DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Wallace believes Holmgren wants to coach.

Wasn't sure if this deserved it's on thread or should be in the "Lunacy of firing Mangini thread"

BEREA, Ohio -- As the Cleveland Browns, his all-consuming pet rebuilding project, went through drills earlier this week, team president Mike Holmgren ventured onto the rock-hard practice field and called over kicker Phil Dawson for a chat.

With coach Eric Mangini standing only yards away, Holmgren, bundled in a heavy jacket to combat December's biting cold, talked to other players and then with Gil Haskell, his longtime friend and one of the trusted advisers he brought to Cleveland.

Last year, Holmgren traded his whistle for an executive's tie.

He might be about swap them again.



Holmgren

With the Browns perhaps on the verge of a coaching change, quarterback Seneca Wallace believes Holmgren is angling for a return to the sideline.

"I kind of do just because things probably haven't turned out the way he wanted on offense and being an offensive guy, I think he still has that itch to come back to coach," said Wallace, who played seven seasons for Holmgren in Seattle. "But at the end of the day, he's going to make the right decision for the rest of the team."

Yep, the Browns (5-10) could be getting a makeover. This one, though, might not be quite as extreme.

Mangini, given one reprieve by Holmgren last January, may not get a second as the Browns stagger to the finish of another disappointing season -- their ninth with double-digit losses in 12 years. Cleveland has gone just 2-5 since a midseason upset of New England, and unless the Browns can stun Pittsburgh on Sunday, Mangini will close his second year with a four-game losing streak.

That may be enough for Holmgren to make a coaching change, assuming he hasn't already made up his mind to replace Mangini, who will carry a 10-21 overall record -- 2-9 vs. the AFC North -- into Sunday's regular-season finale.

When Holmgren last met with reporters on Nov. 2, he said he would wait until after the season before making a decision on Mangini. He also left open the possibility of a return to coaching.

"I'd be less than honest if I didn't say I get fired up watching the games," he said. "I mean I [coached] for too long not to react sometimes the way I do, but I also recognize what I was hired to do and that's what I'm trying to do."

Browns owner Randy Lerner brought in Holmgren to fix his franchise, which has undergone nearly constant change in the past decade.


AFC North blog
ESPN.com's James Walker writes about all things AFC North in his division blog.

• Blog network: NFL Nation


If Mangini gets fired, the 62-year-old Holmgren, who won a Super Bowl with Green Bay and an NFC championship with Seattle, will quickly jump to the top of a list of possible replacements. There could be several other big-name candidates available, including Jon Gruden, John Fox, Bill Cowher and others.

But Holmgren simply packing up his belongings and moving down the hall to a new office would cause the least uproar for organization craving calm. Unlike previous years, there doesn't seem to be nearly as much concern about the possibility -- and potential likelihood -- of change.

Maybe that's because Holmgren is overseeing it.

"He brings credibility to the whole organization," said Dawson, who has seen his share of turnover in 11-plus seasons with Cleveland. "I think if you ask anyone, they would say the same thing. Guys are confident that he knows what he wants to do, and we'll all have to wait and see what happens. But no one seems to be panicking or anything like that."

Many Browns fans can't bear the thought of another coaching change, but Wallace believes they should be comforted by Holmgren's presence.

"He's a person who is going to build a foundation," said Wallace, who started four games this season. "I don't think over the last couple of years there's been a foundation. There has been a lot of turnover. And I think once you build that foundation and that type of mentality, it's going to build for the future."

Has he seen any part of the foundation formed?

"I saw a couple of bricks slide in place," he said, "but there's still a lot of building that needs to be done."

Holmgren has spent the year evaluating Cleveland's roster, which has been upgraded by general manager Tom Heckert -- Holmgren's first hire. Holmgren knows what's needed and what's not, a fact that would make his potential takeover as coach that much more seamless.

Cornerback Sheldon Brown, acquired in an offseason trade with Philadelphia, has faith that the Browns' front office is getting things done.

"If they came back here and said, 'Sheldon, we need you to play safety, nickel, dime,' I believe that they know what they're doing to get us to where we need to go," he said. "I just believe in the plan."

When Holmgren accepted Lerner's offer to restore the Browns, he did so knowing it would be hard to shake the coaching bug. It's all the former high school history teacher has known since becoming an assistant at his alma mater in San Francisco 40 years ago.

Holmgren has enjoyed his executive role, immersing himself into the daily business of the Browns with the same verve as he did as a coach. But shaking hands with season-ticket holders and charming suite holders doesn't provide the same excitement as preparing a game plan to beat the Ravens.

He knew turning the Browns into consistent winners would take time, but patience has never been a strong suit.

"The problem is that I'm old, and the clock is ticking a little bit for me in this business," Holmgren joked during an interview with The Associated Press in October.

He misses the game.

It might be time to get back in it.

Link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5971586

Could be just a case of Wallace wanting to stir up trouble for Mangini since he's not been playing much QB.

My only hope is that if he returns to the sidelines he gives up his duties in the front office.

Quote:

---

My only hope is that if he returns to the sidelines he gives up his duties in the front office.

---

I agree. Of course, with Heckert in the front office, it would be easier for him to do this, I think.

The only way that I see this happening is if one of Holmgrens choices does not want to coach for the Browns. I have got to believe that there is someone that Holgren has enough confidence in that is available.

If he wants the sideline that is fine with me. I like Heckert a lot, but I would prefer another entity as coach.

More media wrangling......reporter sees MH on field, slides over to disgruntled player that used to play for him and asks him if he thinks he still wants to coach.

Bing bada bing another "story" that people will be jumping all over.

From one sentence uttered by a 3rd string QB to an unnamed reporter.......

Daman, can you name a QB Gruden didn't start out loving

The scariest thing about Holmgren coaching and leaving the office duties to Haskel and Heckert is....who is in charge? is Mike pulling double duty again which he failed at in Seattle or did he hire his Boss, the same mistake with Mangini and Mr. unmentionible.?

Bottom line : Mangini is toast !

I dont want Holmgren as a Coach.... reason is...

I want someone long term, Im tired of a new coach every three years. Holmgren is 62, so he comes back and how long until he's tired and retires? I wouldnt mind gruden, and I dont mind mangini. I want a younger coach!

Wallace wants Holmgren to coach because he seems to be in the Mangini doghouse lol I loved the shot about the foundation. can you say ouch!!

If Mangini is gone and that is still a big if, I think Gruden is your #1 most likely candidate.

Anyway the only news worth info was Holmgren talking to Dawson. Hopefully they get something worked out. I would like to see Phil retire a Brown.

j/c

If we release Mangini, is there another team that you feel will hire him as HC?

Unfortunately... I don't want Gini' to go...

but if he did.. I'd rather have Gruden as head coach (who I don't like) than Holmgren (who I think will stop coaching if he takes the job in 2 years)..

CONTINUITY

I believe he ends up at Michigan. He is perfect for the college game.

Quote:

---

I agree. Of course, with Heckert in the front office, it would be easier for him to do this, I think.

---

I don't see Heckert performing any President duties. He's the General Manager. The General Manager must be a football guy. He spending all day and burning the midnight oil evaluating our guys, determining our needs and evaluating available players from the pro-personnel and college ranks. He's a busy guy doing his own job so would hardly have time, or the experience, to take on any of the Presidential duties.

However, it's not necessarily so that it takes a football guy for team President. Although by the Browns having a football guy, Holmgren, in that position has helped establish an organization geared toward football which is what the business is. This has insured that winning football takes precedence over merely selling tickets.

Many have sited Holmgren's less than stellar job of being Head Coach and GM in Seattle. Well, when you are trying to be the Head Coach and the General Manager at the same time you are taking on the challenge of doing two jobs that are each full time, burn the midnight oil positions.

The President job however can be split between the football side of it and the business side of it. Holmgren could remain President and hire a Vice President to take over much of his non-football President duties. (I don't remember the name of the guy Holmgren brought in mid-season but that guy, the VP, could already be in the building). There's an abundance of duties that are more business related than football related. It was the non-football related responsibilities that he's spent 2010 learning.

Holmgren could retain the more football related President duties which would ensure the organization puts football first and since he now understands the business side better he could oversee his VP to insure the organization is being run as he set it up.

I don't think that would be too much for him to handle. Especially if it were only for a few years.

He could coach in 2011 and regardless of the CBA getting done or not the payroll wouldn't change since Holmgren is already on it. That means there's no risk of paying a new coach for nothing if there's a lockout.

Plus the transition would be smooth as he already knows the team and all the thoughts and planning that have gone into this season as preparation of improving on next season. Much different than bringing in a new guy sometime in February and filling him in.

Holmgren could also keep assistants and/or coordinators as he sees fit unlike a new coach who would likely bring in all his own guys. That means he could retain Brad Seeley if Seeley is so inclined. Same with Rob Ryan if Holmgren likes him and Ryan would like to stay. The same goes for any of the assistant coaches Holmgren would like to keep and who doesn't have their eye on another job now that Mangini is gone.


Game planning and in-game decisions would be handled by Holmgren as head coach which would remove the knucklehead decisions I believe Mangini is making all too often now. The foundation of the team's roster can be built by Heckert with Holmgren's valued input much the same as the 2010 draft went down. This time it would be without Mangini's input which I don't much trust anyway by virtue of the stamp he put on the 2009 draft. (We got one good player out of the deal and two other starters who are underachieving terribly).

Holmgren could hire an assistant head coach and groom him as his replacement for when he steps back off the field to resume his Presidential duties full-time again.

The same could be done with Haskill's OC position and Haskill could stay on as an adviser, which is what he is now although I'm not completely sure who he's advising. It doesn't seem to be DaBoll.

All we need is to stop the insanity of the head coach and staff positions being made up of first-time or failed coaches and assistants. Experienced people like Holmgren as coach and Haskill as OC could stabilize the coaching ranks and it could be done with the full intent of grooming their replacements from the beginning.

Does that sound like the rambling of a mad man? Maybe. But that's how desperate I am to get some freaking experienced people coaching and assisting the Cleveland Browns.

We can see the improvement in the FO that bringing in experienced football men, Holmgren and Heckert, and how smoothly the organization seems to be running. It's also evidenced by how much early success they've had on their first draft.

IIRC Savage played the "I-don't-know-the-current-roster-well-enough-to-make-a-big-difference-in-the-first-draft" card, plus he had to re-organize the scouting dept as well. Most of us understood these were valid concerns making it difficult to have time to properly evaluate and plan for his first draft.

Well, Holmgren and Heckert aren't first-timers on the job. They had no more time than Savage did to evaluate the roster and they also re-organized the scouting department by firing nearly all the scouts and hiring new. They did all the same things Savage had to do and still managed to improve the team a lot with their first draft. It makes a difference a big difference when you have experience on your job.

Of course, the groomed replacements for Holmgren and Haskill would be first-timers but they would be with the team for a few years already and assimilated into the organization from the beginning so would be less first-timers than an outside hire.

Anything, do anything to rid ourselves of this lame offense and penalizing ourselves with a loss of down because our offense is concerned that their offensive might score even though our offense has the ball. (and other similar miscues)

Just a general reply:

I like having Holmgren as President. I think that he gives the front office experience, and a presence that is respected across the board.

I think we lose that if he goes back to the sidelines. He will try not to let it be ..... but it almost has to be. Right now he damn near acts as the owner. He attends league meetings. I believe that he even votes for the Browns in matters requiring a vote. Can he do all of that, while staying up to date on all of the league business, maintain his hand on the rudder of the franchise from above, and coach? I don't think so. Something has to go. If he coaches, he could do a very good job for us. That wasn't what he was brought in to do though. He was brought in to restructure the team, and build an organization, from top to bottom, that can win for a long, long time. If he coaches, we would have to bring in someone to handle the responsibilities of the President. If that person is not Holmgren, the entire organization suffers, because the top is weaker.

I also, truly, do not knwo what happen with Heckert if his boss suddenly moves into a parallel or subordinate position ..... yet still has the power. Right now the way things work is advertised that Mangini and Heckert work together, and Holmgren breaks the ties. There are no ties if Holmgren is the head coach. That worries me because I think that the present system works pretty damn well on personnel. I don't think that it can continue the same way if Holmgren returns to the sidelines.

Just my $0.02 worth. I can already tell pretty much who will disagree with me.

I don't get why this is a story.

Didn't Holmgren say back during the bye week that he still had a desire to coach?

I completely agree Ytown. This setup is really great for the Browns. Mike gets to balance the scales with his decisions and he has total power over the Browns and all their decisions.

Being owner is obviously something Holmgren loves. While he will always have the itch to get back into coaching, I honestly believe he enjoys his role at the moment simply to much to walk away from it. Building something from the ground up will have its own reward.

So, he's either viewing himself as a failure as a President, or he is quitting on the organization to take the position for himself.

Great


Inserting yourself because you find yourself unable to hang up the coaching shoes is not being credible or a leader.

Who's gonna fire him in two years when we're due for the next switch?

I agree with you Ytown.. Holmgrens presents as the top of the organization makes me comfortable that even when things don't go as well as you might hope, he's got the knowledge and experience to correct issues.

More importantly, he understands the process involved in building a winner, and seems less likely to panic when the inevitable setbacks occur.

That being said .... I still worry that we are headed towards another rebuild.

Right, what I'm saying is why is what Wallace said news?

We already knew everything he said.

I think we are closer to having an offense made for the WCO than most realize especially with Vickers, Hillis and Hardesty having the ability to catch. Then you have Cribbs with his run after catch strength and the accuracy of Colt.

For defense we are just as close to having a dominate front 7 for the 4-3 as we do for the 3-4. The players with talent can play in either scheme and the rest are dime a dozen prospects.

We haven't built enough to call it a rebuild.

Looks like we'll know a decision on Mangini at some point on Monday.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...-with-holmgren/

Amid uncertainty, Mangini anticipates Monday meeting with Holmgren
Posted by Mike Florio on December 31, 2010, 2:48 PM EST

On Sunday, Brown coach Eric Mangini will conclude his second season as head coach of the team. Whether there’s a third remains to be seen.

Mangini could find out as soon as Monday, during a meeting that he expects to have with team president Mike Holmgren.

“That’s my anticipation,” Mangini said Friday, per Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

“I’m excited about the game [against the Steelers],” Mangini said. “I feel good about a lot of things we’ve done here. I believe in it. I think this organization, this team has a really bright future and I’m excited about being a part of that.”

Mangini, who acknowledged the existence of “uncertainty” regarding his future, has had mixed results in two years with the Browns. After a disastrous 1-11 start, Mangini won four in a row to end the 2009 season. A rough beginning to the 2010 season gave way to stirring wins over the Saints and Patriots.

Still, as we pointed out in the Week 17 Monday 12-pack (it seemed fitting to make it a 12-pack, given that it’s New Year’s Eve), the decision ultimately will hinge on the true nature of the relationship between Holmgren and Mangini.

Vickers has the ability to catch?

He has had a fair number of passes go his way this year, and has dropped or missed most of them.

He's a great blocker, but has done nothing to show that he's even a remotely competent receiver. If he was a better receiver, that would add another dimension to our offense, and make 3rd downs far more difficult to defend. What do you see that makes you thiunk that he's a good receiver?

Cribbs really hasn't shown a lot of RAC ability either. Last year he had 20 catches for 135 yards and an abysmal 6.8 yards/catch. This year he has 20 catches for 255, and 12.8 yards/catch. He did have a 65 yarder, a 37 yarder, and a 20 yarder, and the rest have been really pedestrian plays. I don't see a lot of RAC ability from him. Can you give me some plays that show this ability?

As far as defense, I don;t see Rubin fitting into a 4-3. In a 4-3, the linemen have to be the strength, able to stop the run and rush the passer, and I don't see any on our team who fit really well. Rogers could, but he's always hurt. Ditto for Robaire Smith, who I would guess is done playing. Who else do you see who fits in a 4-3 DL?

AS far as LBs, well, they have to be smaller and quicker, and able to cover the pass and run equally well. Who do you see who fits this? I think that the closest was DQ, and he's a free agent coming off back to back injuries. I don't really see anyone else who fits a 4-3 at LB.

The secondary is the strength of the team in either defense. I think that they could play in either alignment, but most good secondary players can.

So, we'd need a complete rebuild of the DL and LB corps to run a competent 4-3. If you see it differently, please expound.

If Holmgren takes over as coach,I would feel duped again by the Browns.
The guy came as prez,not as coach to be.
Don't think for a minute there won't be another rebuild,3 year plan.
I have grown weary of the plans,processes and excuses.Just start winning damnit.

Honestly I feel the same way. If this was anyone NOT named Holmgren that I hired to be my president then he comes here and fires the guy I rushed out to hire a few years ago, I would tell this guy to go coach somewhere else.

However, he is named Holmgren and that makes doing so hard.

I can imagine a new O coordinator/head coach in waiting.Or, when he steps down he will basically name his own successor if that guy isn't already on the team. I can see him going to a 4-3 defense. I can see Rob being relieved and/or being asked to be let go rather than do here what he had to do in Oakland.

Just for the love of God and all that is good an holy . . . No Jon Gruden.

Vickers at one time had terrific hands as long as the ball wasnt high. His rookie year, I remember him just lighting it up on the juggs machine and he had some pretty nice catches early on in his career here. Under mangini he has struggled as a receiver but he hasn't had a great deal of opportunity either.

Anyone with Cribbs skill in the open field has run after catch ability. It is just a matter of getting him in the right place at the right time. Get him isolated so he has a chance to do something after the catch.

Fujita played pretty well in the 4-3. I think Benard can play either OLB or DE in the 4-3 as can Roth. Maiva and DQ are typical 4-3 guys. Rubin is a run stuffing DT no matter where u put him and Rogers would be happier and more effective in the 4-3. The rest really aren't good enough to mention although Maiva wasn't either lol.

Thing is our defense is composed of roll players in the front 7. They are for all intensive purposes dime a dozen players. You can replace any of these players with little effort.

Has nothing to do with Mangini.... it has to do with what Holmgren was brought here to do.
To use Randy Lerner's own words: "be a serious, credible" leader.


Booting somebody else so that you can sate your desires to coach again is hardly being serious, and it destroys any sense of credibility... and it certainly is not leadership.
It also has nothing to do with being the President of the organization.

This team is a freaking joke... no wonder we never go anywhere. Berea couldn't manage its way out of a paper bag.

prp...
I'm sure that Holmgren laid out all the possibilities when he and Lerner sat down to discus the conditions of his hire.

After Holmgren was hired it was my opinion that he was leaving the door open to return to coaching if he wanted. The media wrote about it...and it was discussed briefly on this board. Of coarse, everyone on this board, except a few, railed on me for even suggesting that Holmgren might step back into coaching.

Holmgren has been more than fair to Mangini, allowing him to remain as HC and leaving it up to Mangini, to make changes to his coaching staff...none were made.

I don't want to hear this crap, Holmgren screwed over Mangini...that is pure BS from the Mangini lovers.

If Holmgren decides to return to coaching...that is nothing but good news for the Browns...imo.

Cribbs is going into his 7th season. He hasn't shown any RAC ability in his 1st 6 years. Maybe the light goes on ..... but he's probably better off just being a great returner.

Vickers has never shown great hands in 5 seasons. (or even good hands, to be honest) Again, maybe the light goes on ..... but probably not. There's a huge difference between working with the Juggs machine and catching under fire. He doesn't do well under fire.

Roth has played LB for his entire career in the NFL as far as I know. It's tough making that change in year 7 of your career. I wouldn't count on it.

Benard is 256 pounds. He has pass rush ability ..... but he also gets hurt a lot. I don't think that making him a DE is going to help him in that regard.

Rubin is NOT a 4-3 DL, period. He is an exceptional NT. I don't see him as anything but that.

We do have a lot of role players, but they are 3-4 guys. Our entire depth is made up of 3-4 guys. Again, you have to rebuild everything, from depth up to convert to a 4-3. Our guys could play a crappy 4-3 ..... but that's about all.

Quote:

---

Booting somebody else so that you can sate your desires to coach again is hardly being serious, and it destroys any sense of credibility... and it certainly is not leadership.

---

That is, IF that is why he'd be booting him. I would see that point if Mangini were doing a great job and hadn't made so many questionable decisions and calls on game days. But it's not like a no-brainer that Mangini is what is best for the Browns.

If Holmgren boots Mangini it won't be so that he can satisfy his own coaching urges even if he decides to become the coach. It will be because he doesn't think Mangini can grow into the role of a quality head coach for the Browns.

He's been a head coach for 5 years now and still he makes boneheaded decisions like he did in the Rats game. And the bengals game before that. And the Bills game before that. and the Carolina game before that. And the Jets game before that. I know all coaches make boneheaded decisions at times. But I think I just see too many "rookie" mistakes from a guy who's been a head coach this long.

He should have an accurate pulse on the game at hand and should know what to do in common situations or at the very least be decisive regarding them. In both the Jets and Rats games, in a span of a couple of minutes in each he waffled one way and then another in how he wanted to manage them.

But then I could be wrong and Holmgren may see it differently. I may also be wrong in the importance I put on those things. Holmgren may be good to go with him and if he is then so am I. I'm on his side now. He just cranks me the wrong way too many times. And I think it would be in the best interest of the team if Mangini were not in charge of game day and in-game decisions. And I've never called for a head coaching change. Not ever.

Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky.

Naw.