DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Lunacy of Firing Mangini

You've done it now, fans and media who want Eric Mangini fired. You've really pushed me to the brink. Finally it's time to come out guns a blazing in support of Coach with rational football logic and reasoning instead of the irrational "DERP DERP DERP" I've been hearing and reading the past several days, weeks and months.

I'm gonna flat out ask this to those of you who want to see Mangini gone: Do you realize what you're doing? Do you realize what you want? Do you realize you want to blow up the most sound organization we've had since Belichick in the early-90's (who got a bad rap here, I might add)? Do you realize you want to continue the Merry Go Round of Misery that has plagued this franchise?

Here are some FACTS about the 2010 Cleveland Browns.


1) The Browns are a much improved team despite facing a brutal schedule. Why haven't we improved further? We are simply not talented enough to win consistently. It’s a fact of life in the salary-cap era of the National Football League that unless you're a top-level team or a bottom feeder, you're wildly inconsistent.

Let me explain: In the NFL you have a few good teams, a few dreadful teams and a bunch of teams right in the middle. The Browns are one of those middle teams, which makes them wildly inconsistent. When you play against a tough schedule like we have this season, more than likely than not you will lose more than you win when you’re a wildly inconsistent team; it's simple logic because you play a higher ratio of top-level teams that you have to mentally and physically prepare for. It takes its toll over the course of a season.

We see this every year from every average team in the league: they win when they shouldn't, but lose when they shouldn't; they have ugly wins and pretty losses; their fans are frustrated with their inconsistency because they can win against anyone but lose against anyone in the league. Every week feels like a coin-toss. This is NOT unique to the 2010 Cleveland Browns, this is today's NFL unless you are a team that has top-level talent, or a bottom-feeder. We are so used to being bottom feeders that we don't know what being average feels like.

Plus, look at the roster. One of your starting receivers couldn’t get open in college against above average opponents (Robiskie). Your wildcat/reverse threat is currently less than 100% so he’s less than effective (Cribbs). Your most talented receiver is wildly inconsistent (Massaquoi). Your only consistent offensive threats are an above average tight end (Watson) and a runningback who, while beastly, has a tendency to put the ball on the turf (Hillis). Defensively, your two most outstanding players are rookies (Ward and Haden). To expect the roster to be fully fleshed out in only year 2 of Mangini's tenure when the first year involved stripping the team down to next to nothing is absurd. We don't have the overall talent to win consistently.

2) Mangini has established a culture change that was much, MUCH needed in Berea. It’s been well documented that the pre-Mangini the Browns were horribly dysfunctional and soft (both physically and mentally) and well documented that former GM Phil Savage and former head coach Romeo Crennel didn’t work well together. Mangini had to completely remodel the practice facility in order to create an environment conducive to winning (there are articles out there about this). The entire organization needed to be stripped down and rebuilt from scratch. This does not happen in one or two seasons, especially in a tough division such as the AFC North.

3) Last I checked, it wasn’t Mangini who signed Jake Delhomme for $7 million this year and said “Colt McCoy won’t play this year, I signed Jake Delhomme for a reason.” “I think he’s gonna be fine.” Burdening Mangini with a QB who is ready for the glue factory is not the best approach to winning football games. Ask yourself this: could Mike Holmgren win with Jake Delhomme circa 2010?

I'm sure at some point someone is going to say Mangini should have played Seneca Wallace the past three weeks. I do not disagree, but please keep this in mind: Not even Mike Holmgren himself had a winning record with Seneca starting for the Seattle Seahawks at a time when the Seahawks were a consistent playoff team and Super Bowl contender. It has also been documented more than once that Seneca only reads half the field, which reduces the ability for the offense's capabilities.

4) Reasonable expectations for this season were that the Browns wouldn’t make the playoffs, but would be a tough, scrappy team that would punch you in the mouth every single week. That’s precisely what has happened: We have not been blown out and we have been a tough, hard-nosed, physical team every single week. Any further expectations (aside from the outside chance that Delhomme would reinvigorate himself, and Robiskie and Massaquoi would become stars overnight) were absurd and a product of wishful thinking, especially considering that two teams in our division are traditional AFC powerhouses, and the third team was coming off of an AFC North title. Be realistic. This is only Year 2. Baby steps.

5) I've said this multiple times, but it needs re-iterating: THIS IS ONLY YEAR 2 OF THE MANGINI REGIME! 2 years (one of them with an actual GM) is not nearly enough time for a coach to have a fully fleshed out roster with the level of talent the coach desires, especially when year 2 involves breaking in a rookie QB. One of the problems with this town is that we keep firing coaches and coordinators and never give the regime enough time to build a stable base of talent. Stability will pay off in the long run, especially with this regime because of the people in place.

Here's an example: Bill Cowher had 3 losing seasons in a row with the Steelers in the mid-90′s. Did they fire him? NO! They stayed with S-T-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y. What was ultimately the missing ingredient for a Lombardi in that disgusting city to the southeast of us? A franchise QB. Find a franchise QB (who we may already have), keep acquiring talent and Mangini will win. A coach's success is largely tied to the performance of his quarterback based on history.

But I guess progress isn't good enough for Browns fans. You're not happy because Mangini hasn't won immediately yet because he wants to build this franchise the right way? You're not happy because his name isn't Bill Cowher or Jon Gruden (a "sexy" pick, which historically is usually not the best route to take)? You're not happy because we don't blow out teams every single week?

Fine. Let’s keep firing coaches, firing coordinators, overhauling the roster and setting us back a few years because we're too impatient to see a rebuilding process through. Let’s continue this Merry Go Round of Misery despite seeing that constant change in other cities (Washington and Oakland come to mind) never works.
Lunacy. Sheer lunacy.

Wow! I just want an OC who produces. I think Mangini has made strides. He needs to revise a few things to be allowed back. That said, I support him. Think the DC moves on. But gimme a better OC. Players aside, it is a bad area.

WTH? Have I missed a thread or three that people want him fired??

Got it. Thanks, guys. Guess I didn't know there were enough people spewing that B.S. that it deserved this kind of rant. Guess I was wrong.

Gini doesnt need to go...

No coach is perfect.. Not one, and those who are deemed to be probably have more wins than loses....

We just need a new offensive coordinator, and need to start looking now. Bye Bye Daboll.

I personally want a pass first OC, who has a little common sense to run the ball most of the time...

Quote:

---

Why haven't we improved further?

---

Because Jake Delhomme has been too healthy for Mangini to keep him off the field?

I don't want to get rid of Mangini, but he needs to get rid of Daboll. If he is unwilling to do that then he will have to go.

+1 with most. Mangini sticks....Daboll must go. I've been anti this guy since his first game with us.

However, a question....if Mangini doesn't see how bad Daboll is, what does that say about him as an HC?

Look Ammo

I wouldn't be against bringing back Mangini and crew for another year..I have said that...i think its only fair that he gets another crack, however, life isn't always fair.

My biggest concern with Holmgren keeping Mangini was a "clash of interest"

Bill Bellichik/Eric Mangini philosophy is the anti-Walsh/Holmgren tree all the way...the two sides basically share ZERO in common with how things are done offensively and defensively...I knew this going in.

Mike Holmgren said in a press conference a few months ago that when asked about the offense he said "Its not the way I would do it" and the look on Holmgren's face, the grimace he gave tells you all you need to know...that Holmgren don't like this O philosphy

Also when Holmgren was asked about the defense, he said "It drives me crazy how they moves those guys around, but if it works "shrug" now Body language tells more then words and Holmgren don't like the D system either.

Holmgren and Heckert BOTH are WCO and 4-3 D guys...thats what Heckert helped build and draft for in Philly, thats what Holmgren ran, built and drafted for in Seattle and Green Bay. Mangini Philosophy and Holmgren's philosphy are complete polar opposites.

Eric Mangini may end up being the "victim of circumstance" Holmgren really didn't know enough about Eric to really make an informed decision last year, and Holmgren probably felt it was unfair to fire him when he didn't really know if Eric's way of doing things would work or not.

when push comes to shove, Mike Holmgren is going to go to what he knows works...whats worked for him in 2 cities, whats worked for his proteges Gruden and Andy Reid...its what he is comfortable with, its what Heckert is comfortable with.

I totally wouldn't be against giving Eric Mangini another year if thats what Holmgren decides, i'd be fine with it...but if Eric gets a year 3 anything less then 8-9 wins is not acceptable.

However, Holmgren may not be 100% comfortable with what Eric is doing. Holmgren may not be convinced his way is going to get the job done here.

Perhaps sitting in the booth screaming, hollaring, and feeling "powerless" to do anything on gameday is eating at Mike...perhaps Mike feels he could win more games with this group then Eric...we don't know...historically Mike Holmgren coached teams are very well coached and usually over-achieve very well like Bill Cowher coached teams....

Mike Holmgren has 5 years left to be a head coach, before age makes that just not possible...he has already stated him and his wife have had "discussions" about him returning to the sideline at some point...

I don't see Mike Holmgren as a guy that will be content sitting in an office. Bill Parcells was just too old to handle the rigors of coaching anymore, he is older then Mike Holmgren...Parcells sat in the office in Miami because he had no other choice, Holmgren does have a choice....if Holmgren wants 1 last trip to the sidelines, it will have to be here Cleveland...also don't forget egos...if Holmgren turns this team around and wins a SB...the guy will be a legend only equaled to Paul Brown himself...

Even though I don't agree with it, and I wouldn't mind having Eric for another year...Mangini may be the victim of circumstance...

Parcells sat in the office in Miami because he had no choice due to his age and his health couldn't take it anymore, as a man you have to do what you love until you can no longer do it anymore...Holmgren still has a 5 year window to coach....and he loves coaching....I said when we hired Mike that Mangini better win some games or else Mike will take his job...sometimes the best way to get a job done (rebuilding a football team) is to do it yourself (Holmgren puts on the headset)

I hope Mangini gets another year, but I will also understand if Mike Holmgren feels he can do more to help the Browns on the sidelines where he has more coaching talent then just about anybody in the league right now, and since Weidmer and Heckert are in place and settled in...its doable.

Holmgren takes VP of Football Operations job and coaches and works with Heckert.

Weidmer takes over the rest of the Presidential duties and sits in on meetings and stuff (Holmgren as president is allowed to delegate you know, its part of the job)

I can see where it can work, I can also see everyones point about keeping Eric..im fine with either...

Who's to say he doesn't see it, Canada?

It's entirely possible that he's playing out this year with the coaching staff intact, and waiting until the offseason for a change. Or it's possible that he sees it, hates it... but is too professional to air his greivances in public. Either way, 'no news' means- nothing much at this point.

Then again, dumping Daboll is not really his call any more, since we have a Prez to handle such things. Questions about Daboll should land on Holmy's desk- not Mangini's.

Quote:

---

Then again, dumping Daboll is not really his call any more, since we have a Prez to handle such things. Questions about Daboll should land on Holmy's desk- not Mangini's.

---

I disagree. The coach has to have the majority decision on his staff. Of course he would be stupid to not listen and consider Holmgren and Heckerts input but if Holmgren starts firing and rehiring Mangini's staff without his consent and approval then we will know that Mangini has one foot out the door.

I wouldn't be TOO surprised if Gil Haskell stepped into the OC role next season. He was the Seahawks OC under Holmgren and is a Senior Advisor to MH now. He's getting up there age-wise, so I don't know if he would do it or not. However, he would certainly fit the WCO mold for an OC if Holmgren wants to push it.

I imagine if EM is stubborn enough about sticking with Dabol, he could be gone as well. However, even EM has to see that his current OC is struggling and is probably in over his head. I hear the argument that Dabol doesn't have a lot of horses to work with. However, some of his game plans and his play-calling have been real head-scratchers.

even if Gini is fired... the big names will probably want to go to Dallas, or Minnesota.

Keep Gini...

FYI

Jay Glazer from Fox Sports is reporting that Mangini is out as head coach at the end of the season

its posted on his official Twitter, and he is going to talk about on his upcoming broadcast in about 30 minutes or so on foxports.com

Jay Glazer has a pretty good track record...i'd say it 90/10 that Glazer is spot on and Mangini is out...sad really...I can't post twitter links here, but look it up...or listen to Glazer on fox sports web site in a bit to find out more.

I question Mangini's strategy in the game and his ability to take chances.

Simply put, I think Mangini is a great guy to build a team, he can really teach the game of football...but I'm not sure if Mangini is the guy to get a team over the hump.

I dont like Mangini and I thought he was a bad hire from day one. Just another Bellyache assistant that couldnt make it on his on. Sticking with Delhomme and St. Claire makes me wonder if he really did want to dump Colt in the preseason for Ratty.

If it was me, I would can him and the entire offensive staff. This offensive staff is bad from top to bottom. Hell half these guys we have already fired before.

Rob gets a promotion and an entirely new offensive coaching staff. If can't keep Rob then find someone with that natural leadership ability. It is a rare quality.

I would push Heckert to continue drafting and bringing in quality people with that tough, physical style of play but hopefully they have some speed as well lol.

Here are the facts you need...not your apology treatise:

Year 1 as Napolean: 5-11, 31st D, 32nd O

Offseason: Lesson learned, hired H/H, demoted EM to HC only

Year 2 as HC-only: 5-8 (most likely 6-10, maybe 7-9 if PIT is through), 22nd D, 29th O

Lesson learned so far: no clue about O

Just fire him and let him be a DC or ST-Coach somwhere else...there's no point of running a DC out there every sunday acting as a HC

For those of you calling for MH to install a OC, that pretty much is conceeding the failure of EM as the HC

Also, Belli is the exception not the norm....the % of failure in years 3 and 4+ after 2 bad seasons far outweight the success stories...look no further than our own history: would it have been a mistake to fire Butcher and Romeo after 2 seaons? No, it would have saved us time...same with EM....EM's Browns look better but effectively aren't even better than Romeo's...and he has way more talent than Romeo ever had...just punt him

I want to see how the team handles the last three games of the season. The world is full of experts. Most of what I'm hearing in the press about Mangini is what an awful person he is, as if football coaches are supposed to be Mr. Congeniality. "I don't like the coach because he won't play my boy and we all know he's the best on the team." I hear it enough out of high school programs.

The positives of keeping Mangini: the status quo 2 5-11 seasons.
oh, is that a positive?
the lack of creativity in close games is mind numbing. I have thought this last stretch was make or break for both Mangini & Daboll yet the coaches made NO adjustments and kept the awful Delhomme in the game. If you want" moral victories" Mangini is your man.

What would you replace him with. I heard a lunatic article in the Bleacher report suggest or repeat the whispers of Jim Zorn: that would be heart attack stupid. Zorns Redskins were a disjointed and dysfunctional team. Such talk is hopefully just nonsensical blather.
Yet Mangini is truly auditioning to keep his job
a) lack of game day adjustments and time management.
b) lack of any originality in play calling(save the Patriot and Saints games where it paid off) went right back to Zombie thereafter.
c) the self deception of staying the course in the offseason with the worst set of WRS in the NFL.
d) Dumping Harrison and Davis and leaving no options or a breather for Hillis. getting the Bum, Bell at RB was a joke.
e) leaving injured and struggling players on the field as they continue to make worse mistakes and not replace them.
f) so many close games had any changes been made may have been the difference. I do not see a philosophy of keeping them close as a consolation for more losing.
G) leaving the struggling RT St. Clair without a TE to help him chip on passing downs.
However change for the sake of change I see no good as well. Zorn would be a joke. It is obvious this team needs serious help in many areas talent wise yet there also needs a change in offensive philosophy a) after wins vs the pats and saints what i saw in those games were several calculated risks that resulted in momentum changes for the Browns.
In a league where every team is close you have to take calculated risks. Winning two of the last three games was an illusion as the offense stagnated and the play calling was uninspired to say the least. Losing to Jacksonville and the defense getting 6 turnovers shows how downhill the offense has gone since that game.

In the end, daboll and mangini are on thin ice and the poor play calling, the risk aversion, leaving in poor performing players is on the coaches. While the Browns do have mediocre talent, the coaching has NOT put them in a position to win.

ok, Rex Ryan. here is a man the gets the most out of the least every week. he is saddled with an offense that struggles to get 14 points so he has little margin for error yet his teams come up with some fine efforts without star personnel. They love playing for him. If Mangini goes I would hate to lose this guy. it would be a HUGE loss. 3 games left to prove yourselves.

Holmgren cannot like the playcalling. Cannot agree with the play not to lose mentality. the risk aversion. Mangini is not making a case for himself. Put in the rookie at QB. Delhomme is TOAST. I said it last week. Every time he makes a mistake his stool gets loose and he craps himself from that moment on. Funny the rookie has more composure than the two vets combined.

If Mike wants to Coach would he keep Rex? Does he have the patience to coach THESE players who are mangini men. Is this blowing up the team again for a 3 year plan for a 66yr old coach. In the end while i doubt Holmgren will coach I do not see him keeping Mangini/Daboll unless they win two out of the last 3.

Quote:

---

What would you replace him with. I heard a lunatic article in the Bleacher report suggest or repeat the whispers of Jim Zorn: that would be heart attack stupid. Zorns Redskins were a disjointed and dysfunctional team. Such talk is hopefully just nonsensical blather.

---

Actually the Zorn rumor was that he would be OC replacing Daboll.. not HC.. sorry you wasted all of those big words.

Remember, akronjoe was behind such outstanding predictions as "we traded Quinn for a ham sandwich." Let's just say, don't rely on him for any lottery numbers.

Quote:

---

In the end while i doubt Holmgren will coach I do not see him keeping Mangini/Daboll unless they win two out of the last 3.

---

I have to say that with H&H watching camp, watching preseason, watching the season, watching the practices, having a feel for the injuries, getting to watch the tape and discuss decisions, and generally having their fingers on the pulse of the mood and belief of the players, I seriously doubt if actually winning or losing these last 3 games have a lot to do with whether or not Mangini stays.. H&H have to know what the guy is about, what the OC and DC are about and have a pretty good idea of whether they think they are decent coaches who just need a little more talent.... I think EFFORT might play a part in it, if the players quit in the next 3 weeks or if we fail to show up for one of these games... I'm not saying I think the decision is 100% made but I don't think that winning 2 of 3 or 3 of 3 is going to stay where as competing hard and only winning 1 means he goes.. in fact I'll go so far as to say that would be a pretty stupid criteria...

"The Browns are a much improved team despite facing a brutal schedule. Why haven't we improved further? We are simply not talented enough to win consistently"

This is a true statement. The problem is it's HIS guys for the most part. We needed WR's in the off season and watched as guys like Holmes and Bolden went to other teams. We passed on Matthews who SHOULD have been a BROWN. Why can other teams hit in the draft and off season consistantly and we always wonder HOW the heck they do it ? Better last year with new management maybe but it's still NO excuse. The FANS could pick better players then our previous leaders. I like Eric's style, but if the Offense sucks.... DO something about it. Replace the OC if need be, Change the plays to something more than Hillis up the middle. Try a SLANT once in awhile, A pitch sweep, A fake handoff ? The buck stops with the HC. He HAS to fix it.

If Mangini is gone Gruden is coach.

I'll go on record right now as saying the following:

1) I wasn't thrilled about the Holmgren hiring. Not because I don't think he's perfect for the job, but because I thought it meant yet ANOTHER tear down and rebuild. We can win with Mangini's run-first tough minded offense and 3-4 defense. We could win in the future with Holmgren's pass-first finesse offense and 4-3 defense but hope you're ok waiting 4 years. Personally, I'm not.

2) I love the job Mangini has done in his time here as HC. Our offense is pathetic right now, but I attribute that to Jake Delhomme (we were NOT terrible with Wallace or McCoy at QB), injuries (hello running team with OLine injuries), lack of WRs (which wouldn't be as huge of an issue if we didn't have to dump Braylon due to his ego and attitude...and I think will be fixed this off-season anyway) and Brian Daboll. Only the last one is even possibly the fault of EM and it's arguable (see: Kosar, Bernie) as to whether Daboll is really all that bad or if it's just lack of execution and talent on the plays he does call.

3) I'll be alright if we fire Mangini....as long as whomever the next head coach is has the same philosophy and makeup that EM installed. A hard-nosed offense and the 3-4 defense. The only person I think that might even fit that bill is Cowher and he's not coming here.

4) The day Holmgren fires Mangini and replaces him with one of "his" guys, which signals yet another dreaded rebuild, is the day I officially jump off the Holmgren bandwagon that I was so cautious to get on in the first place.

Horrible, horrible HORRIBLE idea to let him go right now IMO.

I'm in the camp where if Mangini stays, I'm OK with it but I'd really like to see us let him go and bring in a Gruden or let Holmgren do it if possible. First, let me say that Mangini has definitely improved this team, improved the locker room and put in a quality culture on this team. However, here are the reasons I'd like to see him move on.

- Mangini himself said he's afraid of becoming a "cleaner" - the guy who comes into a team, removes the bad seeds and builds up a good foundation. What if that's all he is? He showed with the Jets that he's able to build a foundation but the team never got anywhere. What if he's limited by other factors (that I'll speak to in a minute) and can't get a team to the next level? If this team has peaked with him as a coach, it's definitely best to move on.

- His in-game management is terrible. Our team rarely adjusts well throughout the game and especially coming out of halftime, our clock management is usually awful and every game there's always a few decisions that leave us scratching our heads. There's a reason we've lost most of our close games this year, it's because stuff like this decides them. If this is as good of a gameday coach as Mangini will ever be, we're in trouble with him.

- He has an inability to take necessary action. Brian Daboll should've been out as coordinator after last season and replaced with someone with experience. There's no way in hell Jake Delhomme should be starting over Seneca Wallace. Our wide receivers absolutely DID need an upgrade in the off-season but Mangini said we'd be fine. Eric Wright was allowed to stink like hot garbage for weeks upon weeks before he was finally benched for Haden. I can go on and on but the point is that Mangini isn't making the right decisions until we have losses to show for it.

- Mangini has a difficult time (or just chooses not to) coaching "talent". What I mean by that is, at some point, a team has to have guys on it with supreme physical ability and usually, that comes with a bit of an ego (or a raging ego in our case). Instead of coaching those players, Mangini would rather avoid them and stick with solid guys who might not be the fastest but are easier to coach. One look at his offenses in both New York and Cleveland will tell you the tale... there was very little superstar talent on either team. Coaches aren't paid to coach the easy guys, they're paid to coach the difficult ones whose talent puts their team over the hump. I don't know if Mangini is capable.

- Holmgren and Mangini come from two completely different coaching schools. That's not a knock on Mangini, just saying that we brought in the Bill Walsh coaching tree to run our front office only to have them draft players for the Bill Parcells tree. That's not a good way to stay on the same page in the long run. Bringing in a guy like Gruden or having Holmgren take up the headset would ensure one organizational philosophy.

I mean honestly, I like Mangini more now than I did at the end of last season because I see some progress but I'm also frustrated as hell by the ineptitude I see popping up again and again. This is shades of Romeo all over again... a guy who makes for a great defensive coordinator but just can't cut it as a coach because of how he runs games. Gruden and Holmgren both have great track records, have won Super Bowls and share the same philosophy as our front office. I'd much rather put this foundation in their hands than leave it in Mangini's and watch it just stay a foundation for years to come.

That is the kind of pro-Mangini post that I can agree with...except for the part about how "this town" fires coaches and that we start over too quickly.

We do not fire anyone - although we should be able to.

We have not had a coach get fired from here and go on to success as a HC anywhere else. If anything, we kept certain guys a year too long.

Here are my concerns:

EM was bad while playing GM. Thank goodness that he is no longer the GM. So now, he is not the GM but is STILL in charge of deciding who fits and who doesn't fit - aka talent evaluation. (See Wright v Haden...Anyone v St Clair at the break of camp...bye bye to Davis & Harrison...etc.) Did his utter failure at GM disclose his shortcomings in finding and managing talent for the 53? I personally think so.

A good friend of mine always says that it is a rare head coach who can take a perennially bad team to mediocrity to perennial playoff contender. The shtick just runs out over time...see Marvin Lewis.

The only coach I can really think of succeeded in that challenge was Jimmy Johnson...and he was able to trade H Walker for about 11 draft picks to jump start his rebuild. (Maybe Cowher...maybe.)

It is pretty rare nonetheless.

Is EM a guy that can get a team to respectable as his ceiling of success? Who knows...but I am starting to think so.

It's funny though...I think having Heckert makes me more comfortable than having Holmgren or Mangini. That is probably because we appear to have finally had some draft success with Heckert here and I am starved for draft successes.

I hope EM is THE guy...I just don't think he is.