DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Lets take a deep breath...

to django's request....

what makes Eric Mangini a good head coach? my thoughts...

1. Stability. We have had a team that in past years has been marked by repeated turnover in roster, lack of leadership, lack of stability...and in a year where 3 qbs were injured, countless other guys were injured (some preseason DQ, Hardesty and some after the season (QB, and so on), and we had RBs shipped out and defensive backfield somewhat in flux. yet i never felt that there was instability. Delhomme was the starter until he proved otherwise and that was that. wallace filled in, and colt filled in for him...but when colt seized the opportunity and got hurt, he ecame the starter, and delhomme his next step replacment. Our OL was stable most of the year. Yates stepped in and was fantastic. Womack looked good at the RT spot with Yates. our left side was good even with an iffy year from joe thomas. the point is...is that when you are building a team (on any level in any sport) stability is important. people must understand that positions are earned (see Joe Haden, peyton hillis) and not expected (see Jerome Harrison, james davis). When you develop a system based on accountability the cream rises and you have stability. Thats what i saw this year with Eric Mangini. thats good coaching. in game? maybe not...but overall...very good coaching.

2. a couple statistics that i like to see: The Cleveland Browns have given up less 1st Q points than any team in the NFL...fact. Thats very good to see. That says that the plan throughout the week has been executed effectively and we arent in an early hole....
another one...the team didnt allow a rushing touchdown until the steelers got one in week 6...and we didnt give up a 2nd one until mike goodson just a few weeks ago...
the team has had 4th quarter leads in 10 of our 15 games (the 5 wins, TB, KC, Bal (round 1), NYJ, Jacksonville,) and were within 1 possession in 4 of them (Pitt, Buffalo, Cincy, and ATL) and last week v. Baltimore we were close. that shows good preparation, good execution, and a solid game plan...just missing the killer instinct to finish a team off....okay theres a knock...but...youre there, you had a chane to win...thats good coaching.

3. The team believes in him. 53 guys plus PS guys all work for the same goal, in unison, together, and united. You havent seen anyone give up. Te few guys this year that seemed to question the plan have moved out with minimal distraction or fan fare in the lockerroom. we all loved the potential of harrison and davis...but no one made a peep when they left. just like no one cared in NE when moss left. (see Tennessee and VY...we arent there, see chilly in Minny, we arent there either...see Singletary and QBs in SF, we arent there either)...we have a roster and coaching staff all on the same page. bad coaches dont get that...regardless of the talent level of the players.

4. Adjustments...we've lamented our in game adjustments...but our in-season adjustments have been sound. our replacement of injured players has been seamless. Delhomme goes down, senecas right there, he goes down colt goes in, he goes down jake goes in. lauvao down, yates in, pashos down, womack in, st claire in. DQ down, gocong in. fujita down bowens in, bowens down barton in. wright down haden in, wright down again adams and eric king in. robaire down, schaefering in....
our adjustment of scheme has been very good (well...defensively anyway). look at our D early...blitz heavy and ineffective. So we back off the LOS and take out NO and NE, and befuddle several QBs and give up the most points all year to Pitt 28, NYJ 26 (in 75 mins), Jax 24, and Carolina 23...Look at the rest of the league...you wont find many...if any teams that havent given up 30pts yet this year...we havent.
Offensively...the adjustments havent been as good...but Hillis has been our only playmaker...and hes been given EVERY chance to make plays. sure our playcalling to keep him fresh and effective have suuuuuucked but we used him and he delivered in big games. Daboll has been very good using trick plays, and we have used them to get pts...but its nt something you can rely on. We have made some adjustments on offense...but we just dont have the talent to execute effectively...and i think our OC is bad.
...back to adjustments...what has been good. defensive scheme, special teams (cept the return game), replacement of injured players, and roster management.
Thats good coaching

5. accountability. EM hasnt thrown a single player or person under the bus. He hasnt shown any bits of deception this year. Yes he has in the past...with Kokinis, i believe that he wanted a certain mentality and kokinis was of a different mindset, and mangini won out in a power struggle...this yearhe was humbled...and he has shown growth. You grow from your mistakes. you learn and i thinkhe has learned.
There has been accountability in the organization and team this year. He owns up to losses, he admits mistake, and he takes the good where he can get it...theres been no deflection this year (maybe its a product of environment, but ill take it). Romeo, Butch, other coaches in the league...they deflect blame where they can...Eric has continued to say, we're learning, were growing and were establishing a winning base. hes said there is a plan...and he hasnt strayed...hes done exactly what he said...thats a good coach. follow what you preach. good job.


I dont have much for in game coaching as i dont know the ins and outs of football...but as a basketball coach...these things stick out to me. These are things that good coaches do. he has shown that he has the ability to be a good coach, and has been one.




to a few other points...

Mangini in NY...he went 10-6, 6-10, and 9-7...He inherited a roster that didnt have sustainability and he built one that did. he was 8-3 and his QB began to fail...ive read a number of times that he wanted to replace an injured Brett but was told from above he cant. his whole accountability system was undermined there and the rift was created. leading to his exit.
Under Mangini in NY the roster was built to last with a power running game, a solid defense that attacks the QB well and plays smart in the secondary.
Rex Ryan took his team to 9-7...which the following year was good enough to make the playoffs and his team...which was built for January wins...won games in January. this year...they added big names, and have 1...prolly 2 more wins in the regular season than last year...we'll see what happens in january. regardless...stability is there...and he wasnt able to see it through. his reign was cut short, and now rex ryan is making the most of what eric put in place, with added big names (and i still think TJones and Shonn Greene would be better than LT and Greene). thats my opinion of that.



Another thing on Mangini...

I think that this year...has been the first year we (and everyone else) has seen Eric Mangini. In new york we saw eric belichick...in cleveland we saw eric belichick...This year we finally are seeing eric mangini. Holmgren...as well as a more stable situation (all around...FO, roster, and whatnot) have allowed Eric to be himself. and he has realized that trying to be someone else doesnt work. bing Eric Mangini will make things work correctly, and it has shown with a team that works hard, playshard, and never gives up for its coach. The players seem to respond to him, and believe him and believe IN him. this is the 2nd year of eric mangini in cleveland and the 5th year of eric mangini the HC, but the first year of the real Eric Mangini.
The point is...he isnt a finished product. he is a young, up and coming coach who has been learning his place and seems to be finding it. it would be a disservice to discard it.
Everything is building and growing in one direction. dont change it.



eric hasnt been perfect...but eric has grown, with his guys...there is something real about him now, and something to get behind. When we lost games early...you saw mistakes of guys learning, and you saw mistakes of a team devoid of chemistry because they were new to each other. you saw a lot of inexperience...all around.
as the year has gone on...we have grown, he has grown, and together things have moved forward. weve taken a couple steps back in the last few weeks, but theyre small...and may actually benefit because we'll draft higher.
Next year...roster turnover will be small. We arent going to firesale our guys...and this years starters wont be jettisoned like some from last year, t¾eyll be given a chane to keep their spot, or be replaced by better talent. this year we will build upon what is here (hopefully with a new OC). and cntinue to move forward.


Until improvement stagnates...he should be here

Quote:

---

Until improvement stagnates...he should be here

---

2009: 5-11 2010: 5-11 (it's a good bet we lose on Sunday so humor me).

I'd say that would be the definition of stagnation, wouldn't you?

Quote:

---

2009: 5-11 2010: 5-11 (it's a good bet we lose on Sunday so humor me).

I'd say that would be the definition of stagnation, wouldn't you?

---

Is the record stagnant? Absolutely. You can't tell me that this year's team isn't closer to winnign consistently than last year's. THAT is NOT stagnation. I'll take the 5-11 team that's been in every game over the 5-11 team that was out of most games by half time last year.

Now let me say, I'm not happy with 5-11. I'm happy that the team has shown progress. The question is, would the progress be greater with someone else in charge? That's the million dollar question Holmgren needs to answer. The Browns, in my opinion, seem like a team that is primed to take some steps forward if the right pieces are added. How big those steps are might just depend on coaching.

You could look at it and say, Mangini has the team headed in the right direction and should be given another year to prove it. Say the team stumbles out of the gate next year, Holmgren can fire him and take over on the spot.

On the other hand, maybe Holmgren sees a team ready to take the next step, and he can just jump into the driver's seat now and take the team there.

I believe it will be a very interesting next 2-4 weeks!

I'd rather have a team with a winning record than a 5-11 team that is in every game. If Mangini stays, we better be at least 8-8 next year.

agreed...or ytown...even if we had that that legi pass rusher that maybe doesnt get there...but it would be great to have that guy that they have to scheme against. That one pass rusher that they have to account for every play and perhaps double team most of the time. Then it might free up our other guys that can get it done.


I think we hav that guy in the defensive backfield in Joe Haden...and in haden, its more that guy that doesnt need the extra help, and thatll free up guys like Ward and Elam to go other places. We have 1 of those guys right now.


If we had that wideout (like a Marshall or Jackson) that command attention or can break a tackle or 2 and get YACs we could be very good.


We just dont have those playmakers. No passrusher commanding attention. no run stuffer that says you cant run this way. and no receiving threat that says you need 2 on me...which will free up a guy like MoMass...

every team we play is allowed to go base packages to shut us down...and that hurts big time.

This is a perfect example of you have some football knowledge but not having a clue about what to do with it.......you still think BE and KW were part of the solution......We are getting just as much production out of Ben Watson in the receiving gam than Kellen Winslow and he actually BLOCKS....and Braylon Edwards was a prima donna that would NEVER succeed in an atmosphere where he is actually held accountable...heck Peyton Hillis AND Ben Watson have more catches than Edwards...Edwards is all flash and no substance

Second, Rogers really???? you mean the guy who immediately went head case on us because Mangini didn't say "Hi" to him??? I love what Rogers can bring to a game...but he can't sustain that for an entire game much less an entire season.

And Rubin...the kid who was still a 6th round PROJECT at the time he was inherited???

DQwell....you mean the guy who hasn't played in over 2 years???

Wright??? Isn't that the guy everyone on the board has been ripping on since day one???

So that leaves us Thomas,Steiny, Vickers and Cribbs......oh and a decent special Teams kicking trio.....Sounds like his 53 man roster was all set to me......

and again...

while the record looks the same...we have improved.

the bills very well could end up 5-11...but they have a cleveland browns 2009 5-11 record. some wins, some wins against okay teams, and some games against bad teams, and some very ugly losses against good teams...and some close losses v. good teams.


We played every game close this year. our 5-11 could very easily be 10-6...alot of us see that as a negative...its not. thats a positive.

Rogers? Have you seen the NO game? He won it all alone...both Bowens INTs don't happen without Rogers...he was getting to Brees all day long and it got into his head all game...he won that game ALONE, that's how good he can be....re-watch the game...and he was a ProBowler Mangini inherited...so yes, I think that qualifies for AVG to Good NFL talent

as much as you hate BE and KW...both ARE AVG or better NFL talents and they WERE in fact inherited by Mangini...ask TB how thankful they are about the trade today.....thank god we got Veikune and 50% (1 of 2 5ths) of 2 years of S.Brown stop gap for him...great deal

I don't know if you watch games...but I was pimping Rubin after the 1st snaps I saw him play, he got better every game and was already a pretty good rotational player last year...and this year he got some PBowl talk from national media...on a losing team that is, that's how good he has played

why don't you answer my question though? What did Romeo inhert that even comes close to this talent base? Did HE ever get a "full team" (you mean a fair shake I guess too)? Should we have given Romeo some 2-3 more years too then, right? I mean, that's your argument

Quote:

---

while the record looks the same...we have improved.

---

Sorry, while I didn't want to jump off the roof as often this season as I did last year if we end up 5-11 we are not improved.

I'm also betting that if that is how we end up Mike Holmgren won't think we've improved either.

And his is the only opinion that matters in this case.

Quote:

---

Again, he inherited: Rogers, Thomas, KW, BE, Rubin, Steiny, Vickers, Cribbs, Wright, DQwell and a great kicking trifecta (Phil-Zas-Ponty)...that's a solide enough foundation of AVG to pretty good NFL talent...he didn't have to built that...he inherited that

---

In all due fairness... it's not enough to constitute a decent core of an NFL team. It's a start- but not a core. And to continue the fairness- Romeo and company were dealt a stacked deck as well. NIETHER regime inherited a decent starting point, if you get my drift...

What folks are trying to get across to you- the thought train that you seem to remain oblivious to- is that the current coach saw a hodgepodge slammed together by Phil Savage that:

1. lacked a central core philosophy
2. presented a cast of characters who played as individuals, and not as members of a unified team
3. was top-heavy in cap money, and loaded with short-term FA's and inexperienced young'uns who never never bonded together as a unified force... in any way.

Bottom line: He "Butched" us... leaving us in that same old obligatory "rebuild" situation- once again.

Many of the things Mangini did during his first year here was things any competent GM would have done anyway. Change a name or two, the end results would have been very similar. Regarding the draft: a competent GM would have made better choices, for sure... I'll give you that. That's why we now have Haskell on the case. BUT... here's the point:

You're now engaged in a discussion about Mangini The Coach... so I'll play along within the parameters of context.


What has he done?

1. Cleaned house of 'me-first' players (Shame that some were playmakers, but I don't really miss them... they had to go. Cap space or cancers... they wouldn't help THE TEAM )

2. Established a culture of 'team first' within the locker room... something that we're experiencing for the first time since '99

3 Led 2nd-rate and also-ran players to go toe-to-toe with the best of the league. No more blowouts. That HAS to men something- even to you.

4. Established a core of players with the proper mentality to compete in this hardazz division... after years of hearing Pitts/Balto players publically spout off about how the Browns were 'soft.' (...and this was even during a year when we went 10-6...)

5. Instilled a sense of hard nosed, 'play to the last whistle' mentality into a team that used to give up before the end of the first half of play.



To me, this is a substantial HC contrbution... and one that merits another year.



Has he shown game-day weaknesses? Of course he has. Has he hit his ceiling as a HC? No. I don't think he has... and that seems to be where you and I TRULY part ways in outlook. You seem to think that Mangini's a 'done deal." I see a young coach who could continue learning, and eventually be a fine leader of a quality NFL team.

If there were more Djangos in my life than Clemdawgs, I wouldn't be where I am today... and many of my lessons were learned AFTER I hit Manigini's current age. (Trust me, son- I'm old... but I'm now in a good place.) In just 5 more months, I'm about to hit the pinnacle of my profession's milestones... and I wouldn't have been able to do it if there wasn't a corps of individuals who believed in me enough to stick with me through the speed bumps. (If you want details, PM me. If not, 'tis OK, Dawg)

Now look- if you're the kind of fan who only values on-field wins above studying the details of a team's evolution, there's nothing I can say to you that will convince you that my observations have merit- and that's OK. To each his own.

On the other hand- if you're a fan like I am... and wish to study the team in detail, from 'nuts & bolts rebuild' to a potential Lombardi, you'll at least TRY to see it from a different perspective. That 'new perspective' will give you a glimpse into why you receive as much resistance here as you do.

My job here isn't to tell you that you're wrong... it's to tell you that you aren't neccessarily right- and that a different perspective might make you a more optimistic Browns fan... even WITH the current personnel.

As always, your mileage may vary... but I will tell you this- without being a Mangini apologist or blind homer- I see things in this this team that I haven't seen since before The Departure.... and that actually means something to me. Enough to make me want to see more before I hit the 'reset' button... once again.

You?


Just sayin'...

Am I the only one who wouldn't be surprised if Clem was the reincarnation of Paul Brown?

Some of the stuff Clem posts blows my mind.

Quote:

---

1. Cleaned house of 'me-first' players (Shame that some were playmakers, but I don't really miss them... they had to go. Cap space or cancers... they wouldn't help THE TEAM )

---

Sorry, I see this posted as if it were the gospel and it's just not true. If you can tell me we were better off without the talents of KW2 and BE (ass that he may have been) then you're just not paying attention. The "Cancer in the lockerroom" thing is vastly overblown and there is no cap this year and we have no earthly idea if there ever will be one again or what it might be so that is bogus as well.

Quote:

---

2. Established a culture of 'team first' within the locker room... something that we're experiencing for the first time since '99

---

While this might be true you have no way of knowing this. Winning establishes a team first attitude. When we are over .500 then I'll believe everything in the lockerroom is peaches and cream. Until then I suspect it's pretty much like every 5-11 team....some guys are team first (as they always will be) and some guys are stats first.

Quote:

---

3 Led 2nd-rate and also-ran players to go toe-to-toe with the best of the league. No more blowouts. That HAS to men something- even to you.

---

The players aren't as bad as the Mangini apologists would have us believe. But even if they were just because we're losing 14-10 instead of 24-3 is of little comfort to me. I'm surprised it "trips your trigger" this much. What's next? A 5 year contract extension if the team goes 7-9 next year? Sheesh.....

Quote:

---

4. Established a core of players with the proper mentality to compete in this hardazz division...

---

While we have 2 pretty good teams atop the division I honestly don't think this division is any more "hardass" than any other. With the possible exception of the NFC West. Football players (good ones, anyway) all have a hardass mentality when it comes to football. I don't think ours are anything special.

Quote:

---

5. Instilled a sense of hard nosed, 'play to the last whistle' mentality into a team that used to give up before the end of the first half of play.

---

I don't know.....it sure looked like they packed it in early against the Bengals. We'll see how much "play 'til the last whistle" we see on Sunday against the Steelers. I hope you're right.

As I've said in the past I can take Mangini or leave him. I think he's a "good" coach. Not great. And I don't see him taking this, or any, team to the promised land. And if I'm right why would I want him as the coach of my team?

We'll see by this time next week, I suspect, who is more closely aligned with the feelings of the FO. It will be interesting, I'm sure.

Quote:

---

If you can tell me we were better off without the talents of KW2 and BE (ass that he may have been) then you're just not paying attention.

---

Are you talking to the mirror???? Becauise YOU are obviously the one not paying attention......

Quote:

---

The players aren't as bad as the Mangini apologists would have us believe. But even if they were just because we're losing 14-10 instead of 24-3 is of little comfort to me. I'm surprised it "trips your trigger" this much. What's next? A 5 year contract extension if the team goes 7-9 next year? Sheesh.....

---

Talk about apologists and making stuff up.....this is the biggest load of horse puckey I have read yet.

It is discussions like these that really shows who REALLY knows football, and who really just plays Madden. Let me know when you are ready to put down the joystick and have a real discussion.

See Clem, that's the problem...the points you make for Mangini are all "philosophically", a team president or GM can accomplish those points, getting those kind of players in. Not even 1 of the positives is about actual IN-GAME coaching, like play-calling etc...to use a spot on postgame reference from Rish: if a coach isn't a good gameday coach, then he isn't a good coach, period. That's where you win close games...the league is too balanced, there's imho no other professional sports league where coaching makes as much a difference....we need much, much better gameday coaching....TB, KC, JAX, BUF, CIN are all games that could have been won with better coaching and while there's no candidate out there that is perfect and would have won them all I'm sure there are a couple that would have added 1-3 more Ws in those games....in a 16 game league that is a world of difference

I also think the "play hard" argument, which pretty much was all you got in your 5 points combined, is overblown...as otto said: who cares? The fact we play close games is 80% because of Mangini's "not to lose style"...of course a pass happy team with an inconsistent gunslinger at QB (ie DA) will suffer more blowouts...is Coughlin a bad HC or worse than Mangini because he was on the losing end of some blowouts? Our game against BAL was finished after 2.5h, because we play not to lose and other teams just play it safe knowing we don't have a comeback Offense...a 20-10 IS, in fact, a blowout in such a fast paced (less plays overall) game, same with the BUF game, we lost by 7...but it was a blowout watching it and you know what I mean...our inept Offense actually helps us keeping the score close, that's nothing to brag about

I'd prefer a high risk passing Offense that leads to more blowouts either way but at the end produces a couple more Ws, because THAT'S what matters....you play to WIN the game, not to STAY in it as long as you can "mathematically"...that's just cosmetics and you guys are falling for it very hard...and that's what's left of Mangini's positives: cosmetics...that's sad and sure as heck not enough to keep him around

Quote:

---

I'd prefer a high risk passing Offense

---

With a rookie QB and our receivers...ANY pass makes our offense HIGH RISK

So what are you complaining about

Quote:

---

What has he done?

1. Cleaned house of 'me-first' players (Shame that some were playmakers, but I don't really miss them... they had to go. Cap space or cancers... they wouldn't help THE TEAM )

2. Established a culture of 'team first' within the locker room... something that we're experiencing for the first time since '99

3 Led 2nd-rate and also-ran players to go toe-to-toe with the best of the league. No more blowouts. That HAS to men something- even to you.

4. Established a core of players with the proper mentality to compete in this hardazz division... after years of hearing Pitts/Balto players publically spout off about how the Browns were 'soft.' (...and this was even during a year when we went 10-6...)

5. Instilled a sense of hard nosed, 'play to the last whistle' mentality into a team that used to give up before the end of the first half of play.



To me, this is a substantial HC contrbution... and one that merits another year.

---

clem...let's assume, for the sake of argument, everything you say above is true.

I have no problem saying Mangini has contributed to the makeover of the Browns from a me first team to a tough team more suited to competing in the AFC North.

Mangini did a similar job when he was with the Jets and they cut him lose after 3 seasons.

While Mangini shows strength when it comes to weeding out trouble makers and building a foundation of team first tough players....what are the other strengths that Mangini brings to the table?

After 3 seasons with the Jets and now 2 seasons with the Browns, we have seen Mangini's strengths as a HC...is that all there is to Mangini, as a head coach?

Is Mangini hitting his head on a glass ceiling, showing once again, he can build a foundation, but it limited beyond this point?

Compared to last year, we are scoring more points by a small margin and have allowed over 100 fewer points on defense, with one game to go.

Our offense was even more inept, yet we got blown out by larger margins. This would appear to contradict your argument, without even considering the substantial difference in quality of opponents. Consistency of play throughout the year must also be considered.

Several games this year could have been won with just ONE "big play". Very few of these last year.

Would better gameday coaching make a difference? Maybe so, but IMO not nearly as much as adding a big-play WR and a big-play LB.

Also, you are saying that you have NOT seen improvement in Robiskie's play? Not comparing to what you or anyone else thinks he should have been, or against what we could have drafted. Compared to the only valid yardstick, which is what Robiskie has done up to a few weeks ago. He certainly appears to me, and many others, to be improving. Why, How, and/or for what Reason is not important here, just do you see it or don't you?

This is similar to seeing that we are now a more competitive ball club than we were last year. Forget the How or Why and What Else could have been done, just are we or aren't we?

My guess is that you will admit neither, when almost everyone else does. I will further guess that you will be completely, totally unable to address either of these points without bringing in negative Mangini comments.

If you cannot see and/or refuse to admit to clear, obvious improvements, this to me greatly reduces the value of any observation or opinion you state.

What I see from you is "It rained, that's Mangini's fault. Somebody got injured, that's Mangini's fault. The ball bounced the wrong way, that's Mangini's fault. We scored, Mangini had nothing to do with that. We made a good play, Mangini had nothing to do with that, either."

It is possible to address Robo's apparent improvement without even mentioning the HC in any way. I DO NOT THINK YOU ARE CAPABLE OF THIS.

I already said I don't care about Mangini-Mangini comparisons, they are meaningless to me, Mangini doesn't play Mangini...he plays other NFL teams and HCs...he took over 4 years of Romeo...and after 2 years we're not better than the AVG Romeo team..that's the only comparison that has any significance...

...and I said multiple times now that of course we are mproved...but that's nothing to be proud of, since we were the worst (or at least among) team in football last year...improvement wasn't hard to accomplish...look at the teams that drafted in the top 10 last season...OAK, TB, KC, STL, DET, WAS, BUF, SEA, JAX...we're not even more "improved" than most of these, in fact, many of those have overtaken us in their "process"...we are 0-4 against Top 10 pick teams of last year...what does THAT tell you? That we have improved? Really?

H/H drafted and signed Haden, Ward and Fujita...if it wasn't for those 3 our D would suck as much as last year and we would have more of Ventrone, Veikune etc stinking up the place

Did Robo improve? Of course he did but it's still not near enought to be even an AVG starting WR in this league...if he was late round pick or UDFA, that's how he played, he would have been cut already twice from TC...he got the chance to improve because he was a high investment pick...every UDFA would have "improved" the same if given chance after chance...it's funny you bring up Robo...his improvement is comparable to Mangini's "improvement" from 09...from "worst" to just "bad"..wow, consider me underwhelmed...both are still underperforming from what was expected when they came in...that is to what they should be compared to, their investment...not the stinkers in their 1st year..."better than expected" compared to their 1st year is a backhanded compliment at best

Quote:

---

Holmgren does indeed have a boss, and there's two things with that:

1. Holmgren was brought in so that Lerner is NOT the guy making these decisions, so I would expect Randy to stay out of it and let Holmgren run things. That's why we have the structure we have now, because Randy finally figured out that he should NOT be the guy making these decisions.

2. If Randy is going to assert any influence, he will also be listening to outsiders, and lots of folks support Mangini staying. Far tougher record than last year and a significantly tougher schedule with the same record and the record was very nearly much better several times over. With more talent, this team would have won a LOT of games this year.

---

Well Holmgren was brought in to be President, he wasn't brought in to just sit around, do nothing and idly lose money.

If you were Randy Lerner and you owned Cleveland Browns and youpaid Mike Holmgren many millions of dollars to run your business and the product put on the field is this years team and you have most likely lost money....your going to be ticked off about it.

no way this team didn't lose money from last year to this year...no way...with the way the economy is an a garbage team...those on the fence that may pay won't pay...

in fact it makes better businesses sense to switch coaches after 2 bad years to keep the seats filled then to stick on the course of losing money with a HC that isn't very popular for whatever reason.

Randy Lerner has every right to walk into Mike Holmgren's office and say:

"Mike I hired you to run this thing, the numbers are not what I thought they were. This is not what I paid you for, im not pushing you to do anything, just remember I am paying you well for your services and I look forward to better results in the future"

After saying that, walk out of the office...it is what it is.....

just because a teams "bottom line" IE Profits are greater then expenses and other things paid out DOES NOT mean the company is necessarily profitable....did the Cleveland Browns hit their "projected" Net Profits they forecasted for this year? Those numbers are internal and I don't know...but it wouldn't be a stretch if they didn't reach their profit projections...yet still made money..just not what Lerner and his circle projected...see how long a guy has a job if he don't meet the

"projected net profits"

what many of the fans say is absurd...oh Rany should just sit back and lose money for 4 years so someone can figure it out so we can win...thats just ridiculous

Art Modell did that and lead him to moving the stinking team out of town...I want Randy Lerner to be "thrifty" and not let his GM spend the entire salary cap or the budget..save money for the future...just because you have 600+ million dollars your allowed to spend on the salary cap doesn't mean you spend 600 million

just because your credit card has a 20,000 dollar credit line, do you go to walmart on saturday and charge 20,000? no most rational people don't..the same applies here...

I don't want to see another Browns team move...however Cleveland is a small market team...we can't just throw money down the toilet like many on here think and say well

"its ok if Randy spends 500 millions the next 3 years and we lose as long as we have a winner in the future"

thats just insane, and if thats Holmgren's or anyone elses reasoning and way of going about things, then I hope Randy has enough common sense to can the guy before he eats 500 million dollars out of this organization in losses....

football is a business to make money just as much as anything else..in fact thats is purpose...to make money...not lose money wasting it like we have the last few years....

We won 5 games with a harder schedule in year one with Mangini over 4 wins the year before with Romeo(win total...thats what you care about right???) And you say they aren't better????? heck they were better year ONE with Mangini than Romeo's team and tthey are better now than thwer were last year....

What DO YOU WANT????

I mean we want wins too...but at least we can see that what Mangini is doing can lead to that path....You seem completely oblivious to what really wins in this league.

That is an excellent point....there IS a business aspect to this and "winning" does cure all...So Holmgren has to decide whether or not we are close to winning and if Mangini can take us there...switching coaches is a temporary bandaid to the business aspect untill the team starts winning. A switch might generate interest but what happens 2 years down the line when that coaches plan hasn't come to full fruition as he had planned?? Switch again???

As others have said...it very well might depend on some of the answers Mangini gives....If he is too stubborn over certain things...then things will have to change...One of those things will most decidedly be the offense...

No, they aren't better than the AVG Romeo team, that's what I said....Romeos last year team tankd it, of course that's not good but even Romeo got 6 Ws in his 1st year with a worse roster...5-6 Ws isn't that hard

We are 0-4 against the worst of the 2009 season....that's not improvement, that's stagnation at best...we don't play ourselves, we play the rest of the league and they don't sleep...they "improve" too, you know?....only the comparison to other teams and their level of improvements is important, the rest is homerish apologetics

I think it really boils down to one simple question.

Is Mangini the right man to take this team to the next level?

Everyone has different opinions for various reasons. Personally, he lost me when he brought an injured delhomme into the game when the guy could barely stand and then he left him in the game when Jake was not even looking downfield and just throwing it up for grabs.

It really showed me that he is harming this team with bad decisions. St. Claire over Womack at RT is another perfect example. Hell he did the same thing last year with Hank, Womack and St. Claire.

Sitting on the ball at the end of the half just to onside kick it coming out of the break, horrible clock management, afraid to mix it up on offense, asking jake to throw 35 a game are all simple reasons why I just do not have the faith in Mangini.

I understand why some do but honestly I just see to much Romeo in Mangini.

I don't think anyone will challenge Mangini's reputation or ability as a "cleaner" but is he anything more? The Jets recipe was to bring Mangini in, have him build the foundation and clean things up and move on from there but when they realized he wasn't going to get them anywhere, they let him go for Ryan who took them to the next level and made them a force to be reckoned with. To your 5 positives that Mangini has done which makes you think he deserves another year, I give you 5 questions that I think the answers to are murky at best that have me leaning towards letting him go.

1. Is Mangini capable of taking that foundation and willing to build on it with talent that may be a bit difficult to manage?

2. Can Mangini's philosophy of conservatively running and stopping the run win consistently in today's NFL, especially without a good passing attack?

3. Is it possible for this coaching staff and front office from completely different ends of the philosophical spectrum to co-exist and achieve "best results"?

4. Is Mangini too stubborn to make the right decisions in a timely manner regarding "his guys" when they just aren't performing (Daboll, Delhomme, Wright, etc.)

5. Will Mangini ever learn to be a good gameday coach who is capable of consistently solid in-game adjustments and clock management?

The point isn't that Mangini can't build a good foundation, but does he have too many fatal flaws to move past it? To me, that's the debate that's going on with Holmgren right now... not that Mangini hasn't put a good foundation into place, but can he take the team to the next level? In the end, that's why I think Mangini goes... he has everything it takes to build a foundation on the team but as far as being a winning coach on gameday... that's an entirely different skillset that he doesn't seem to possess on a consistent basis.

I know the remarks regarding if you don't have talent you play the game this way or that.
However what is obvious is how Gini wants to win,keep the game close ,hope it's within a FG and then try to win it.Thats the mentality he has all through any game.
It also sends the wrong message to the team.
I just do not like how he is handling the team.


Sitting on the ball at the end of the half just to onside kick it coming out of the break, horrible clock management, afraid to mix it up on offense, asking jake to throw 35 a game are all simple reasons why I just do not have the faith in Mangini.



Wonder how Holmgrem thinks about these things.

56-35
26-14
26-17
47-3
34-13

Those are scores of Jets wins in Mangini's last year.....Doesn't sound like a guy who is playing ot keep the game close to me. The plain fact of the matter is you play the cards you are dealt the best you can...and that does not mean you go "all in" every single time with an unsuited 2 and 4 just because you are "playing to win".

Why don't you ask yourself who was the OC and their talent level ..and still ask yourself why he was canned and has he improved over his mistakes in NY?

Why don't you ask youself the same question???

I mean that was my point...he had a higher talent level on offense there.....your gripe is he doesn't open things up and "doesn't play to win" But if the horses are there...it is shown that he DOES in fact opne things up and puts a plethora of points on the board....

Quote:

---

I don't think anyone will challenge Mangini's reputation or ability as a "cleaner" but is he anything more? The Jets recipe was to bring Mangini in, have him build the foundation and clean things up and move on from there but when they realized he wasn't going to get them anywhere, they let him go for Ryan who took them to the next level and made them a force to be reckoned with.

---

The Jets started 8-3 under Mangini, then Lord Favre got hurt and they struggled the rest of the year.

They wound up 9-7.

Ryan took over .... and they went 9-7.

They did make some noise in the playoffs, but their regular season wasn't an improvement at all.

.....your gripe is he doesn't open things up and "doesn't play to win" But if the horses are there...it is shown that he DOES in fact opne things up and puts a plethora of points on the board....

No thats not my point.
Do U watch? How many times are they so predictable in the redzone or a close yard from the endzone but call something stupid that makes them settle for the FG?
How many times are they confused about what to run on a crucial down?
How often do they waste time or timeouts because they don't know what to run or they have the wrong players coming in or still out in the huddle??

See this is where your observation about that I'm saying is off.They really can't OPEN it up ,but they can sure call plays that utililze the talent they do have.
Mangini has never been proficient in using his personnel,even in NY he was criticized for that among other things.
For a team to lose as many close games as they have,it also falls on coaching as well as execution.

And how do you even credit Dabol who is inconsistant with his playcalling as any OC we've seen?
Another inexperienced OC over his head.