DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns News & Notes

Didn't BB coach somewhere before NE?

That depends upon Why.
If they're simply incapable of executing it, that's one thing. Same with if the opponent player simply beats them.

If they willfully do something they shouldn't be doing, or don't know what to do... that's on the coach. Sure, maybe you give a pass the first time or two for a guy, but after that, the coach has to own that. It is his job to have them ready and to put the people out there that will do the job.

Nobody suggests that he should get fired in the middle of the season and off course it’s not his fault that key players get injured outside the field, that our star QB get’s long term suspended or anything else outside his control, that’s not why he get criticized.

We’re underperforming! That’s undeniable.

We can discuss all night long about his pros and cons as a HC but when results isn’t there what do we do. Give him another 2-3 seasons to turn this around?

this is well said

Before the season, you said you were not going to watch the Browns any longer. I remember you were happy about having your Sundays free. Have you changed your mind? If not, how can you state these things about the team?

What does that ^ have to do with football? Or the thread topic? Or your boy Baker?

I agree w/this. Of course Stefanski ultimately is responsible for the team. However, he should not be directly involved in taking over the defense. That's Woods' job.

Thus, what can Stefanski do? He has meetings w/his coordinators. They review things. They discuss possible changes. Woods will act on those suggestions. He is either successful or not.

The biggest issue w/the Browns D in the first 3 games was blown coverages and protecting against big plays late in games. It was pretty obvious that the secondary played a lot better in game 4. Atlanta completed 7 passes. Not in the 4th quarter. That number was for the entire game. Yet, fans come on here and say no adjustments are being made.

I'd say being down 3 starters on your DL and your leader on defense [Walker] might have had some influence on our run defense late in that last game. And 3 out of those 4 players were in top group of highest graded players on our team by PFF. But, of course.......Stefanski is inept.

Now, what else can do to help the defense in addition to what I mentioned above? He can replace Woods. I see no one on this current staff that is even remotely qualified to be a DC of a professional football team. I think firing a DC this early in the season would only bring on more scrutiny and create a sense of panic. After a tumultuous off-season, this team is starved for stability and calm and stable leadership. The bye week is a possibility to make a change if the D is still faltering, but I don't think that is such a good idea. I think at the end of the year, Stefanski and Berry can sit down and do a thorough evaluation of the defensive staff. If they determine that Woods and his d-coaches are not getting it done, that would be the most logical and intelligent time to make a change.

I believe that both men are far too intelligent to make rash, emotional decisions due to the influence of emotional and irrational outside influences. The concern is whether or not one of the emotional and irrational influences might be on the inside and he is also the owner of the team. We need Depo--the ultimate salesman and influencer--to work his magic on Jimmy once again.

I agree...but with an opposite conclusion about that in the case of the Browns. There is a pattern of blown communication on the defense. Even if we won the (2) games we lost/pissed-away this year I would still be concerned about that pattern...a pattern that carried over from last year.

Our DTs are well below average. Unknowing fans such as myself could see that coming...AND could predict what the Falcons did on (14) straight plays that we had no prayer of stopping...our DTs were poor last year as well.

Leaving points on the field and repeatedly crapping our boxers in the redzone is a very concerning pattern...whether we won or lost a game dong just that.

Chubb on the bench at critical moments is a pattern...and a carryover from last year.

When the HC's nose is buried in the Waffle House play sheet how can he be managing the rest of what is going on? The apparent answer is that he can't - or simply isn't - managing the other facets of gameday.

Saleh goes to a moribund Jets team and has them looking ready to play...regardless of whether they throw out a dinosaur or newbie at QB...Peterson goes to the absolute shat-show that Urban created and they look like a team that knows what they want to do - whether they have the horses to do it or not. BB's OC takes a 3rd string QB and gives the Packers all they could handle.

Coaching makes a huge difference at the professional level. Every guy on the 90 man preseason roster is a stud athlete. (37) of those guys move on. Of the (53) that remain, there are a few like Chubb who are even more studly than the other absolute studs. Coaching up guys who have been studs their entire life to reach even greater heights is not something that every coach can pull off. Having "subordinates" who make more $$$ than their bosses is something that only happens in professional sports. Some coaches are HC material and some are wannabes. Look around the league and tell me how many "good-to-great" HCs are also playing the role of OC...when you find them...look at the weapons they have on offense and how their defenses perform...we aren't those teams with those guys.

I'm not up for firing Ski in mid-season. This season was lost months ago...and the next (2) draft don't have a 1st Rd pick. But I would look into Sean Payton for '23 (and start courting him now)...we will need a HC who is the guy-in-charge when the $230,000,000 man gets in the huddle...not a HC stuck in the role - and mind - of an OC.

J/C

This is something that I “argue” about with some friends and family members who aren’t fans of Stefanski. Their argument: “he has no fire, doesn’t yell or scream or seem to care.”

IMO, his demeanor is the RIGHT way to coach for lasting success. I think he’s a good leader and very mindful. Sometimes yelling, screaming coaches wear out their welcome very quickly.

That's a valid point. The loud, emotional coaches are often successful early on. They are usually good motivators. However, that style often grows stale after multiple years. It's not a blanket statement, but I think you have a very good point.

There's no right or wrong way to succeed as a HC. They all have their own recipe to get results.


How do you know Ski is a good leader and what's the definition of a "good" leader?
Is there a blue print for being a "good leader"?

I’d say someone who is able to communicate, be consistent, organized, forward thinking, innovative, and in-tune with both their team strengths/weaknesses and their opponents strengths/weaknesses.

I’m not in the locker room and don’t know anything more than you do, but i’d venture to guess KS checks off more boxes than not. But, maybe I’m wrong and he’s horrible. Who knows.

I own this site, so I can't just go away, beg that my account be banned, and not come here when there is a player I don't like on the roster, unlike someone else around here.

For 50% of the game, Ski's nose is stuck in the Waffle House menu. How much input can he possibly be getting from the various offensive position coaches during that time? Offense, defense or STs? How much interaction can he have with officials? Working them like Tomlin does incessantly?

For the other 50% of the game, his DC is 'busy' running the defense. How much can Ski possibly work with the defensive coaches while they are actively coaching?

By default, he is coaching 50% of the game.

This has been an issue since he's been here.

I think what people are missing is that consistent play calling leads to predictability. If you always rely on the same method in the same situations, you are working against what your opponent is set up to defend. Calling plays to catch your opponent off guard isn't a bad thing. Teams do it all the time and it works quite often. It's only a bad thing and gets second guessed when it does not work.

On the bright side, the whole division is having issues, and we are still in a good position at 2-2

I wasn't suggesting any of that. It was a legit football question. I was wondering if you changed your mind and started watching or if not, what was fueling your stance since it came across as so definitive.

Never mind. Sorry I asked and I won't make that mistake again.

No, no it wasn't. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

Sure it was !! 100% football.

Thank you for saving me the time.

It was totally legitimate. You said you weren't going to watch the games. You are commenting on the games. That begs the question "are you watching the games?".

I'm struggling to figure out why that's not a legitimate question.

Is it? If he's commenting on the games, he's obviously watching the games. Why beat around the bush (league)? Call him "liar, liar" and move on with your life instead of asking dumb questions.

1. I would venture to guess a good portion of the people that comment on the game didn't watch it. I think you would be surprised.

2. It's a dumb question because you guys don't like him.

3. The gang mentally you guys engage in is asinine.

Prp made some very specific posts about what he was seeing on the field. Saying some people don't watch the game is a cop-out for a smart ass remark made by the poster in question.

For some there is no reason to like him; snide remarks, bogus conclusions about other's posts, and hiding behind "j/c..." while he obviously is responding to a specific post is high school bs. In short, he acts like a child. A pouty child. Now he's pouting about you because you compared Baker's "excuses" to the excuses being made for this crap fest we see on the field. That's one of the reasons you posted above, he already sent you a cease and desist in a PM; I'd bet on it.

There is no gang mentality. He makes it a habit to call people out by name while also grouping them into imaginary factions... "bullies", Baker Boys", "guys who never played the game", "people who don't understand football". I've been on the web since Al Gore stuck the plug in the wall and I've never seen anything like it. Since he quit and came back, it's worse than ever... people calling him out on it is not "gang mentality".

No kidding. You left off your list the fact that he is the biggest bully on the board and I have seen a minimum of 3 different posters comment that he is the reason they don't post more. And who can forget the PMs telling posters what to do .... I still have mine where he implies he might take legal action for deformation 🤣

I wonder which move evicted the most reaction out of Browns
Fans here....the Browns showing Mayfield the door or
Trading for DeShawn Watson?

You think I would kowtow to a PM telling me to do something? That's laughable. If I ever got a PM of that nature by someone on here I would amplify what I am being accused of...rub salt in the wound until it was unbearable. I'm vindictive like that.

It was a legitimate question. I was wondering if he changed his mind about watching the games. That would not be a sin. I was curious because he was speaking in a "voice" that was absolutely sure of what he was saying.

No one should be surprised that the same folks who dictate what people can say on this board jumped all over it. They are permitted to get away w/it. Hell, the other day, I was accused of masturbating because I posted PFF numbers for Jacoby and Baker. No suspensions. They even left the post up. Pure Football, baby. There are reasons why so many long-time posters left. The ugly tone of the Political forum has made its way to other forums and if you take a look, it's the same guys who post a lot in both forums that cause most of the trouble.

I noticed Diam Dawg and Overtoad don't post on here anymore