|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805 |
Haslam will "Stick with a HC he believes in for the long haul" I do believe from his statement.
If he Believes in Shurmer, he will stick with Shurmer. If he doesn't believe in shurmer, it will be whoever he hires for the job.
One thing you can not quote him saying mac...... Is that he plans on sticking with the current staff over the long term. I do believe that he is being honest about consistancy. But at the same time, nobody in their right mind will go the long haul with someone they don't believe in.
So wheather that is Holmgren and Shurmer, we have no idea. If you're paying all the bills, you're going to pay people you believe in to go down that road. And that may or may not be the people you inherited.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
I agree with that.
It's a lot like a man saying that he believes in marrying for life, but not necessarily marrying the first woman his parents fix him up with.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
  Ten days later...
Toad...yea...10 days later...sometimes I have time to challenge your "stuff" ...sometimes I'm busy doing other things.
I didn't even know you made that post...doing your best "shrink" impression claiming you now realize why I'm holding Haslam to his words...so, I now feel compelled to respond.
What caught my eye, were two of your comments from that 10 day old post, where you questioned... why didn't I hate Holmgren?
...this toad quote..."If you hated Mike Holmgren you wouldn't be taking this path."
and...this toad quote ... "If you hated Holmgren and the rest you'd be singing a different tune."
Reading those two quotes, I realized the Toad has a personal agenda...he has "hated Holmgren" all along but never admitted it. Well, now you have admitted it...
Everything you write that concerns Holmgren or rebuilding this franchise 'is not' driven by your knowledge of the game, but clouded by the emotion...hate...hatred of Mike Holmgren (and others).
Now I understand why you wanted to claim there was never a 5 yr plan...because it was Holmgren's plan and you don't want Holmgren around to see the plan through.
You even tried to convince others their was no 5 yr plan. Now I understand why you made that crazy claim...it was driven by your hatred of Holmgren.
BTW, we are only in year 3 of that 5 year plan and the first two years addressed defensive needs while this year's draft addressed the offense.
But you can't stand the thought of Holmgren being allowed to complete that 5 year plan, not because it makes sense and might work...but because you "hate" Holmgren.
Now that I understand your posts are driven by an agenda and not based on football knowledge, I know better how to respond to them.
Toad...serious questions here...
...1. Just when did you develop this emotional "hatred" of Holmgren?
Don't run now Forest, I've just started.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
One thing you can not quote him saying mac...... Is that he plans on sticking with the current staff over the long term. I do believe that he is being honest about consistancy. But at the same time, nobody in their right mind will go the long haul with someone they don't believe in.
Pit...I agree, nothing says Haslam can't go against his stated belief concerning the need for "consistency in coaching"...
But I hope we have someone in the media with balls enough to say... hey Jimmy, wait a minute..you criticized Al and Randy Lerner for changing coaches every 2.8 yrs...and the first thing you do is change coaches?
The next question the media should ask if Haslam starts ripping the franchise apart...so Jimmy, you're willing to set this franchise back another 3 or 4 yrs with this coaching change, going against the core principle you stated in your Peter King interview?
The way I see it, either Haslam has "core beliefs" he is willing to stand by...or he's just another guy who likes to criticize others but unwilling to hold himself to the same standard.
Why am I being so stubborn about the subject of making changes ??...because I'm a true believer in what Haslam said about making coaching changes and setting the franchise back everytime you make a change...HASLAM IS 100% right.
I just hope Haslam has the balls to stick to his stated belief...willing to tune out the Cleveland fans and media that are always calling for change.
We will find out something about Jimmy Haslam, the man...and whether he is just another "rabbit eared owner", void of any principles or core beliefs.
Both Al (influenced by Policy) and Randy Lerner had "rabbit ears" for the criticism from the screaming fans and media and Haslam was right to criticize them for their too frequent changes in the organization.
But now Jimmy is in a position where he will be judged as the Browns owner and what he has stated in the media is a matter of record.
What kind of owner will Jimmy be...just like the previous owners...or someone who did learn something about the way the Steelers turned their franchise around???
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Toad...serious questions here...
...1. Just when did you develop this emotional "hatred" of Holmgren?
Don't run now Forest, I've just started.
Setting aside the borderline delusional rants you've made, because they are OUT there, to answer your "serious" question...
There isn't a player or executive on the Browns I "hate." I probably haven't "hated" a guy since Butch Davis. I DO think Holmgren's body of work has been unacceptable, exemplified by the fact we're in year 3 of his program and we're one of, if not the worst, teams in the league.
Now you can...and undoubtedly will ...go on about your wishful 5-year plan, but you asked why I'm down on Holmgren so I answered.
So you asked me a point-blank question and I obliged by answering. Now, perhaps, you'd humor me and other posters as well who have asked this question, one which you have yet to answer (or perhaps you did and I missed it):
Mac, do you truly believe that Haslam is saying he intends on keeping the coaching staff in place?
This is a very simple question. You need only give a one-word answer: Yes, or no.
Now a mirthful comment...If this team doesn't make some SERIOUS strides down the stretch, I'm going to want Holmgren out. I'm close as it is right now. If Holmgren is given the boot, I'm going to find it quite entertaining to watch you go bananas 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871 |
Quote:
Quote:
Toad...serious questions here...
...1. Just when did you develop this emotional "hatred" of Holmgren?
Don't run now Forest, I've just started.
Setting aside the borderline delusional rants you've made, because they are OUT there, to answer your "serious" question...
There isn't a player or executive on the Browns I "hate." I probably haven't "hated" a guy since Butch Davis. I DO think Holmgren's body of work has been unacceptable, exemplified by the fact we're in year 3 of his program and we're one of, if not the worst, teams in the league.
Now you can...and undoubtedly will ...go on about your wishful 5-year plan, but you asked why I'm down on Holmgren so I answered.
So you asked me a point-blank question and I obliged by answering. Now, perhaps, you'd humor me and other posters as well who have asked this question, one which you have yet to answer (or perhaps you did and I missed it):
Mac, do you truly believe that Haslam is saying he intends on keeping the coaching staff in place?
This is a very simple question. You need only give a one-word answer: Yes, or no.
Now a mirthful comment...If this team doesn't make some SERIOUS strides down the stretch, I'm going to want Holmgren out. I'm close as it is right now. If Holmgren is given the boot, I'm going to find it quite entertaining to watch you go bananas
If Holmgren gets the boot, My sources tell me we'll be hiring a ham sandwich as President.. Just thought I'd let you know so you can't say you weren't warned.
I also predict the return of Akron Joe.. but that's another story
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Akron Joe and his ham sandwich comments became cult-classic around here, hehehe.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I agree with that.
It's a lot like a man saying that he believes in marrying for life, but not necessarily marrying the first woman his parents fix him up with.
So with that in mind, after today's game, has anyone changed their previous positions on whether or not Holmgren and/or Shurmur stay?
Just curious...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871 |
Quote:
Quote:
I agree with that.
It's a lot like a man saying that he believes in marrying for life, but not necessarily marrying the first woman his parents fix him up with.
So with that in mind, after today's game, has anyone changed their previous positions on whether or not Holmgren and/or Shurmur stay?
Just curious...
Impossible to say. On one side, we aren't winning and Haslam doesn't appear to be the type of guy that goes for Moral Victories.
On the other hand, he believes in building through the draft and has to understand that when you do that, you have a young team and young teams blow it more often than not in the beginning.
Then the wildcard is, his and his fathers professed admiration for Holmgren.
Then you have the Banner Factor. If they release Holmgren, move Banner in his place, does Heckert and Shurmur have the relationship with him that will allow them to remain?
Either way, this is going to be entertaining...
How do you fire a legend and a future HOFer in Holmgren? You don't, you work a deal where he leaves his way. Pride and reputation intact.
How do you explain we are starting over with a new HC and maybe GM and President without the 5 year plan talk starting again?
How many fans are going to accept yet another 5 year plan if they dump Holmgren, heckert and Shurmur? and let's face it, starting over from the top down, this isn't going to happen overnight and I don't care who you hire.
One thing that hasn't been talked about much is the Polians. Could that be the answer? Could Haslam already have the decisions made?
Just as long as it's not Casserly. Please, not him.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Quote:
Quote:
I agree with that.
It's a lot like a man saying that he believes in marrying for life, but not necessarily marrying the first woman his parents fix him up with.
So with that in mind, after today's game, has anyone changed their previous positions on whether or not Holmgren and/or Shurmur stay?
Just curious...
This wasn't a game where anyone covered themselves in glory, from players to coaches ......
We did wind up with DQ and Patterson out against one of the better offenses, and possibly the best QB in the NFL. That's tough to overcome.
My biggest concern was the way things seemed to fall apart right before the half. That was largely coaching.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
How do you fire a legend and a future HOFer in Holmgren?
"Mr. Holmgren, sir, with all due respect, your tenure in Cleveland has been replete with failure at your hand. The decisions that you have made and the staff that you have put in place have failed to produce a viable on-field product. This is not a personal decision; it is strictly business and we feel that it is in the best interests of the franchise that we go our separate ways."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
Quote:
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
I can only hope. That's all I want for Christmas: Holmgren and Shurmur gone and a winner brought in to lead this team to glory.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
Yea .. I think we should fire everyone and start over.. Seems to have worked in the past.. A few dozen more times and we HAVE to get lucky right ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
i think Heckert has a 60/40 chance of keeping his job. to be honest with you, he hasn't done that bad in the draft....and its just a hunchy feeling from me mind you, but i don't think Heckert wanted either McCoy or Weeden. I think holmgren "pulled rank" on both of those choices and overrode Heckert.
The Weeden pick at what...#22....that pick just doesn't have Heckert's stamp on it....i just don't think Heckert is the kinda guy that would draft a 29 year old QB at that pick....i think Heckert is much, much, much smarter then that. i think Heckert was forced into that pick by Holmgren who pulled rank.
I think Tom Heckert keeps his job due to his relationship with Banner from their days in Philly, I think Shurmur and company will be out. i then think Heckert and Banner will work "together" and pick the proper Head coach and staff for this team. Make ni mistake about it, Banner is going to want to model this team after the Eagles, and Heckert is going to be thrilled with this set up of having a President that wants to build the team the same way he does. furthermore, Heckert will now not have an overbearing President that is going to pull rank with the draft and let Heckert do his thing.
i fully believe Holmgren pulled rank and forced Heckert to take Weeden...I fully believe that Heckert would not be stupid enough to take Weeden at 22 when he easily could have had him in the 2nd rd. The Weeden pick has Holmgren written all over it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
I think Heckerts biggest mistakes so far have been not bringing in some stud FAs.
We will not be able to compete if we don't supplement the roster with FAs.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
I might agree with your thinking that Holmgren pulled rank.. ( Maybe ) And if he did... I'm glad. Weeden is the least of this teams problems. Did Mike "pull rank" for the Hardesty pick too ? How about the Fullback that I don't even want to mention ? I love how some posters take what they think are the "bad" picks and give them to Mike and gives Tom all the credit for the good ones 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Heckert's biggest mistakes have been every time he has taken a risk, it has blown up in his face.
Although I think Weeden is a decent QB, he's certainly not what a first round QB should have been. The McCoy disaster, trading up for Hardesty, Greg Little, and other smaller roster moves.
It seems like most of the no brainers he has done well with. But any time he's take a step out on a limb, he has failed. Josh Gordon may be his only hit when he went with a risky pick.
It's the reason why I wouldn't shed a tear if Heckert is gone with Holmgren and Shurmur.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
I think Heckerts biggest mistakes so far have been not bringing in some stud FAs.
We will not be able to compete if we don't supplement the roster with FAs.
Name these 'stud FA's" that would even think of signing with the Browns? If your talking about washed up aging vets yeah that would help us instead of progressing young guys to either be depth or starters.
Today was a sad day for being a Browns fan. Talk to you all in 3 years when the next new rebuild re-begins.
I imagine most the same people will be here saying the same things anyway.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Does that mean that you're leaving?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Yeah "stud" may have been a strong term.
But his job is to convince guys to come here. It kind of seems like he takes the default position that they won't come and barely tries. Of course, that's speculation. Just a gut feeling.
And if we have to over pay to get guys here, then maybe that's what we got to do.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
"Loyalty" is 95% a myth in the NFL. If you pay the most, you get the guy. We've signed plenty of free agents over the years. We just didn't want to.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
That's kind of what I suspect as well.
In that regard Heckert has failed.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805 |
Quote:
Pit...I agree, nothing says Haslam can't go against his stated belief concerning the need for "consistency in coaching"...
Hiring people you plan to go the long haul with isn't "going against your core beliefs", it's implementing them.
Quote:
But I hope we have someone in the media with balls enough to say... hey Jimmy, wait a minute..you criticized Al and Randy Lerner for changing coaches every 2.8 yrs...and the first thing you do is change coaches?
To which a common sense reply would be, " I feel continuing on our current path would be a waste of time. I do believe in consistancy but I plan on being the one who provides the ingrediants for that recipe."
Quote:
The next question the media should ask if Haslam starts ripping the franchise apart...so Jimmy, you're willing to set this franchise back another 3 or 4 yrs with this coaching change, going against the core principle you stated in your Peter King interview?
Another logical reply would be, " Some may call it setting us back, but if we are on the wrong path, the reality of it is it would be prolonging and spending wasted time to get on the right path. We need an environment of winning and to me the evidence dictates this current regime hasn't shown an ability to lead us in that direction."
"The quicker we get on the right path, the quicker we all get to where we want to be."
Quote:
The way I see it, either Haslam has "core beliefs" he is willing to stand by...or he's just another guy who likes to criticize others but unwilling to hold himself to the same standard.
So if you take over a corporation that is failing, you should just let it kep sinking? His "core belief" is to put the right people to accomplish the job and stick with them. So far he hasn't put anyone in charge of anything. Claiming that in order to stick to his "core beliefs" he must retain people he had no input in hiring in the first place is just plain silly.
Quote:
Why am I being so stubborn about the subject of making changes ??...because I'm a true believer in what Haslam said about making coaching changes and setting the franchise back everytime you make a change...HASLAM IS 100% right.
According to your theory, Detroit should have stuck with the crappy cars they made in the 80's.
You don't run a successful business by retaining people you "inherited" if you don't feel those people will be successful. You hire people you do believe in and stay the course.
Quote:
I just hope Haslam has the balls to stick to his stated belief...willing to tune out the Cleveland fans and media that are always calling for change.
Oh he does. With his people, not Lerner's people. There will be very few fans that would expect any different if this team doesn't greatly improve over the course of the season. Most have the common sense to understand you don't stay the course with something you consider a losing proposition.
We know what he said. But you refuse to look at what he didn't say.
And what he didn't say is that the people he will go the long haul with are people someone else hired.
Quote:
We will find out something about Jimmy Haslam, the man...and whether he is just another "rabbit eared owner", void of any principles or core beliefs.
And we have already seen someone read more into something than was said. Someone that wishes to twist things into what they want to hear rather than what was said.
Quote:
Both Al (influenced by Policy) and Randy Lerner had "rabbit ears" for the criticism from the screaming fans and media and Haslam was right to criticize them for their too frequent changes in the organization.
Exactly. So the stage is set for a new owner going the distance with peoople he believes in. Wheather they are already here, or will be here soon.
Quote:
But now Jimmy is in a position where he will be judged as the Browns owner and what he has stated in the media is a matter of record.
What kind of owner will Jimmy be...just like the previous owners...or someone who did learn something about the way the Steelers turned their franchise around???
We'll have to see who he decides to go with and see if he stays the course. To suggest that he must stick with a regime he didn't hire and doesn't believe in order to judge his "core beliefs" is ludicrous.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805 |
Quote:
Quote:
I agree with that.
It's a lot like a man saying that he believes in marrying for life, but not necessarily marrying the first woman his parents fix him up with.
So with that in mind, after today's game, has anyone changed their previous positions on whether or not Holmgren and/or Shurmur stay?
Just curious...
My opinion will be based upon the season in its entirety. So no, my opinion has not changed. The jury is still out........
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
My biggest concern was the way things seemed to fall apart right before the half. That was largely coaching.
How? I scratched my head when we took TRich off the field on 3rd and 1 but Weeden is still the one who forced the throw... then it was the defense that gave them a touchdown in 2 plays from the 40... then Cribbs fumble had nothing to do with coaching, nor did allowing them to score another TD from the 30 quickly.... then the 16 yards of penalties we had which prevented us from getting a first down to run out the clock... the crackback block, jumping off sides.... how is any of that, except for the questionable call that started it all, on the coaches?
Somebody needed to make a darn play... and we couldn't do it.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Because good coaches will pull the team back together.
With 1 minute left in the first half, with the team obviously in a spiral, what would most coaches do ... pass, or run the ball? We opened with a pass. It fell incomplete, stopping the clock. We then had back to back penalties that forced us into a 2nd and 21. The Giants then decided to play the time out game, and they got the ball back with 17 seconds back. We then added another penalty on the defensive side of that series that allowed the Giants to kick the FG.
3 costly penalties on that one series flip cost us that final FG. That's coaching.
Overall today we had 10 penalties for 91 yards. Many were just stupid, undisciplined types. That's coaching.
Hell, on the drive where we had the Weeden INT in the end zone, we had to overcome a 3rd and 18 because of 2 penalties. Coaching again.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
pit...and to all of "that"...I say, we have heard it all before Jimmy...you come in here claiming you learned the Steelers way...but turns out you are no different than the past two owners the Browns have had.
Change is the enemy of the Browns...
Browns fans have lived it for the past 14 years...rabbit eared owners who listen to the noise from the fans and media, rather than completing a plan.
The Browns and their owners have not finished anything they started since 1999...but now we have endured 3 years of rebuilding with the focus on rebuilding the key offensive personnel this season.
The offense is playing with a rookie QB, rookie RB, rookie WRs and a rookie RT.
Pitt...if you expected this offense to play like seasoned veterans...you don't know crap about football.
Just like any offensive line that is young and never played together, it takes time for them to gel...this offense is a lot like a young offensive line learning to play together.
At this time...it is not about the W-L record...but about the progress being shown on both sides of the ball, though I tend to focus more our very young offense.
Barring significant injuries, I look for this team to continue to show progress, becoming more competitive as the season progresses, likely putting together some wins toward the end of the season....THEN WHAT ?
New playbooks, new coaches, new everything next season from an inexperienced owner who can't even stand by his stated beliefs...
...Lord, I hate "rabbit ears"...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871 |
Quote:
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
which was the point I was trying to make that Adam P didn't seem to catch,,,,
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871 |
Quote:
pit...and to all of "that"...I say, we have heard it all before Jimmy...you come in here claiming you learned the Steelers way...but turns out you are no different than the past two owners the Browns have had.
Great Googly Boogly,, The man hasn't taken over yet and already you start on him,.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
Quote:
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
which was the point I was trying to make that Adam P didn't seem to catch,,,,
I caught your point. However, what we, the public, hear isn't necessarily the same as what Haslam tells Holmgren.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
There isn't a player or executive on the Browns I "hate."
Toad...sorry, I don't believe you...based on your own words...
...this toad quote..."If you hated Mike Holmgren you wouldn't be taking this path."
and...this toad quote ... "If you hated Holmgren and the rest you'd be singing a different tune."
It's obvious you hate Holmgren and anything you say now, is just you trying to spin your way out of the facts.
That type of "emotion" clouds a person's judgement and common sense. It does explain your most recent position though. You can't even acknowledge that Holmgren put in place a 5 year plan, even though the entire media have referenced the 5 year plan many times.
Quote:
I DO think Holmgren's body of work has been unacceptable, exemplified by the fact we're in year 3 of his program and we're one of, if not the worst, teams in the league
Toad...you don't rebuild a team's roster via the draft in 3 seasons....can't be done....DO YOU AGREE?
Also, the Browns drafted for defense in Holmgren's first and second years...only this season (yr 3 of 5) did the Browns focus on spending their high draft picks (1st & 2nd rd picks) on the offense adding a QB, RB, 2 WRs and a RT.
SERIOUS QUESTION, TOAD...Do you honestly believe Holmgren, Heckert, Shurmur and his coaching staff targeted this 2012 season as the year the team would make a major turn around (in terms of the number wins) ?
If your answer is NO....this is not the year the Browns management and coaching staff targeted as the turn around year...then shouldn't they be given another year to produce results?
IMO,it would be a MAJOR MISTAKE by a rookie owner if he did not give this group one more season to produce results.
I contend, the 2012 season was never meant to be the year the team showed a major turn around and to set that standard now, is "totally unfair" to those who have sacrificed knowing they signed on to a 5 year plan, not a 3 year plan.
Quote:
Mac, do you truly believe that Haslam is saying he intends on keeping the coaching staff in place?
If Haslam believes in what he says he believes in...this...
"One thing Haslam has judged -- critically -- very early is the Browns' coaching merry-go-round. "They've averaged a new coach once every 2.8 years [since the franchise returned to Cleveland in 1999],'' Haslam told me, "and that's just not a good recipe.'' Do the math: Excluding interim coach Terry Robiskie in relief of Butch Davis in 2004, Cleveland's had five head coach in the 14 seasons between 1999 and 2012 -- 2.8 seasons per coach. "One thing I learned from watching the Steelers is the importance of consistency in coaching, and how much it sets you back when you're always making a change. When you change coaches, it can be a three- or four-year deal to get back.''
...YES, I believe Haslam intends to keep this coaching staff in place...or most of it. That said, Haslam does have options if he chooses to promote from within the present staff.
Haslam could replace Shurmur with defensive coordinator Dick Jauron, keeping Childress as his offensive coordinator and maintain the consistency within the coaching staff he speaks of in his Peter King interview...
OR, Haslam could replace Shurmur with Childress, keeping Jauron and the rest (or most) of the coaching staff together and still maintain the consistency he is "preaching" about in his Peter King interview.
NOW..try to answer my question...again..
... Just WHEN did you develop this emotional "hatred" of Holmgren?
...if you want to change the word "hatred" to say "major dislike" of Holmgren, fine...the question is WHEN you began to feel this dislike (or hatred) of Holmgren?
Please try to answer my question again...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
It's obvious you hate Holmgren and anything you say now, is just you trying to spin your way out of the facts.
Hey, believe whatever you wanna believe, Mac. I'd learned long ago not to worry about the disconnect from reality that sometimes happens in your world. 
Quote:
...if you want to change the word "hatred" to say "major dislike" of Holmgren, fine...the question is WHEN you began to feel this dislike (or hatred) of Holmgren?
Please try to answer my question again...
It's not even "dislike." It's "approval" or "disapproval."
I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea to express exactly why I'm very close to wanting Holmgren out.
Holmgren didn't come to this organization with a track record of success as an executive. He was demoted...essentially fired...as an executive in Seattle. Had he come here with a better resume in-or-near the position he currently has here, he'd have earned more leeway. He differs from Heckert in that way.
Holmgren stated that the drafts belonged to Heckert, but when McCoy was on the board, Holmgren threw his weight around and took the kid. Now I have never liked micro-managers, and this one move showed that Holmgren was just that. I didn't believe in McCoy coming out, but actually made a statement that I'd give McCoy the benefit of the doubt only because Holmgren had a well-earned reputation as a QB-guru. However, it didn't take long to understand that McCoy didn't have it, and that Holmgren's reputation took a huge hit with that mistake.
Then there's the failed move with Mangini. There is no way to state that the move was anything but a massive mistake.
Shurmur was a guy I kinda liked when we got him. I've given him the benefit of the doubt because he's been surrounded with a sad amount of talent, and have defended many of his moves. However, I still see him making very dumb mistakes, and I'm beginning to wonder if he's got "it" to be a good head coach. If he continues to make mistakes it would mean that Holmgren made a mistake with him as well. This is yet to be determined but it's not looking good for Pat, and thus it isn't looking good for Holmgren.
Then there's the philosophy of building just through the draft. We needed major help in a major way, but have elected to do very little in terms of signing any impact free agents.
Sadly, there's more...
Regardless of how any individual feels about RG3, it's very fair to judge that scenario because Holmgren was the master-mind behind it. So what happened? Holmgren BADLY wanted him. He had more ammo than the Redskins. But he failed. Then, after it was over, he stood angrily in front of a podium and somewhat embarrassed himself to the point where the media made fun of him and chided him for it. Again, it's not about whether or not the move was a good one. The way to judge Holmgren revolves around whether or not he succeeded in something he went after. He didn't.
So to answer your "question" which is much more of an "indictment"........In year three of the Holmgren master-plan, the Cleveland Browns are the only winless team in the league.
There isn't a rebuilding plan in the history of the NFL where the person in charge says it's acceptable to be the only winless team in the league in the 3rd year of the plan. His stewardship has as many questions now as it did three years ago.
Simply stated, if someone were to grade the body of work of every guy who has a similar title to Holmgren in the league, Holmgren would be ranked near the very bottom. In no uncertain terms, that is simply unacceptable.
So why have I soured on Holmgren? Because he's failed, and if his team doesn't make big strides very quickly, he doesn't deserve more time.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,871 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
which was the point I was trying to make that Adam P didn't seem to catch,,,,
I caught your point. However, what we, the public, hear isn't necessarily the same as what Haslam tells Holmgren.
Then you didn't catch my point.. I fully expect that if Holmgren goes, it will be a scenario similar to what you describe. But to us in the public, it will allow the man to retire, leave gracefully and with his image and pride intact.
We'll find out the truth 10 years from now
NO WAY will haslam go out in public and say, Holmgren sucks and needed fired. and if he did, I'd lose all respect for him immediately.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
I think the next regime is all but decided on paper.
Haslam and Banner arent taking over Holmgrens choice for HC unless things turn quickly. I still think this team will look much better weeks 10-16 than now.
Enough to make a difference? Who knows.
Ive heard Andy Reids name and just think...blech.
I like Billick but he must be either flawed or blackballed as hes never really garnered much attention lately. I thought his Rats team was tough, well prepared and fearsome. Any thoughts on him?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Billick was a mediocre OC who doesn't excite me in the least.
I have a name, but I'm certain, much like Billick, it'll give me a ton of flak. But I'd love to see us go bold and hire Chip Kelly.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
But I'd love to see us go bold and hire Chip Kelly.
I think Dana Holgorsen's offense is a bit more suited for the NFL myself (if we are going to go bold).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think the story we here will be the Mr. H decides to retire. We will be thankful for his time and efforts in Cleveland and wish him the best.
which was the point I was trying to make that Adam P didn't seem to catch,,,,
I caught your point. However, what we, the public, hear isn't necessarily the same as what Haslam tells Holmgren.
Then you didn't catch my point.. I fully expect that if Holmgren goes, it will be a scenario similar to what you describe. But to us in the public, it will allow the man to retire, leave gracefully and with his image and pride intact.
We'll find out the truth 10 years from now
NO WAY will haslam go out in public and say, Holmgren sucks and needed fired. and if he did, I'd lose all respect for him immediately.
I didn't say Haslam will go in public and say Holmgren sucked (even though its no secret). That doesn't mean he won't fire him. I too would be surprised if Haslam publicly came out and said "Mike Holmgren has been fired" or "relieved of his position" or whatever other euphemism you want to use for "fired". However, I fully expect it to happen, regardless of what the public is told. And if, 9 days or two weeks or a month from today, there's a big press release announcing Joe Banner's installation as team President and Mike Holmgren's departure from the franchise, regardless of the wording they use, could it possibly be any more transparent? Regardless of how its phrased, if Mike Holmgren departs between now and New Year's Eve, I think its a very safe bet that it did not happen on his own terms. The image he'll leave with will not be a good one, as far as his tenure in Cleveland is concerned.
I wouldn't lose respect for Haslam, though. He's is in the business of owning an NFL franchise, making money and putting a winning product on the field, not coddling Mike Holmgren. Lerner hired Holmgren because he wanted a "strong, credible leader", but Holmgren, in my opinion, has been nothing of the sort.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,805 |
Quote:
pit...and to all of "that"...I say, we have heard it all before Jimmy...you come in here claiming you learned the Steelers way...but turns out you are no different than the past two owners the Browns have had.
The Steelers way doesn't mean he is forced with people that are already here that he inherited. Somehow you feel he must stick with people that someone else hired and that's silly.
Quote:
Change is the enemy of the Browns..
To some degree I think you are right but the last time I can remember that someone was fired and went on to great things was someone Modell fired and now reides in New England. Continuity simply for the sake of continuity makes no sense. Can you tell me what great football mind and HC that we have had since 99 that was fired?
You must first have the right people in place that have the ability to do the job in order to stick with them. Many HC's in the NFL haven't made the grade. Had teams stuck with those coaches they would simply have been stuck with a tradition of losing.
You seem to indicate that you can simply pick "person A" no matter what kind of job they are doing and stick with them and that is somehow the magic way to build a winner. If that were so, anybody with certain qualifications would make a great head coach and history points out that certainly isn't the case.
Quote:
Browns fans have lived it for the past 14 years...rabbit eared owners who listen to the noise from the fans and media, rather than completing a plan
Isn't this a contradiction in terms? You seem to think that Lermer was a poor owner who simply jumped around hiring different people all of the time and now you advocate that Haslam stick with "the coach de' jour"? Or are you saying that just anybody the was hired here would have been a great organization if we had simply continued to stick with them?
So who are these "great HC's and FO people" Lerner fired?
Carmen Policy? Chris Palmer or Butch Davis?
Or would any of them have worked if we had "just stuck with them long enough"? As I said, you just can't pick "person A" and if you hang with them long enough, be a winner.
Quote:
The Browns and their owners have not finished anything they started since 1999...but now we have endured 3 years of rebuilding with the focus on rebuilding the key offensive personnel this season.
You're right. So we will have to let this owner "start something" and see if he sticks with it.
Quote:
The offense is playing with a rookie QB, rookie RB, rookie WRs and a rookie RT.
Pitt...if you expected this offense to play like seasoned veterans...you don't know crap about football.
I look for steady progress over the course of the season and nothing else. Obviously you haven't been reading my posts on the board.
Quote:
Just like any offensive line that is young and never played together, it takes time for them to gel...this offense is a lot like a young offensive line learning to play together.
Lauvao started all 16 games last year and so did Pinkston. The only "new player" on the OL is Shwartz and I think he is progressing nicely. So your comment only applies to Shwartz and nobody else on the OL.
Quote:
At this time...it is not about the W-L record...but about the progress being shown on both sides of the ball, though I tend to focus more our very young offense.
I don't disagree with you here and as I said earlier, had you been reading my posts on the board, you would have known that's what I too am looking for.
Quote:
Barring significant injuries, I look for this team to continue to show progress, becoming more competitive as the season progresses, likely putting together some wins toward the end of the season....THEN WHAT ?
Well in the case of this hypothetical we must ask ourselves "why"?
Let's look at the draft as an example...........
Even winning teams have weak links. Most all teams could stand an upgrade somewhere. Usually if your team doesn't win much, there is room for improvement. That can be said for any business at every level.
So as with any team when you are looking to draft or any business or FO, you have to figure out why you won a "few games" and why you may not have won more. Was it the coaching that was good? Was it the talent drafted that was so good?
If you feel the coaching was poor but the drafting was good, you replace the coach but not the person doingt the drafting. Just like if your team wins some games but you have poor QB play, you still draft a QB. You don't hold your team back by keeping the weakest link.
Quote:
New playbooks, new coaches, new everything next season from an inexperienced owner who can't even stand by his stated beliefs...
Another BS statement. If your going to quote the man, why not in its entirety to show just how off base you really are?
____________________________________________
"We’re going to be here a lot and you’ll have the opportunity to get to know us, but we’re really excited about the opportunity. We want to bring a winning team back to Cleveland."
“The last thing I want to say before I take questions, because I know this is the first question everybody is going to ask is, what about personnel decisions? What about this and what about that? Let me just say this, first of all Randy still owns the team and as Mike said there is league protocol and the league has to have an official meeting, that will be in October and until then Randy will own the team. So it’s his team and it would be very presumptuous and very poor form for us to make any personnel decisions or comments."
" but it would be the wrong thing for us to do and we’re not going to make any comments at all on any current personnel situations or any future personnel situations and hopefully you can appreciate that."
"if you walk out of here and only remember one thing, remember the Haslam family is 100 percent committed to making the Cleveland Browns a winner again.”
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-blog/index.ssf/2012/08/cleveland_browns_new_owner_jim.html
__________________________________________
So if you wish to take one snippet of what he said and take it out of context, have at it. I've seen that done all too often.
But the fact is, his "core beliefs" are that you put the right people in place and stick with them. NEVER did he indicate wheather or not those people are here now. So don't try to pretend that if he hires his own staff that he's deviating from his core beliefs because when you look at his interview in its entirety, he didn't say he wasn't going to hire his own people first nor did he say he would.
And let me ask you this...... IF our talent improves and we do win a few games at the end of the season, is that bacause they're being coached well or because Heckert did a good job of drafting players?
And since Banner is supposed to be the one in charge and also comes from Philly, why do you think there would be such a huge difference in the sysytem we would run?
Did you ever stop to think that the system would most likely be very similar but they may just put a more qualified guy in charge of coaching the team?
You see, you have me wrong here. I'm not advocating that Haslam fire everybody. I'm actually not advocating he fire anybody...... yet. I don't care much for Shurmer but I haven't seen some of the rookie mistakes he made last year so far.
But much like the rookies, I'm willing to let the season progress and look at the situation at the end of the season.
While on the one hand I'm not advocating anyone be fired to this point, I'm also very understanding that a new owner would install his own people that he has confidence in.
I also understand that in the exact same press confrence you keep refering to, he did not say he wasn't going to hire his own people. While you keep taking one part of the press confrence and don't look at it in its entirety and keep using one small part of it to paint a picture that is totally out of context when looking at it in its entirety.
When looking at the entire press confrence, nothing you have said is accurate becsause you refuse to show the parts that do not support your arguement.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
It's not even "dislike." It's "approval" or "disapproval."
toad...go try to convince someone else...your own words expose you...
...this toad quote..."If you hated Mike Holmgren you wouldn't be taking this path."
and...this toad quote ... "If you hated Holmgren and the rest you'd be singing a different tune."
You know I don't hate Holmgren so you must be speaking of why I don't join you in your hatred of him...no other way to interpret your comments...nice try though.
Quote:
I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea to express exactly why I'm very close to wanting Holmgren out.
toad..."very close" ?...who are you trying to BS...you want Holmgren gone in the worst way...don't start backtracking now.
Quote:
Holmgren stated that the drafts belonged to Heckert, but when McCoy was on the board, Holmgren threw his weight around and took the kid. Now I have never liked micro-managers, and this one move showed that Holmgren was just that. I didn't believe in McCoy coming out, but actually made a statement that I'd give McCoy the benefit of the doubt only because Holmgren had a well-earned reputation as a QB-guru. However, it didn't take long to understand that McCoy didn't have it, and that Holmgren's reputation took a huge hit with that mistake.
toad...I've tried to explain to you that McCoy was not drafted to be the franchise QB.
I have asked you several times to answer this question...but you run from it, refusing to answer it...
Do NFL teams target 3rd round QB to be their franchise QB?
I know the answer and so do you...but the answer blows up your claim that Holmgren blew the 3rd round pick on McCoy in the 2010 draft.
The Browns signed Seneca Wallace on March 8, 2010 and Jake Delhomme on March 14, 2010...
...TOAD, do you believe Holmgren was looking for a franchise QB in the 3rd round of the 2010 draft?
knowing he already had two veteran QBs signed?
I doubt you have the guts to give an honest answer, if you answer at all, so I will answer the question for you...
...NO, teams do not target 3rd round QBs to be their franchise QB. When a team drafts a QB in the 3rd round, they are looking for someone who will at the worst, turnout to be a decent backup QB, which might be all McCoy ever becomes...BUT, if the Browns would happen to get lucky and McCoy turned out to be "that" franchise QB that 99% of NFL teams target in round 1...McCoy would be a steal for the Browns.
The truth is, McCoy was drafted to be the #3 qb on the 2010 roster...not the starter...he was supposed to sit and learn his rookie year. Due to injuries, high ankle sprains to Delhomme and Wallace in the 5th game against the Falcons, McCoy was forced to start the following week against the Steelers and had a decent game in a loss, passing for 280 yds.
McCoy then started the next 4 games with victories over the Saints and Patriots and then a loss to the Jets in OT and 4 point loss at the Jags. Delhomme got healthy and started two games, both wins but Delhomme was hurt again and McCoy started the last 3 games.
The Browns terminated Delhomme's contract the following year, which turned out to be a lock out year and a year in which the Browns changed coaches. But, due to the lockout, the coaching staff could not even talk to their players, so McCoy took it upon himself to hold mini camps in Texas. McCoy also took it upon himself to seek out some advise on the new WCO, contacting and spending time with Brett Favre.
What did Seneca Wallace do ??? NOTHING
So once the strike was over, McCoy was named the starter as the entire team worked to adjust to NEW EVERYTHING. McCoy started 13 games, playing behind a poor offensive line that started inexperienced OGs and below average RTs which lead to McCoy taking a lot of punishment, while his receivers led the league in dropped passes.
Toad...so there you have it...the truth...the Browns spent backup draft value on McCoy who may be nothing better than backup value...but the jury is still out.
Quote:
Then there's the failed move with Mangini. There is no way to state that the move was anything but a massive mistake.
toad...only in the eyes of someone as biased against Holmgren as you.
Had Mangini won two more games down the stretch, I have little doubt he would have been retained as the HC, but with the agreement that he agree to a new OC who knew the WCO.
The basic question Holmgren asked...is it fair to a coach to fire him after one season?...
...ask that question to anyone with experience in coaching football and you are going to get a near 100% agreement, it is not fair.
So Holmgren gave Mangini another year.
Only in Toads world which aligns with the sports shock jocks and the over emotional, uneducated fans, do you hold it against Holmgren for giving Mangini a chance...you have to have a reason to blame someone...someone to hate...as everyone knows, for Toad, that someone is Holmgren.
BUT, from the standpoint of the franchise's goal, to rebuild the team's roster via the draft, having Mangini coach the team in 2010, did nothing to hamper the franchises goal of rebuilding the team via the draft.
DO NOT FORGET WHAT THE GOAL WAS...Mangini's goal was to win as many games as possible, but Heckert and Holmgren were focused on rebuilding the teams roster via the draft. Mangini lost his authority over the draft when Holmgren hired Heckert.
The goal of the franchise was to REBUILD the team.
Quote:
Shurmur was a guy I kinda liked when we got him. I've given him the benefit of the doubt because he's been surrounded with a sad amount of talent, and have defended many of his moves. However, I still see him making very dumb mistakes, and I'm beginning to wonder if he's got "it" to be a good head coach.
toad...Shurmur was a rookie HC last season, in a year when there was no off season to teach the WCO to the players.
This season, Shurmur has a rookie QB, RB, 2 rookie WRs and a rookie RT...Shurmur is up to his ears in "teaching" rookies how to play in the WCO.
If you know "anything" about football...you would understand that Shurmur has one helluva job on his hands.
To the over emotional fans who don't know crap about football, they believe anyone can teach football and that it is easy for rookies to learn...
Quote:
Then there's the philosophy of building just through the draft. We needed major help in a major way, but have elected to do very little in terms of signing any impact free agents.
toad..damn, at least you finally admit Holmgren and Heckert are committed to rebuilding the team via the draft...I'm making some headway here.
If your rebuilding via the draft, you don't go out and spend big on FA...not at first. As we near the end of the 5 yr plan, that changes as you assess what the team needs are.
The Browns just finished their 3rd draft with two more drafts to go and you don't sign free agents if you can get the guys you need in the draft. The closer the Browns get to the end of the rebuild, the better idea they have about which players are going to be capable doing the job.
This off season, I expect the Browns to go after defensive free agents, especially in the defensive backfield and maybe OGs and WRs...**provided the young guys we now have, do not live up to expectations.
Too soon to know exactly what our needs will be, but this team will begin to fill in the roster with good free agent signings...provided it does not blow the cap.
Quote:
Regardless of how any individual feels about RG3,.
toad..as it was, what the Browns offered would have been extremely costly to the overall goal of rebuilding the Browns via the draft...and I must add, he would have cost us more than we offered and we might still not have been outbid by Dan Snyder.
There are limits and he is just one player...who does not like to get hit...and found out what happens when you run and don't slide...RG2/12 is still trying figure out how many fingers he has on one hand.
Again, the average, over emotional fan who thinks with his heart and not his brain is going to cry about RG...Holmgren didn't get RG and we would be winning right now if we only had RG and many more tear jerking claims.
...he was only one player...it still takes 10 more to make an offensive unit and the Browns needed a RB, WRs and RT...it made no sense to offer more for RG, knowing there were so many needs on offense.
Quote:
So to answer your "question" which is much more of an "indictment"........In year three of the Holmgren master-plan, the Cleveland Browns are the only winless team in the league.
There isn't a rebuilding plan in the history of the NFL where the person in charge says it's acceptable to be the only winless team in the league in the 3rd year of the plan. His stewardship has as many questions now as it did three years ago.
toad..how many times do I have to tell you...IT IS A FREAKING 5 YR PLAN...not a 3 yr plan.
No team in the NFL can do a complete rebuild of their team's roster, via the draft, IN 3 YEARS...can't be done, not enough picks.
Hell, it's rare that "any" NFL team commits to rebuilding via the draft these days...why?...because at best, the franchise knows it is looking at 3 losing seasons. Most owners don't have the stomach to even attempt to rebuild their roster via the draft...that is why it is rarely even attempted.
But the Browns have already drafted their 3rd class and we only have two more seasons before the rebuild is done.
I look at this offense today and know they will be better next season, after learning the offense and playing in it for a season. I know this offensive unit will be even better after two seasons in this offense, under the same teacher....same goes for the defense...each year, the young players will improve as they learn and gain experience.
To build a successful NFL team, you have to teach your young players and give them experience playing.
Toad....you look at this offense through your over emotional, uneducated eyes and go...they suck...we didn't win today...they suck...I wish we had RGIII...lets blame someone...blame Holmgren...blame Shurmur.
It's obvious you and I are on different wave lengths when it comes to football. You just can't understand, it's not about winning X number of games this year...it's about teaching this young team, on both offense and defense, how to play in our system.
You must admit, the defense, which is about two years ahead of the offense, has played well enough to win many games, both last year and so far this year.
But you expect this young offensive team to play as if they are experienced veterans, which they are not.
Once the players have learned enough to carry out their assignments without having to think of everything they are doing...which only comes with repetition from practice and game experience....then the team will begin to win.
Toad, the more you type, the more you look like the uneducated fans and sports shock jocks who spend their days crying over the airwaves about the Browns not winning...and the Browns didn't get RG...always looking for someone to blame.
Most fans do not understand the rebuilding plan that was started in 2010...most fans are over-emotional people with not a clue about what the Browns are doing and just how rare and how difficult it is.
But when it is done, Holmgren and Heckert will have laid the foundation for "long term success" for this franchise...that is what this rebuild is about.
I invite anyone to go back and look what had become of the Browns roster by the time Holmgren was hired to try to fix the mess.
From Butch Davis to Crennel/Savage to Mangini...look what Holmgren (and Heckert) inherited in 2010...maybe then you can understand the need to rebuild the team's roster via the draft.
Last edited by mac; 10/10/12 06:41 AM.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Haslam Thread
|
|
