DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Holmgren calls it a career with the Browns.

Yeah, we lost Haden for 4 games for his idiotic "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, except Adderall" adventure.

The defense really looks like it's starting to come together .... with 2 (for all intents and purposes) rookie OLB playing huge minutes.

2 rookie OLB, 1 starting and the other playing big minutes ..... 2 rookie DT heavy in the rotation ...... a rookie and a 2nd year guy getting time at FS ....(along with Young, who is not much as a Safety) and a 2nd year CB (Skrine) to go along with a rookie CB (Wade) forced into more action that either was really ready for.

I truly forgot just how many young players there are on defense because of the overall youth of the offense. However, our defense plays a ton of really young guys too. Taylor is looked at as a veteran, but this is only his 2nd year ... along with Sheard.

The defense has some veteran leaders though, that are really missing on offense. On defense we have guys like DQ, Rucker, Parker, Brown, Ward, and Haden to really push the defense to higher levels. They help cover for some of the rookies, and help correct mistakes.

On offense our veterans are guys like Thomas and Mack, and Watson. With Massaquoi having missed so much time, that's really about it. I do think that we will see improvement on offense next year as these players mature, and become more well versed in the offense.

I am so excited about the future for this team. I think that next year really sees the Browns start their rise from the ashes, just like the phoenix.

I have to agree with you on the game day failures. Any time you make a call and the team's owner, whose billion dollar check hasn't even cleared the bank yet, is up on his feet and screaming it's not a good thing. I don't know that he's doing any thing through the week that can make up for stuff like that.

Beating the Steelers twice would make a great out for Haslam if he is so inclined to keep Shurmur. Or not. I really don't care all that much as long as Haslam finds someone better. It all comes down to who else is out there and what they offer.

What I don't want to see is a complete tear down and reload. Heckert probably deserves to keep his job. And I really don't have any serious issues with any of the players that can't be solved by bringing in talent to compete with them.

That body of work would get him executed in certain foreign countries.

At some point however we need to stick with someone, we just can't keep resetting this thing every two or three years and expect to ever build a winning culture here again. I say baby steps as we have no clue how to win and our expectations have to be low as we keep inching ourselves forward until we learn to play past the level of our competition and put some teams away when we have the opportunity.

I'm not lobbying for Shurmur to stay, I think he needs to go but we've got to get this next one right or we're going to sit in this cellar for another decade.

Rebuilding the Cleveland Browns can't be done by just one leader: Terry Pluto

Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer By Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer

holmgren-depart-shadows-2012-gc.jpg As shadows surround the end of the Mike Holmgren Era in Berea, Terry Pluto is trusting that the new leadership team understands that no one man can successfully shape an NFL team. Gus Chan, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- It started with Butch Davis. Then came Eric Mangini and Mike Holmgren.

All three were supposed to save the Browns. A desperate Randy Lerner turned the franchise over to them without ever making it clear just what was their job.

Davis was hired as coach and was supposed to work with General Manager Dwight Clark. That didn't last long. Clark was gone, and soon Davis was making a mess of his the draft as he hired his former University of Miami recruiting coordinator Pete Garcia as his player personnel guru.

Mangini was hired as coach, then permitted to name his own general manager. That exploded in the middle of his first season (2009) when George Kokinis was fired.

Holmgren was recruited by Lerner in 2010 as team president and allowed to do anything -- coach, draft players, be the defacto owner. He had a 5-year, $40 million to be football emperor.

It didn't work. That's because great organizations are just that, great organizations.

New Browns owner Jimmy Haslam came from the Steelers, where they've had three coaches since 1970. They have had a few general managers. But the Steelers have not been about one man -- rather, one idea. They have a certain way of building teams, nurturing coaches, draft players. And they do it, decade after decade.

So far, Haslam has hired one man for the Browns -- Joe Banner. He is a former Eagles president, now the Browns CEO. We don't have to worry about Banner wondering if he should be coaching -- or even if he should have taken this job.

He's a sports executive who helped turn around one franchise, and wants to do the same again here. His business-like approach gives off a sense of "been there, done that ... and know what to do next."

That's a relief after what this franchise has endured.

Holmgren will never understand why he so frustrated and infuriated the fans and media. They wanted to hear his voice, but the only times he became reasonably accessible was in the last few weeks when he was leaving. He seemingly wanted the rest of the NFL to know that he may be interested in coaching again.

OK, he did several interviews with his buddy on a Seattle radio station, but refused to talk to local media during most of 2 1/2 seasons here. And he failed to comprehend why that became a problem.

No matter his intent, Holmgren's last few weeks have come off as very self-serving. His musing about missing coaching is embarrassing, because he had two chances to do it in Cleveland. The first was in 2010, when he kept Mangini as coach, knowing that had no chance to work long term. The next was 2011, when he fired Mangini -- but hired Pat Shurmur instead.

Mike, you we're making $8 million a year. You had Tom Heckert in place as general manager, and others were hired (some very good moves) to stabilize the organization.

You didn't coach because you didn't want to coach, period. That was your decision, so don't tell the public how much you missed coaching and expect any empathy from fans. Yes, you won a lot of games in Green Bay and Seattle -- and went to three Super Bowls -- but none of that happened here.

At his first farewell press conference (there were more), he discussed going to Hawaii, sipping umbrella drinks and riding his motorcycle. Fans were outraged, believing he never fully was engaged in the franchise.

So it was time for Holmgren to go, and let Banner handle the operation.

You can debate the merits of Heckert and Shurmur, but their commitment to the Browns is unquestioned. Heckert had heart surgery this spring, worked through it and put together an excellent draft. Just look at Shurmur's face after every game and you know this man is emotionally attached to his job.

The team does continue to play hard.

It's up to Haslam and Banner to decide on the general manager and coach for 2013. But most of all, they must hire people who know their roles, do them well and want to be here.

History has told us that no one man can save the Browns.

Anti-Holmgren, Lerner, pro Banner, Heckert, Shurmur.

I fully agree with everything Pluto said here, and I don't say that very often.

NRTU.

While digging around for some things on Banner and Heckert, I came across this tidbit from ESPN. It essentially grades-out Holmgren during his time here. The REALLY interesting tidbit is this:

Quote:

---

QUARTERBACK: Holmgren ultimately chose the package of Brandon Weeden and Trent Richardson over Robert Griffin III. He acknowledged that the Browns spoke to the Rams about moving up for RG3 but decided the price was too steep. Holmgren then urged Heckert to take Weeden late in the first round when he could've been available in the second. RG3 has the look of being a superstar with 1,343 yards passing, 379 yards rushing and 11 total touchdowns (five on passes and six on runs). Weeden has thrown for 1,519 yards with seven touchdowns and an NFL-leading 10 interceptions. While Weeden could develop into a decent starter, the Browns may end up regretting this decision.

---

---

Since there's been speculation on how much Holmgren was throwing his weight around, and to what extent Heckert honestly had autonomy, this little blurb is very helpful in knowing what went on.

There's a TBD attached to Weeden, but the more we read about Holmgren, the more it reads that he was a lazy bankers-hours kinda guy who micromanaged his way to 3 years of losing.

Toad,

Quote:

---

He acknowledged that the Browns spoke to the Rams about moving up for RG3 but decided the price was too steep.

---

This goes against everything we have heard... the story is that we made a pretty decent offer, found out it wasn't enough, tried to up the offer but were denied.... which is it?

Quote:

---

Holmgren ultimately chose the package of Brandon Weeden and Trent Richardson over Robert Griffin III.

---

I don't know how much influence Holmgren had in taking Richardson and Weeden but that decision was made AFTER RGIII was unavaible.. I seriously doubt Holmgren didn't go after RGIII in hopes of getting Richardson and Weeden...

Quote:

---

RG3 has the look of being a superstar with 1,343 yards passing, 379 yards rushing and 11 total touchdowns (five on passes and six on runs)

---

Cam Newton had that look at this point last year... let's see how it plays out.

Holmgren telling Heckert to take Weeden early is not news. Even Heckert led on that he wanted another player (even after Wright was gone) before saying something like "we all agreed [drafting Weeden at 22] was the right thing to do." It was also clear that the planned on drafting Schwartz in the third, but just took him in the second since their "plan" had been foiled already and they took their second round guy with 1b. I remember being appalled at the apparent lack of preparation. The guys basically vocalized in their press conferences that they weren't prepared for Wright to be taken ahead of him (though anyone paying attention saw that it was clear he'd go between 16-21) and had no contingency plan in place, so they just moved up their planned picks in order to make sure they got them.

I'd link to the articles, as they were posted here, but they were in the phantom draft forum.

It all worked out pretty well though as I think Gordon > Wright...especially in terms of no1 ceiling...Wright looks more like a good no2/3 guy

also, if you planned to take your starting QB in the 2nd, you better be safe than sorry a 3rd (!!!) time after missing out on RG3 and Wright...at that time it was Weeden or bust, since there was no day 1 upgrade to McCoy left...and we just could not go into this season with McCoy as the starter again...that was out of the question for H&H...and Shurmur...I think that was pretty clear

I'm pretty happy with Schwartz and am glad we didn't gamble that he'd fall into the 3rd...

akthough I really like him, my only regret looking back is that we took Hughes over Sanu...that could come back to haunt us for years as Sanu now is the no2 WR opposite AJ Green and caught 4 TDs in his last 3 games...I'd trade Hughes and Benjamin for him in a heartbeat. I understand though...we were looking for speed at WR and we already had "our" Sanu in Little....and yet there were several WRs I would have taken over Benjamin too....like Jarius Wright, who has caught more balls in 2 games than Benjamin all season. So far Benjamin looks like our worst value pick...hope he proves me wrong, but he doesnt look like he wants to play WR when the ball is in the air

However, we had a pretty good draft and I'm glad they go get their guys before they lost out on some more...

I agree that Gordon looks very good. I watched Tenn vs. Jax in Short Cuts this past week (as I've been keeping an eye on Blackmon) and what they've been asking Wright to do, he's done very well, which is catch the screen and make one or two guys miss. You can see that in that Wright leads all rookie WRs in YAC and catches for 1st downs. He's another guy who is suffering from poor QB play, but not to the extent of Blackmon. Wright also hasn't been on the field nearly as many snaps, as Tenn has been going with a 1-2 of Britt and Washington, then comes out in a lot of 1 WR sets with Damian Williams when they want to run. That Chris Johnson has been able to get any positive yardage out of that predictable set is actually pretty miraculous. He has been running so well... he runs really tough and fast. Impressive player despite his slow start this year.

I envisioned a Browns WR corps of Little, Blackmon, and Wright with Doug Martin at RB before the draft after RGIII was a lost cause (as those of you who may remember my sig at the time recall.) Little lined up at X, Y, and Z his rookie year, and both the draftees did the same at their schools their senior year. I am very happy with how Gordon has played and I didn't know anything about him before the draft, but part of what is showing Wright to be a "#2/3 guy" is just how Tenn is using him. He has definitely displayed toughness, shake, and YAC ability when he gets his touches, and was open a LOT on plays he didn't get the ball thrown to him.

Quote:

---

also, if you planned to take your starting QB in the 2nd, you better be safe than sorry a 3rd (!!!) time after missing out on RG3 and Wright

---

I agree with this, though I didn't agree at the time and don't agree now that Weeden was the right choice for the Browns, though that is water under the bridge. It may have been that Gordon in the supplemental was their backup plan all along, though obviously that was not apparent at the time of the draft to us outsiders.

Quote:

---

He acknowledged that the Browns spoke to the Rams about moving up for RG3 but decided the price was too steep.

----------
This goes against everything we have heard... the story is that we made a pretty decent offer, found out it wasn't enough, tried to up the offer but were denied.... which is it?

---

It isn't a stretch to read that sentence in an entirely different way with the addition of just one word:

Quote:

---

He acknowledged that the Browns spoke to the Rams about moving up for RG3 but he decided the price was too steep.

---

What's more, it was Holmgren himself who stood in front of a podium stating he had made a great offer and wasn't sure any offer would have been good enough.

There are very few who believe Holmgren didn't up his offer and got shot down.

Quote:

---

I don't know how much influence Holmgren had in taking Richardson and Weeden but that decision was made AFTER RGIII was unavaible.. I seriously doubt Holmgren didn't go after RGIII in hopes of getting Richardson and Weeden...

---

I fully agree. My question revolves around how heavy-handed he was in forcing Heckert to take Weeden in the 1st. We already know he forced Heckert to take McCoy.

Quote:

---

RG3 has the look of being a superstar with 1,343 yards passing, 379 yards rushing and 11 total touchdowns (five on passes and six on runs)

---------
Cam Newton had that look at this point last year... let's see how it plays out.

---

Newton can't throw the ball like RG3. However, if RG3 doesn't make it, it'll because he has Mike Vick-Itis, where he has no idea how to protect himself when running.

I never doubted how well RG3 would ultimately do, but I've always been afraid of him getting his career cut short due to injuries.

It's possible you're mistaking my intent. I'm not focused on RG3. I'm focused on how many times Holmgren played the trump card on Heckert, and because of that I'm not sad he's out. The blunder with Mangini and the egg-on-the-face of the failed RG3 trade just make it worse.

On the flip side of that though Toad, you can't give credit for the great hire of Heckert and bag on Holmgren for all the personnel problems that have occured. If Heckert was a great hire then Holmgren gets credit for setting up the FO as he was hired to do as President. Conversely, we can not say that Heckert is a great talent evaluator and the only mistakes he made were Holmgren's fault.

It goes both ways bro, if Heckert is great then ultimatly Holmgren accomplished his most important goal here imo. If personnel problems have occured (and they have) then Heckert deserves his share of the responisiblity as well. I think Tom wanted Brandon as much or moreso than Holmgren did......they both took the gamble.

Willie, here's why it doesn't go both ways...

We don't have any evidence of Holmgren forcing his will on any other draft picks. Only McCoy and Weeden.

Let us not forget the acquisitions of Delhomme and Wallace...

Quote:

---

Whike you love to go this route not alot of us believe your spin. Sorry but your setting the placemat of a major fail and placing it on 1 person. Your agenda has been exposed.

He has done that and if you dont like Weedon that is fine...

---

If there are others that think exactly like you, they too have missed the mark, and the point.

I never liked McCoy. I'm on the fence with Weeden but still say he was a huge, unnecessary gamble. But they have nothing to do with the point I was making, a point you've missed because you're too focused on "my agenda."

If you go back and read the posts, then figure out the point, let's talk about it...

Or you could just get to the point.

Nah, if I'm going to get accused of agenda's and other stuff, I'm gonna make those posters work for it.

Way to avoid the question as you always do. I have nothing to work at.
It must be killing you that Weeden again drove the Browns down the field and you will focus on the major reach and the ints instead of the fact after he tossed the 1st int he opened up and played gunslinger.

Mike Holmgren forced his will on Heckert and thus if Heckert has to go so be it but that was Mikes fault if the new guy sucks.

See I can talk with the forked silver tounge as well.

Actually, I was quite ecstatic that Weeden and the Browns went down the field.

However...you still missed the point, and I have no idea what "question" you say I avoided because you didn't ask one...

I'm musing to what extent Holmgren forced his will on Heckert to draft Weeden.

We already know Holmgren forced Heckert to take McCoy. I'm 95% sure Holmgren forced Heckert to take Weeden in the 1st.

I understand your intent completely.

I simply fully disagree.

If you saw HEckert talk about Weeden, I'd say he was 95% the driving force behind that pick....maybe Heckert wanted to play "value whore" and wanted to wait for Weeden in the 2nd and Holmgren made sure they get their QB, without risking to lose yet another target (RG3, Wright).

To me the difference in how much who talked about the QB after the draft is all I need to know....Heckert was and is a Weeden fanboy. He raved about him for minutes when asked...after the McCoy pick it was pretty much Holmgren talking more about him than Heckert and Holmgren finally revealed that it was pretty much his pick and that Mangini and Heckert wanted other guys there....he literally said so at the time. This time it was Heckert getting a boner while talking about Weeds...I really don't think Heckert got Weeds forced on him....if anything, he got Holmgren's nod, that's it, but he wanted him badly....I'm not even sure if he liked Weeds' value more than RG3, as in Weeds costing just 1 lower pick and could still be surrounded with high profile prospects....Heckert is all about value, and I love him for that. He's the first GM here that gets this concept

Quote:

---

If you saw HEckert talk about Weeden, I'd say he was 95% the driving force behind that pick....maybe Heckert wanted to play "value whore" and wanted to wait for Weeden in the 2nd and Holmgren made sure they get their QB, without risking to lose yet another target (RG3, Wright).

---

So Heckert was the driving force behind that pick, but Holmgren forced him to take Weeds in the first, but Heckert wanted to play "value whore" so he really wasn't the driving force behind the pick.

Well, which is it?

Next time try not tying both sets of shoelaces together so you won't trip over yourself.

I've seen cases of posters trying to cover their own tracks but that one takes the cake.

As for the rest, hey, good for Heckert loving Weeds and not loving McCoy. That wasn't my point, which revolved around how much control Heckert had...right up until Holmgren decided it was no longer his time to have control.

I wonder how many people have come to the realization that the very thing they fear in Banner is the exact same thing that Holmgren represented: Control.

Banner has always given final say over personnel to Reid, yet Holmgren always had the trump card over Heckert.

Oh the irony.

I'm still on the fence with Weeds, and don't count me as one of the low-hanging fruit who's buying stats as the end-all be-all. You're the king of cherry-picking stats to fit your arguments to back your boys. His QB rating doesn't reflect his three-stooges act in the Dallas game where he panicked and threw the football right into the chest of a defensive lineman, then threw a panicked ball right to the linebacker, then coughed up a fumble all in the same series. His stats don't reflect the three dropped INT's in the Steelers game, or the INT he tried to throw as he was taking a sack this past week. No, you can cherry-pick your stats to death while ignoring the entire picture but people see through that crap.

The rest of the board knows. It's okay to admit it.

Unlike McCoy there are reasons to stick with Weeden a bit longer to see how he progresses, but if it weren't for my desire to see Shurmur kicked out the door, I'd still have that sig about Weeden in there. He represents one of the big gambles at QB in the history of the game, not because of where he was picked, but because of his age. He better become a pro-bowl caliber player or the "value" of that pick will be greatly debated. If he turns out to be Joe Flacco, where he has a career QB rating of 86 after 5 years in the league as a 33-year old, the pick will not have been a good one, and to this point in time Weeden is behind Flacco's curve...and he's a year-and-a-half older. Weeden has received the kind of pass-protection afforded to NO Browns QB in the last 14 seasons, and the argument that his receivers aren't helping him is long-gone. In fact, they've been bailing him out in recent weeks.

The stars are lined up for Weeden and there are no excuses. He's gotta continue to develop and stop making the boneheaded mistakes. God knows he can't go throwing his coaches under the bus again. It may seem unfair to say it, but his clock is ticking. That's what happens when you draft a guy who is a 29-year old rookie; he won't get the kind of time that Flacco has been afforded. If he's still a guy who has ratings in the mid 80's (a place he hasn't reached yet) by the time he's 33, he's done. He won't get any more time. That's a sobering thought...

Quote:

---

Weeden has got to be a PBler, but it's ok for TRich NOT to be in the same class as Gore, Rice or AP....TRich gets an A for 72yds on 20 carries, Weeden a C for 360+ yds and a 94yd game saving drive...how about a serious look in the mirror Toad, because you're losing it

---

Good Lord...more of the same...