brought him in was he was cheap and more of a blocker..but he wasn't anything special in Bill Town and a waste..when Gains/Moore were aquired the postions was upgraded..but that was late ..
If your # 1 WR (who basically sucks) is on the trading block,then go into the draft with the intent of finding as close a# 1 as U can find..not a compliment WR(Robo) but a true deep threat.
As far as St.Clair goes..that was a bad choice..better choice would have been to net a OT in the draft..
And because EM isn't looked on with confidence he isn't going to be doing any FA signing if he is here in after this week..so I ain't worried about his handprint on any aquisitions.. Then there's the winning streak, against "bad teams". Well, earlier in the year, "bad teams" were cleaning our clock. We are better NOW than we were at the start of the year, and better than last season.
And we're still a bad team with a lot of holes and not a lot of talent.that winning streak doesn't dismiss that at all. Didn't see anybody mention it, but one of EM's comments in the post-game yesterday was something like "I'm not the A-hole everybody thinks I am", with something about a sense of humour. Why mention that when it is worthless to comment on?
Who cares ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
"I could understand Mangini saying "no thanks" and moving on."
That might be what keeps him here. If he takes it up the tail pipe but stays, he gets paid. If he get fired he gets paid. If he says no thanks and walks out I believe Randy would be out from under the contract.
Maybe thats exactly what they want to happen. Make it SO hard on Mangini he quits. Possibly a small buy out/settlement to make it easier ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
IMO and my opinion only I think Eric deserves another year to prove himself, and his system. I said when we hired him he needed to have two or three years to prove if he was the right guy or not, and I still stick by that.
I have no problem with that as long as Holmgren has MAJOR input on the Offense. We were so damn sickly that it's needs something.. a new OC or scheme or something..
But the question remains, if and it's a big IF, Holmgren wants to install a WCO, will Mangini be agreeable and capable of dealing with it?
I'm wondering if that would be a stumbling block...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
But the question remains, if and it's a big IF, Holmgren wants to install a WCO, will Mangini be agreeable and capable of dealing with it?
Comments like those make me frown...if EM wouldn't agree to what MH wants ,buh-bye..what do U think will happen if he isn't agreeable to it?
U think Walrus is gonna say .."O.k we'll run what U want..whatever that is.."
Or.."Man he wants to do something else,what will I do now?"
The better question is can EM run it?
Don't have any second thoughts about Dumboll being here,he's as good as gone..so MH gets his GM to hire a legid OC who can run that..and really all EM is going to do is work on the defense with some input on the offensive side of the ball..
When it's laid out that way,well what can he do?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
Comments like those make me frown...if EM wouldn't agree to what MH wants ,buh-bye..what do U think will happen if he isn't agreeable to it?
U think Walrus is gonna say .."O.k we'll run what U want..whatever that is.."
Ahh, only if it were that simple. Holmgren made a statement something to the effect that Mangini (not naming him) would have to really convince him of something other than what he's familiar with.
Mangini might try that.. and I expect it not to work..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
But the question remains, if and it's a big IF, Holmgren wants to install a WCO, will Mangini be agreeable and capable of dealing with it?
Comments like those make me frown...if EM wouldn't agree to what MH wants ,buh-bye..what do U think will happen if he isn't agreeable to it?
U think Walrus is gonna say .."O.k we'll run what U want..whatever that is.."
Or.."Man he wants to do something else,what will I do now?"
The better question is can EM run it?
Don't have any second thoughts about Dumboll being here,he's as good as gone..so MH gets his GM to hire a legid OC who can run that..and really all EM is going to do is work on the defense with some input on the offensive side of the ball..
When it's laid out that way,well what can he do?
I don't think he has a choice but to try.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
So he "screwed up" by not doing it the way it is "supposed" to be done? If it made little or no difference, then it's not much of a screw-up. Just EXACTLY what "strengths" of either QB would have been taken advantage of?
I just don't think you can replace a Winslow right away. WR, TE, OT, we had HOW MANY draft choices to accomplish all this, plus another WR, Center, LB's, RB, and everything else we needed?
Yes, we are still a bad team. BUT, and this is a my-ex-wife's-size BUT, we are a heckuva lot LESS BAD than we were at the beginning of the season.
People have called Mangini a humourless martinet, so that a jesting comment poking fun at himself is, IMO, worthy of taking notice of.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
Quote:
U sure it was Gatoraide?
Seriously I'm not affected by that..seen all of the EX-Browns coaches get hit with that liquid..some I'd rather see get hit with the jug..
What gets me is the so-called changes came after BK was brought in to ...help the offense..yeah...give advice..if dude was soooo good why was this needed?
There's too much question about certain issues that to me solidify that a change might be in order one way or another.
If he is kept he's going to have several people to answer to..
Gatorade, the official sports drink of everything important. 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
Quote:
The better question is can EM run it?
I agree with you he will go any direction needed....who wouldn't.
The thing is, he doesn't have to run it.....his OC has to run it.
I think OC is about the only position that is going to be changed.
Mangini gets vilified on every level,,,,but I honestly believe him when he says he is all for bringing in anybody who can help make the Browns better.
I just don't think the guy is quite the control freak some make him out to be.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560 |
I usually don't like to read Bill Livingston from the PD but I agree completely with his article here: http://www.cleveland.com/livingston/index.ssf/2010/01/cleveland_browns_coach_eric_ma.htmlCLEVELAND, Ohio -- If Eric Mangini is still coaching the Browns by the end of this week, it will be unexpected. That does not mean it would be undeserved. With many Browns fans, the final impression, which is that of an unbraked car rolling down a steep hill, will be what lasts. But all that will matter will be the impression of Mangini that new team president Mike Holmgren brings to their pending meeting. It is hard to see an accommodation occurring between them. It has little to do with the incidents that caused such a hue-and-cry locally and nationally. The Browns players were not Bear Bryant's "Junction Boys," taken to a sandburr-infested, burning patch of Hell in central Texas and made to live in barbaric conditions. The toughest things Mangini's players did were to take long bus rides, run punishment laps with water breaks provided, and pay for their incidentals on the road. If the coach enjoyed the same backing by team ownership now that he was given then, the Browns would be heading into next season with a newly forged identity and a proven plan for victory. But he does not. To continue, Mangini would have to agree to work under conditions that are vastly different from those when he took the job as the franchise's generalissimo. Also, Holmgren, the new great and powerful Oz, would have to cede some of the virtually unlimited power he assumed upon taking the job. He did not come here without assurances he could hire his own people. There are vast philosophical differences between Holmgren, a West Coast offense guy, and Mangini, whose team's closing rush was fueled by a strong running game and an improving defense. Amid a nearly unanimous chorus of local and national criticism of Mangini, owner Randy Lerner decided a new vision for the team was needed when the record was 1-and-11. I can't criticize Lerner for hiring Holmgren. Almost no one thought Mangini's methods would work at the time. Yet the Holmgren hiring, coming as it did just as the Browns were turning the season around, is more proof that Lerner has been both unlucky in his hires and untimely in his making of them. This is not a eulogy for Mangini. It is an appreciation of a coach who was not greeted warmly when he was hired and who had to earn the respect he now commands around town. Even under the heaviest fire, Mangini was professional in his dealings with critics. He did not talk down to media members and team functionaries, as did Bill Belichick and Marty Schottenheimer. He did not criticize players, as did Bud Carson. He did not sugar-coat shortcomings, as did Butch Davis. He did not downplay lax discipline, as did Romeo Crennel. He patiently explained both the execution of a play and the philosophy behind it to those of us who are uninitiated in advanced X's and O's. He is secretive in many ways, but he also could de-mystify elements of the game. I appreciated the effort he made. I do not dismiss the final four games as meaningless, as do some critics. The team learned then, despite a siege of injuries, what it took to compete and win. The final-game Gatorade dousing of the coach in Arctic wind-chill conditions didn't wash away all the problems, but it should be remembered more than the infamous $1,701 bottle of water. Mangini and his staff made mistakes, some of them big. There is no point in recounting them now. He also changed the culture of defeat on the team. He might keep his job, but I wouldn't count on it. All that would take would be for two strong-willed men, both accustomed to enormous power, to find a way to share it in what amounts to a shotgun wedding.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
Remember what Otto has said: I've perfected the art of insulting people without insulting people, as well as riding the fence in such a way as to always be able to say I'm right.
Hey, that's a compliment where I come from......
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
Shep...as you can see, I didn't make this up...the possibility of Holmgren coaching again has been in the news for weeks.
Yep...I can see and have seen, and I didn't say you made it up, but thanks for regurgitating.
Quote:
Until Holmgren knocks the story down, it will remain a possibility based on what Holmgren himself has said to the media. Whether you or I think it's logical, does not matter to Holmgren.
No duh???
I shoulda just done what I normally do when I think about replying to one of your posts, and that is slamming my head off of the wall a few times.
It's much simpler and makes more sense. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Quote:
Quote:
He MADE the TEAM into a WINNER with his SYSTEM.
5-11. If you're happy with 5-11 so be it but do not call this team a winner until they deserve that title.
The only thing Mangini proved was that he was a better coach than RAC...and that isn't hard at all.
This is the last post I read so I will apologize in advance if I'm just repeating what others have said.
Ifv we fire every coach for mistakes they make each year we will never have a winning team.
Toad told everyone who would listen that we were rebuilding. Magini brought in all of his guys (to the point it was a running joke on here) to get his system in place. We were downright awful in the beginning of the year. mangini has been able to make some real progress and it is showing. We are playing the best ball we have played in the past two years without our defensive stars. The offense is running the ball effectively even though everyone knows a run play is coming.
Dabol may suck but he was a first year play calller. Our offensive has been very effective of late even though we have had the worst play in the league from the QB spot.
I'm not saying that any of these guys are the answer but how can we know if we pull the plug so fast?
BTW... I'm going to speak up for my buddy EVE. She isn't happy with a 5-11 team. She is happy that we have seemed to start to really turn things around.
I'm curious, do you really want to blow things up again this year?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
I'm curious, do you really want to blow things up again this year?
...I don't know, if you want my honest answer.
I am just not sure if Eric Mangini is a SB caliber HC in the NFL or not. I do know that Holmgren has been there twice and one once...so I trust him to know who can get there and who can't. If Holmgren doesn't want Mangini, I'll trust him.
I guess my personal opinion is that I'd rather blow it up now if we are going to have to blow it up in a couple of years anyway. So...yes, I guess I do want to blow it up again.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Mike Holmgren doesn't rule out coaching Browns
Not to argue, but then there's this ...
"I want to make this clear: I'm not coaching anymore," Holmgren said on a conference call with reporters on Dec. 28.
ColumbusDispatch
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 294
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 294 |
Quote:
Adding in a high-flying Walsh/Brown offense and we're going to be something serious to be reckoned with.
I wonder if MH would hire himself as OC.  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
So he "screwed up" by not doing it the way it is "supposed" to be done? If it made little or no difference, then it's not much of a screw-up. Just EXACTLY what "strengths" of either QB would have been taken advantage of?
 The answer has been stated on more than 10 occasions..you lose reps with the first unit..getting to know and get confortable with the offense and supporting cast. I just don't think you can replace a Winslow right away. WR, TE, OT, we had HOW MANY draft choices to accomplish all this, plus another WR, Center, LB's, RB, and everything else we needed Another question thats been answered many many times...
If you're losing all your recieving weapons ,then you go get some comperable players to come in via FA and/or the draft.
We had 8 picks...used differently the bigger holes could have been addressed better..they weren't.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Mangini Won 4 in a Row..Now what?
|
|
