It seems that you are unregistered. Please register with us by clicking here.
It seems that you are unregistered. Please register with us by clicking here.
 |  |  |
 | Register | Arcade | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |  |
|  |  |  | |||||||
| The Cleveland Browns Place for all discussion about our beloved Browns. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-03-2010
| ||||
| ||||
 Quote:
Look no further than the difference in competition levels between most of 2008 and 2010. People pretend everyone works exactly the same with injuries. HOWEVER, not everyone has 1 draft pick left from 2008 preceeding the draft volume of 4 Savage had us scheduled for in 2009. In the process, we had a dline full of overpaid guys from 4-3 alignments with 1 gap schemes trying to play 2 gap football up front. Square pegs meet round holes. Even worse, reflecting back to our last set of golden years in the 80s, we were bringing in late round draft picks such as Paul Farren who could start anywhere from Cneter to OG to OT. Our FAs that were all rock solid like Dan Fike weren't overpriced; and they could pass physicals outside of Cleveland just as easily as inside Cleveland unlike Joe Andruzzi. As for Daboll, show me 1 person that can beat people in chess with just pawns. Who did Bill Belichick beat when we had Todd Philcox starting at QB here? Who was he beating when NE started out winless with Bledsoe the year Tom Brady led them to a Superbowl Championship? Once our roster full of audition and transition settled some in 2009, Daboll found an identity/strength to play some chess with. While he lacked the chess attack pieces DawgFan was kind enough to remind us of - he knew what to call to stay within what he had. The day Harrison ran a 10k on the Chiefs defense - it gave our WRs 1 on 1s with their corners giving Bob Slowik sized cushions. Well, Daboll thought that might be wonderful for his young QB's confidence so he dialed up a couple pass plays to expose the matchup utopia. Unfortunately, what should have improved BQ's confidence became 2 INTs to the corners giving our receivers enormous cushions. People that can't wait to blame the guy standign on the sidelines purposely missed that reality because it's just easy to reference the NY media's take on Mangini. What the NY media never wanted anyone to realize is that Mangini went 10-6 the year after a Head Coach was fired. The next year his starter was injured and then the Jets returned to 9-7 when they brought in a healthy QB for as long as he remained healthy. The point? ANY time he has had decent QBs - he wins more consistently than he loses. When Holmgren had an injured QB named Haselbeck - he went 4-12 right? For all those telling us Mangini doesn't have an eye for talent - tell us morer about Nick Mangold, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Darrelle Revis, David Harris, Dustin Keller, Marcus Benard, Alex Mack. Come to think of it, problem solves like Reggie Hodges, Matt Roth and David Bowens haven't exactly sucked either. In the end, it sure is fun to have a chance to win late in the game. It may not be playoff football just yet; but it's a sign we have the right character that's coachable possessign a will to win. Changes coaches and staffs undoes everything we finally have right (ie: 3-4 personnel to play a 3-4 scheme some 5-6 years after we had to have this defense). We lose 1 more Head Coach within 2 seasons and our chances of getting anyone with half a brain to replace him become non-existant. It's never been as easy 1 simple solution. - Tom F.
__________________   |
|
11-03-2010
| ||||
| ||||
| Mike Holmgren may not be the coach, but as the boss, he must be in control of Cleveland Browns: Terry Pluto Published: Wednesday, November 03, 2010, 4:10 AM Updated: Wednesday, November 03, 2010, 4:32 AM Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer  John Kuntz / The Plain Dealer For now, the Browns don't need to develop a firm plan for how to use (from left) Seneca Wallace, Jake Delhomme and Colt McCoy -- at least until all three quarterbacks are healthy, team president Mike Holmgren said Tuesday. But Holmgren will have to take responsibility for the move sooner or later, says Terry Pluto. BEREA, Ohio -- Dear Mike Holmgren: I just walked out of your Tuesday press conference understanding why you dodged the issue about who should be the Browns' quarterback. "That's a question I'm not going to answer," you said. "That's a coaching decision." As team president and a former NFL head coach, you want to be respectful to Eric Mangini. You said that when you have the Quarterback Talk with your coach, you plan to open with, "Eric, what do you think?" But Mike, you must know that you weren't hired to pass the big decisions to Mangini or anyone else. On draft day, your strong feelings about Colt McCoy led you to insist that General Manager Tom Heckert draft the Texas quarterback in the third round. Now, you must express a clear game plan to Mangini and his staff about the quarterbacks. It may be, "We said at the start of the year that McCoy won't play this season -- and that still holds once we get a veteran healthy." Or it could be, "I know we said McCoy wouldn't play, but injuries forced us to play him. I like the kid. I want to see what we have in him. What do you think? How can we make it work?" We can't have a repeat of 1999 when the front office of Carmen Policy and Dwight Clark traded for Ty Detmer to start and Tim Couch to sit -- but head coach Chris Palmer benched Detmer at halftime of the opener and went with Couch. Nor can we have a ruptured line of communication, as was the case between former GM Phil Savage and coach Romeo Crennel. Or a repeat of whatever Butch Davis was doing with quarterbacks as he kept switching between Kelly Holcomb and Couch, then turning to Jeff Garcia. That's three starters in his 31/2 seasons. Mike, you took one look at the Brady Quinn/Derek Anderson yo-yo, and wisely got rid of both young quarterbacks. In theory, your idea of starting veteran Jake Delhomme, back him up with veteran Seneca Wallace and having McCoy sit out the season and learn in practice had both merit and logic. But life and sprained ankles shredded that approach. So after seven games, you are on your third quarterback. You obviously are intrigued by McCoy. So is your coach. Both of you have talked about his intelligence and his poise, about how the "game doesn't seem too big for him." You also can put the decision on hold for at least another week, because you must play your healthiest quarterback against New England on Sunday. That also holds true against the Jets the following week. Perhaps another game or two against elite teams will give you the even more information on McCoy. But at some point very soon, you must set the QB direction for the franchise. You also much let your coaches know what is expected of them, in terms of how the quarterbacks are to be handled. And Mike, you did your coaches no favors when you said you were committed to the Browns, "I made a promise and I'm going to stick with it. Now if I keep wearing a suit or not? We'll see." Your comment will have a significant part of your hungry Browns fan base panting for you to take over and save them from all the misery of losing. I doubt you intended it to be taken that way, but many will assume you are seriously considering coaching next season. Just as you said Mangini will be evaluated at the end of the season, you should have  ged off any question about your own coaching career as something that doesn't need to be discussed now. If the Browns are ever going to have a successful quarterback, all the key people with the franchise must not only be on the same page -- but in the same sentence. After some major input from Mangini, it's up to you to write that sentence. Mike Holmgren may not be the coach, but as the boss, he must be in control of Cleveland Browns: Terry Pluto | cleveland.com
__________________  |
|
11-03-2010
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
What I do see in this team is it's playing better and harder this year and last year since our return. This is the best team we have fielded and we can't afford to throw it away. They play for the man and you can't ask for better than that at this time. Give the man more time,let the front office get a few more drafts under their belts, they didn't do bad this year. Holmgren will still be here. He can always coach when he wants. |
|
11-05-2010
| ||||
| ||||
|
I like what Mangini is doing and am tired of the turn over. We punted on Belicheck before his system had a chance to mature. I don't want to do it again. Like this reporter points out: Many of Mangini's philosophies are the product of the influence Belichick had on him when Mangini was an assistant at New England. One of those philosophies is to have in place a system for developing players. "That's why it's so important to draft the right type of guys, because we have programs in place,'' said Mangini. "We have all these things in-house, in place to develop players and get them to be better and reach their potential. If a guy doesn't want to do that, if they're not committed to that, then we might as well not have the programs. If you get the right type of guy with the right characteristics, the right intrinsic motivation, you take average and average becomes good, good becomes great, and great becomes a Hall of Famer.'' 
__________________ Twitter @OconRecon - Browns, Irish, Tribe & tech Last edited by OconRecon; 11-05-2010 at 06:15 AM. |
|
11-05-2010
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Quote:
|
|
11-05-2010
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
See, this is what makes sense to me! If anyone read that article about BB being a genius there's a line in there about the writers wife asking "who are these guys". And, for the most part, it's true. NE hasn't had first pick in the draft for how long? Yet they still have impact players? And so does Shitsburgh. Why are they able to have such impact with 'later' draft picks? Because they have a SYSTEM in place to make those players have an impact. That is what this team needs. That is what the Browns legacy deserves. And that is what we as fans should expect. And that is what the coaches are demanding. No coach is going to make everyone happy and some decisions are going to piss people off. |
|
11-05-2010
| ||||
| ||||
|
something I believe has been overlooked is that Holmgren is a newbie at his job as well. His future in a suit comment might be based on his own questioning of how well he is doing or whether or not he is enjoying it. Perhaps he doesn't know if he is cut out to be a president. Through the first two years of my new career, I kept my old uniform in the closet ready to go. My belief: The Holmgren-Mangini relationship is still very young and is developing. Both men are intelligent (no one gets to their respective levels without above average intelligence) and if their personal dynamics allow, they will continue to improve as a management team. Holmgren will know when to mentor and when to shut up while Mangini will know when to trust his instincts and when to ask Mike's opinion. The trust is there and can only get better if they work as a team. Mangini stays and no one is going anywhere at the end of the year without him deciding. Holmgren will give Eric that rope but if more talent is added next offseason and Mangini or his coordinators don't make the expected improvement, the entire staff will change all at once. Should Mangini decide to gun some assistants at the end of this season, I really believe it will be his decision and not because Holmgren told him he had to. |
|
11-06-2010
| ||||
| ||||
| Optimistic coach Mangini working hard to rebuild Browns Eric Mangini went through it seven times as Jets coach, and now he gets an eighth shot, as Browns coach on this occasion. So go ahead. Ask him about Bill Belichick. Analyze the postgame handshake. Dig for the status of the relationship between Mangini and the man who raised him, in many ways, as an NFL coach. It hardly bothers him anymore. "I've done it so many times that now it's at the point where you can have more fun with it," Mangini said Thursday night. "It's old news, you know? But I'm over it. Bill's over it, I'm sure. It's not a division game anymore. And I haven't been there in five years." Mangini is grateful for all Belichick did for him, with the Browns, Jets and Patriots, over a decade the two spent together. He has said it plenty. But if talk really is cheap, how's this for flattery: Mangini is using the game film of this year's Patriots not just to prepare his team for the opponent it faces Sunday, but also as an example of what it will take to get over the hump. New England, with the best record in the league, doesn't just look like the team he used to help coach. It also looks like the team he hopes his Browns can be. "There are teaching points in there for any coach, that's the truth," Mangini said. "More games are lost than won, and if you don't beat yourself, and just start there, you'll be in every game. New England doesn't beat itself, and they're very good when people provide opportunities. "It's sound. It's sound football, and when you play sound football, that's why they're 6-1." About a year ago, I had Mangini on the phone, and he compared the Browns in 2009 -- at that point, Cleveland had just fired GM George Kokinis -- to the Patriots in 2000. The Patriots, of course, won the Super Bowl in 2001, and it doesn't look like the Browns are that kind of team now. But if you listen to what Mangini is saying, you see why the win over New Orleans, going into Cleveland's bye week, was mighty encouraging for a team that just fought through a brutal early schedule (opponents' aggregate record: 32-18). The Browns were outgained 394-210 in that one. "Sound football" is how they won the game. Even with a rookie quarterback, Cleveland didn't turn the ball over. Conversely, the defense picked off Drew Brees four times, and David Bowens took two of those back for touchdowns. The offense's only touchdown drive was buoyed by a 38-yard pass-interference penalty. The 30-17 triumph hardly qualified as an aesthetic masterpiece. But it was exactly what Mangini has been preaching. "We did it in New Orleans, and we've done some of that at different points," Mangini said. "I think it was Joe Paterno that talked about the progression. First you work. Then you compete. Then you win. And then you win consistently. I think they know how to work and compete, and they're learning how to win, and then you can win consistently. "The first two phases, we've moved that forward the last year-and-a-half. That's big. Now it's learning how to win, and changing it from hoping to win to expecting to win." That's where you come to maybe the most encouraging thing about that Saints win: The play of Colt McCoy. If you remember, those 2001 Patriots were forced to insert a young quarterback named Tom Brady. Asked about that, Mangini refused to compare the situations, both prompted by injury. But he did relay stories. Like when McCoy addressed his teammates the night before his first start, in Pittsburgh, and told them they could count on him. Or how McCoy, who has always had a reputation as a gamer, made the two-minute drill hum that Sunday after struggling with it in practice. Or the way McCoy seamlessly transitioned into the role as The Man, the role he played for four years at Texas, after scuffling over the summer as the third- or fourth-stringer. "I'm really pleased with the things he's done," Mangini said. "He's working at it, it's important to him. Not that most quarterbacks are not like that, but it's all been so positive with him." That's one more reason why, with the bye week in the rear-view mirror, Mangini is confident about his team going forward and where his rebuilding effort is. Whether he'll get to see it through has been up for debate this week, as team president Mike Holmgren has hinted at returning to the sideline to coach, something some saw as inevitable from the time "The Big Show" took over. It might be trouble for Mangini, but he's not getting worked up over the situation. "Our relationship is good, and I get what Mike is saying," he said. "No coach I've met has gotten out of it and doesn't still think about it. Luke Steckel is one of my assistants, and his dad is Les, and he hasn't coached in eight years. He was in the office last week, and you could feel his passion. A lot of times we joke around about what we'd do if we didn't coach, but this is what we know and love. So it doesn't surprise me Mike would say that. "It doesn't intimidate me. We're going to keep moving forward. If you're sensitive to any of that, you're not going to be productive. He's gone from coaching to being a team president, having to deal with market and stadium issues, and I'm not sure those things get you going the same way. But our conversations, his support, it's all been great. He's honest, sincere and up-front. I know it's always more exciting to talk about conflict and drama. But we talked at practice today, and it was no different than six months ago." And after spending his entire career in the Parcells/Belichick coaching tree, he likes that he's getting a different perspective from Holmgren, a product of the Bill Walsh family. Mangini also knows that winning will cure all of that, and he is confident his team is capable of making that happen. Was the Saints victory a corner turned? Well, that's what the coach is hoping. "It's hard to predict, but that's my expectation, and the team's expectation," he said. "I don't think people are sitting in meetings or the locker room thinking we're going into each game outgunned. There's a sense of purpose there. There's a big different between having a sense of purpose and executing that purpose. But I'd expect us to prepare properly and win now." NFL.com news: Optimistic coach Mangini working hard to rebuild Browns
__________________ |
|
11-06-2010
| ||||
| ||||
|
I haven't come around full circle with Mangini just yet, he's not as unfavorable as he was when we brought him on board. He's worked hard for the team, and it shows on the field. A team we all agree is 'under-talented' has fought hard in every game it's played. Our 2-5 record could easily be 4-3 or better. Coulda, shoulda, woulda's out of the way, Mangini is as responsible for the team's level of play as anything. The coaches seem to be more on the same page than last season. Rob Ryan is probably more on my shit list than Mangini at this point. Our D has been inconsistent this season and with our offense just scraping by, we need more. The NO game was an example of how far along our D has come. We have a significantly improved defense against the run, something that has always been a weakness of the team... our secondary needs some key players to step up. Overall, if we headed into next season with this coaching staff, with a few more wins this year... I wouldn't be to worked up about it. Even Daboll... If we can't manage to improve upon the 5-11 then I think some change would need to be made and that's up to Holmgren to decide. These coaches can just do their best with the players we have. We all know we will be probably making as many key roster changes to the next season as were made this year. Many positions are weak are on our team and I think we're making the best of what we have got and we look better out there on the field than a lot of NFL teams.
__________________ BROWNS 2012: We have our "New Offense" It's Put up or shut up time. Weeden gives us a QB with skills McCoy does not have. Richardson gives us a HB with abilities the Browns have not seen in decades! The message is clear, we want to score more than 13.6 PPG this year. WOOF WOOF WOOF!  |
|
11-06-2010
| ||||
| ||||
|
I feel a lot better after holmgrens address, and i believe it is both a serious wake up call for mangini and dabs in particular as well as a challenge for them to make things happen in a more direct fashion... Dabs hasnt used many of our weapons correctly if at all and i really hope they (gini and dabs) realize and correct the problem of being predictable and vanilla, we have no passing game, sure folks can argue we have no talent at WR but i know for sure our guys can do certain things that dabs avoids and mangini approves of him avoiding, now maybe mangini will actually play to win like he did against the saints instead of playing to lose with an over-conservative approach depending on the defense to save the day.. Against the saints the browns left it all on the field we need that every week even without stunts and trick plays we need that lets take the fight to them attitude as opposed to the lets just play it close and conservative playcalling crap all the time... The gini needs to change his approach and philosophy just a bit for now and use the talent he has to try and win instead of his inflexible one size fits all offensive system which is not properly manned at least until he gets the right personnel to man it... Show some ability to be creative for gawds sake!
__________________ Last edited by kydawgfan; 11-06-2010 at 10:46 AM. |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
